Daniel, your right. I'll just quit opening the thread.Originally Posted by Daniel Rode
Member
Daniel, your right. I'll just quit opening the thread.
Contributor
Of course the metric system has a claim. Imperial treats decimalization like a prostitute, good only for isolated flings. Metric is married to it.
You can use decimal inches, sure. But you don't. Not most of the time. Most of the time, you're forced to use fractions. If you to go an American lumberyard, you can't have a 50mm x 100mm. You have to ask for a 2 x 4, which isn't even 2" by 4"! Your wrenches are fractional. Your measuring tapes are fractional. Your power tools are set up for fractions. If everything was metric, you would never have to worry about common denominators or adding fractions. The fact that you own a decimal-inch dial caliper doesn't begin to make up for that.
How many gallons are in a hogshead? How many furlongs are in a mile? How many roods are there in an imperial light year? Danged if I know. Neither do you. With the metric system, you just add or remove things that look like " x 10^n", or you change the value of "n," and you're all done. You don't have to worry about bizarre, ten-digit quotients. You don't even need to know the names of the units. In metric, the speed of light is commonly measured in meters or centimeters per second, not the ridiculous "miles per second" of the imperial system. To switch, you just change the exponent. That's the way metric works. Metric is MADE for scientific notation, which is one of the neatest tools science and engineering have.
Imperial is a horror. When I was getting my physics degree, we always used metric. I found out why when I looked at old imperial physics! What a joke. Slugs! Grains! Crazy measurements no one could get a feel for without years of practice. And the conversions...crazy!
To this day, I can only picture a few non-metric measures in my head. I can imagine a foot or a mile, but don't ask me to pour you a dram without looking at a reference book.
I remember my E&M prof in grad school, talking about the suffering involved in using fractional materials to build waveguides. No one should be put through something like that.
Decimalization, whether it came before or after the metric system, shows that powers of ten are the way to go. Metric never had any wacky non-decimalized units to begin with. Imperial is still packed with them.
Hatred of nutty imperial and non-decimal measurements is the main motivation for the development of the metric system. I looked it up. An academic named Wilkins tried to create and promote a decimalized measuring system with a standardized inch, starting in 1668. Obviously, he failed, and Thomas Jefferson, along with other frustrated scholars and engineers, took up the cause a hundred years later. Jefferson is apparently the reason we have ten dimes to a dollar, instead of 53 shillings or whatever.
If the decimal inch existed prior to the 1790 creation of the metric system, it certainly failed as a replacement. There is more to life than length. And even today, the decimal inch doesn't solve the problems of feet, yards and miles, which are stupid and inconvenient in calculations.
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the dogs of bench.
I was socially distant before it was cool.
A little authority corrupts a lot.
Member
That could be another nine page thread.
clamp the work
to relax the mind
Contributor
Steve,
As spot on as your post may be, very few people today measure in hog's heads or ask for a dram of your finest whiskey.
Many folks may not be able to tell you a shot of liquor is one once, but they often will consume a shot.
My science classes taught us light travels at approximately 186,000 miles a second. If it is wanted in meters per second, ask Dr. Google.
Rods, chains and many other measuring designations are mostly for specific disciplines and I do not know if they are still in use. My recollection of a chain measurement was while packing shipments. We had a 108" chain to check packages. At the time UPS was not allowed to take a package exceeding 108" total of length + width + girth.
I doubt if many folks work with grains unless they are working with pharmaceuticals or packing powder into bullets.
For many it is easier to say an inch and five eighths or one and five eighths inches than it is to say one point six two five inches. Most Americans would give a strange look to the one saying the latter. Likewise, most Americans wouldn't have a clue if you said forty one point four millimeters.
We would need a great exchange to make the switch. Take an old ruler to the nearest big box store to get it exchanged for a new metric ruler or two. There would still be those who wouldn't let go of their old rulers.
If it isn't going to put two cars in the garage along with a few weeks food in the freezer most Americans will remain happy with what they have.
