Well, modernmaterials, apart from the fact that I did not read his second post and missed that he was using underlay, I do not see that my post is not informed. How do you know that I am not a qualified landscaper with 10 years experience, which I am, incase you do not get it.
For your information it is quite standard to assume that 1 tonne of bulk material, whither it is stone, sand etc is 0.75m3. The different materials do not differ very much in density and so it is a reasonable assumption to make. Also it may be OK for a DIY job to see what the coverage is like when it is on the ground, but what about if you are laying 50 or 100m2 and have quoted a customer. They are not going to be too happy if you go back and ask for more or leave them with bulk bags to get rid of. Or indeed it will probably just come straight of your profit as a price for the job has been agreed.
Therefore 0.75m3 is used as a standard measurement for quotations.
I was well aware that he was laying 40mm stone and was just trying to add some extra information for general interest. Also if he is intending to lay it much more than 1 stone thick then it is going to get expensive and quite thick, you will get much less that even the 15m2 which thermo was talking about at even just 2 stones thick. 4cm for a stone is relavtively large. Most gravel laid for paths etc is 18-25mm.
Also the origional poster talks about using a depth of 1.5-2 inches, 2 inches being 5cm. So with a 40mm (4cm) stone you are not going to get much more than 1 stone depth. Maybe modernmaterials should read the whole post. Sorry to sound a bit upset, but I am only trying to help and it seems that modernmaterials is voicing his or her opinion for Nickcardwell. I would prefer to hear Nickcardwell's opionion on the quality of my post.
The 15m2 seems like a good rule of thumb thermo, not just as suitable when working out how much hardcore you require for a 100m2 drive way at 100mm depth. But absolutely fine for a path or small project.
Thanks
Andrew