It is the display bug that is minimized in
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/161234
Contrary to the discussion in that KB article, there are literally thousands
of decimal fractions that do not display properly in Excel.
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...5e3c663545c8ef
gives another. I recall at least one other newsgroup thread that I cannot
immediately locate

In all instances that I have seen (I programmed a systematic search a year
or two ago), each number is correctly represented in binary, and that binary
approximation should display to 15 figures identically to the input number,
but for some unaccountable reason the display is off by 1 in the 15 figure.

Using the functions at
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...06871cf92f8465
you can verify that the binary representation of your number is
1.100100101110010100111110000110110000100010011010 0000B15
whose decimal value is 51570.62129999999888241291046142578125 which to
Excel's display limit of 15 figures is 51570.6213000000. If you increment
the binary representation by 1 in the last bit
1.100100101110010100111110000110110000100010011010 0001B15
then its decimal value is 5.15706213000000061583705246448516845703125 which
is farther from 51570.6213 than the representation that Excel used. Hence
Excel is representing the number correctly, but for some unknown reason fails
to display that representation properly.

Given that it appears to be a display issue rather than a numeric issue, and
the display is off by so little, it is more of an annoyance than an accuracy
concern, but it is a surprising that MS has done nothing about it in over a
decade.

Jerry

"chd" wrote:

Why if I type in 51570.6213 Excel converts it to 51570.5213999999. I am
unable to get Excel to accept this number.