Now here is a real conundrum of which my knowledge is zilch. The NATO round at 5.56mm is interchangeable, in some cases, with the American Sporting .223 round. The most important difference is in the chamber. The NATO round tends to have a bit more room between the bullet and the rifling to allow for the heavier amount of explosive used in the military round. At least that is what is floating around the internet.
Think I'll go pour myself a pint.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
Looks like things are being worked on, the edit function isn't working as yet.
I forgot to ask after the sentence about 1-5/8", how does one go about measuring parts of a millimeter when it is greater than the opening on a caliper?
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Member
When Dennis Archer was mayor of Detroit, he send out a directive that stated all future City of Detroit contracts, drawings, specifications were to be done using the metric system.
It was ignored. Completely. When I left anything that came metric was by chance. By the way, the directive was, of course, printed on 8.5" x 11" paper.
I looked for my copy of it years later but must have deep-sixed it. Yet another historical curio.
-Tom
Contributor
If I start talking about firearm calibers, there is a good chance my head will actually fly off.
Why is it that .308 = .30 = 7.62mm NATO, but a 7.62mm Eastern bloc cartridge is .310? Why do we call the shorter, weaker 10mm ".40 S&W" instead of something like "10mm Puny"? Why is a super-powerful .38 a .357 Magnum instead of a .38 Magnum? Why is a .45 auto actually a .451?
Who are the crazies who inflicted this stuff on us?
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the dogs of bench.
I was socially distant before it was cool.
A little authority corrupts a lot.
Contributor
I think most people are comfortable with what the know.This was supposed to help Americans learn metric, by getting us used to some common "benchmark" sizes.
American's will not likely change unless they are given no alternative.
It would not surprise me if the electronic scales used at checkout in most markets could be changed to metric in minutes. The scales for use in the produce departments would likely need to be changed out. At least the face plates.
Like so many things it will be a long and drawn out road to change.
Some industries have changed. All my medicines including over the counter items are designated in metric.
An interesting read is the story of the British change to metric:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric...mer_industries
It only happened after it was mandated.
Seems many of their gas pumps could be switched between metric or Imperial measure. The unit price couldn't go above £1.99. When fuel prices started to climb, instead of getting new pumps the life of the existing pumps was extend by switching to selling fuel in liters.
Also from the same page is the idea of carpet or fabric sold by the square yard. The price looks better than the same unit price when sold by the square meter.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Member
38 Special is not 0.38" caliber, it’s named for the 3/8" tool which was used to ream out the chambers when converting percussion revolvers to cartridges.
Contributor
Re the .308 vs. Eastern Bloc .310, I've read that was done so Eastern Bloc weapons could fire captured NATO rounds (little undersized but they worked) but NATO weapons couldn't chamber the oversized Eastern Bloc rounds.
Contributor
I began using metric after purchasing a Hammer K3 Winner. It works much simpler than imperial. An old-timer named Steve Mickley taught me that measuring is the enemy of accuracy and taught how to use a story stick. I might be the only one who uses one of those though.
Contributor
I doubt that very much. Plenty posters on this forum use story sticks, be it the bought version or the home made version.
"If you have all your fingers, you can convert to Metric"
Contributor
Mine was even posted here:
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...ry-Stick-Gauge
Don't have to figure inch or metric with a story stick.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
Well, you do have to start with something. You need to measure the initial dimensions. Can't just randomly pick something. Even that starts with measure and mark your stick. I'm betting you use American dimensions Jim
Contributor
Actually on this one it started with a length of wood and my golden ratio calculator. That was made with metric dimensions but works in any system.Well, you do have to start with something. You need to measure the initial dimensions. Can't just randomly pick something. Even that starts with measure and mark your stick. I'm betting you use American dimensions Jim
Some of the dimensions were based on the size of boxes for my wife's tea.
But if there was any measurements they were likely made with a Stanley four fold ruler, which is in inches.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote