[Zababa]

I think that's because they're not really equivalent. At least for me, a hole the size of 2 washing machines is something that will look close to two washing machines put together. That limits the shape it can have. On the other hand, 92 cubic centimeters doesn't. It could be a 1cm x 1cm x 92cm hole, which wouldn't be possible with 2 washing machines.

If we assume that the two washing machines are side to side, and that the average washing machine is 60cm x 60cm x 85 cm (height), that would be a hole 1.20m width x 60 cm depth x 85 cm height. The washing machine example is still easier to visualize, but it's also better than "a 612 000 cubic centimeters hole".

[OJFord]

I think 'hole in the road' comes with its own visualisation more likely to be accurate than anything you get from 'two washing machines'.

[harry8]

How do you accurately visualize whether "hole in the road" means you saying "what was that?" And driving on without slowing. Or whether the hole will require a crane to get your car to a place where it can be towed if you, possibly inadvertently, attempt to drive over it?

[OJFord]

I meant regarding shape.

[replygirl]

holes can be all sorts of shapes

[OJFord]

But rarely like washing machines. (Which can also be all sorts of shapes anyway.)

[brewdad]

Aside from side by side vs stackable, every washing machine I've ever encountered is roughly the same shape. Some edges are rounder and the door might be on the front or the top but the shape is the same.

[snovv_crash]

You'd say something like "2 cubic metres". Which is roughly the size of 2 washing machines.

[brk]

So like 1/20th of a cubic fathom?