At the risk of turning things around too much, can I recommend that helo pilots no longer discuss the burn rate of the helo as if that tells you something about its range?
Can I also suggest that we not discuss the fuel available as so many "hours of fuel"?
Both were ok when all helos flew at 105 knots and all were Hueys, and neither makes any sense when the cruise speed of a helo can be 10 or 15% faster than another, making the burn rate or fuel endurance time a meaningless way to compare the two.
For example, Head Turner, you got dramatically lower burn rate at altitude (which is generally true) but you didn't tell us what the TAS was at each pilot so we could know the effect on range.
The best way to compare cases between helos or between atmospheric conditions is to use the burn rate (Kg/Hr) and divide it by the True Air Speed (NM/Hr) so that you get the Kg/NM - the fuel needed to go one mile. The lower this number, the more miles in your tank.