this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
1105 points (98.4% liked)

Memes

48558 readers
2389 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/27121839

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 31 points 3 days ago (5 children)

I thought it was the other way around. The thickest part of the can is the top, followed by the bottom. The sides are much thinner. I thought the reasoning behind switching to tall and narrow cans with the same internal volume was to save on aluminium.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 days ago

The top seems to be the same size, the old one just bulges more while the new one almost goes straight down.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Tops are pretty much standars size on all cans I'm pretty sure. So that part should be constant.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

That looks like a 202 vs a 200 can end, so a "sleek" not a "slim" (red bull can is slim)

The sleek can is 355 ml and uses a 200 end.

As for which uses more aluminum.... Good question. It's probably close

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Someone should weigh both and see!

[–] ThePantser 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The only real way, speculation by photo is not that great. They also could have made the metal thinner.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well, I assumed constant thickness, so if that's true, you might be right.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

you could use your coke scale to confirm

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

The tops are the same on both