5 ms·

Yeah that should definitely be 2.10 meters

• Gravityloss 13y ago
  Or then the m to ft conversion is wrong.
• dragonwriter 13y ago
  From the pictures, 1.10m heigth with 1.35m width looks more right; in any case, there's no simple typo: If the feet are correct, (6.11 ft), then it should be 1.86m, not 1.10m (or 2.10m as you suggest.) If the meters are correct (1.10m), it should be 3.61 ft (not 6.11 ft).
  • codfrantic 13y ago
    Wouldn't they write 6 foot 11 inches as 6.11 (eventhough it's confusing and wrong). Because that would make it 2.10 meters.
    • dragonwriter 13y ago
      I suppose that's the most plausible explanation. (Doesn't seem to match the height-width relationship in the sketches, but its the only thing that makes the particular numbers used understandable as a fairly simple-to-explain error.)