You guys are cute! For the conversion to be meaningful I have to have a clear idea of how far 1.604 km is in the first place, lol. (What did we do before the internet? Hard to imagine!) (Hard to remember!)
OK, continuing on from your post and my 'nerdy boring fart' post above ....
As a regular walker who also navigates (including bad weather & darkness) I know my 'pace count' for varying terrains
On level, compacted footpath / path as a steady walker (think more tortoise than hare ! ) my pace count is 67 paces per 100 meters - checked multiple times via GPS, map references & Google Earth (nerd, right !!)
When you walk - left, right, left, right, etc ...... a 'pace' is from right foot to right foot (or left to left if you prefer)
So, "right foot down, to left foot down and back to right foot down" is one pace (effectively 2 steps) - though its easier to count 'paces' than 'steps' as there are half as many.
This is useful to know for navigational dead reckoning when no visible landmarks are present, at night time ..... or when the GPS has flat batteries
I regularly review my 'pace count' mid walk when I'm into a rhythm and I'm accurate to 1/2 a pace - if you don't know your pace of havent measured it, 70 paces per 100 meters is a good starting point for level, flat well maintained path / pavement. Mine my be a little less due to my height.
Just so you know how I keep track, I have 10 spring-loaded toggles on a lanyard on my left rucksack chest strap - every 100 paces a toggle gets moved down - so by touch alone at my left hip (counting toggles) I know my distance covered.
Obviously if you're walking uphill / downhill or on softer ground, the pace count changes -- though I have no change between walking with a pack (rucksack) or without provided my pack weight is less than 40% of my body weight
No doubt this post will only reinforce the 'nerdy boring fart' reputation ......