Bolt Thread Size (Damn Metric Shit)

Page 1 of 3  
I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE. I am puzzled what they are referring to.
I bought a used Makita table saw at a garage sale. It needed a few repairs which I took care of. I got a downloaded PDF file from their Makita website to help me determine what went where. I got it all together and it works except the rip fence is missing a bolt that makes it clamp sloppily. My parts can does not have anything that will fit, so I'm off to the hardware store later today. The parts list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is that? I am assuming the "M" means metric. Is that correct? I am assuming 6X16 means 16 threads per inch. (that looks about right), but what is the "6"? 6 centimeters long, or is it 6cm thick? There's a number missing either way......
Now looking at it in SAE terms, it's about 1/4" thick, fine threaded, and 1/2 to 5/8 inches long, and the head is roughly 3/8" hex.
Damn I hate metric shit...... I wish I had been born 100 years sooner so I'd never have to get frustrated by this metric crap. I was born in America, that means I should be speaking English, and using inches and feet, not speaking a foreign language or using goddamn metrics from countries that dont know how to measure things. Yep. metrics are one of my top pet peeves that really piss me off........
At least they dont have the rip fence ruler in metric, or I would have not bought the saw. At my age, I am too old to change to metrics anyhow.
Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Here is a conversion chart that you might find useful: http://www.mrelectrician.tv/conversioncharts/drilltap.html

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@UNLISTED.com wrote:

You might find the following helpful
http://www.sosmath.com/tables/sae/sae.html
http://www.namrick.co.uk/boltspec.asp
If we had switched to metric 100 years ago we all would have been better off. :-)
--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:25:16 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"

You would still be better off if you did it tomorrow.
What's the impediment except for guys like the OP.
All of your multinationals manufacture things for the rest of the world in metric sizes. Your manufacturing industries would be much more competitive if they turned over to the right side. The only thing that keeps imperial measurements going is a reasonably large domestic market, and that will evaporate in the next few years in the face of foriegn competition (China).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Avery wrote:

Somehow I think converting to metric wouldn't change anything. Its pretty hard to compete with other countries where people are paid $3/day.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

So far...

Threads per *inch* on a *metruc* bolt??? Think about it a bit...

Diameter in millimeters

6cm *thick* would be one hell of a bolt. Think about it a bit...

True enough. The missing number is the thread pitch. 6x16 means 6mm in diameter x 16mm long.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:51:40 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

OOPS..... I guess it would be a sin and sentence to hell to use the word "inch" on a metric bolt. I suppose it's threads per kilometer or some such nonsense. This alone is proof that metrics are meant to drive people insane. They are made for the criminally insane, because after using them, one has an urge to kill whoever made the bolt metric.

Thanks for the info, and yeah, it's MM not cm.... So, are all metric bolts the same thread pitch since they dont list it???
It's so much easier to say I need a 1/4" bolt 1" long with 24 threads per inch.
I think all metric bolts should be sent back to their own country of origin, and the US governement should ban them in the US. If for no other reason, they are anti-patriotic. America was built with inches, feet, yards and miles..........
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why would they pervert the metric system by using a foreign measurement?

Actually, it's threads per mm. A 6mm bolt standard thread is 1.0 threads per mm.

No, one gets the urge to kill whomever came up with the SAE sillyness. #6 bolts? Furlongs? Chains? Rods? Cubits? Hogsheads? Barrels (all 30+ different sizes)? "penny sizes" for nails? Gah.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It\'s not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chris Lewis writes:

Nope. English is threads per unit length; metric is unit length per thread, the inverse.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I thought so at first too, but when I checked tables, seemed t'other way around. But seems like I misread the table. You're right. Oops ;-)
http://www.boltdepot.com/fastener-information/Metric-Thread-Pitch.aspx
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It\'s not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope... metrix bolts are measured in how far from thread to thread.
It will most likely be an M6x1x16, meaning 6mm in diameter, 1mm from thread to thread and 16mm long.

Naw...
M6x1x16 is just as easy as 1/4"x1 UNC
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Noozer writes:

That's not the proper designation. See _Machinery's Handbook_.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Noozer wrote:

Metric makes a lot more sense (it was designed that way). We just know what we're used to. For example, what horsepower light bulbs do you use? I don't know either, I use the dreaded metric unit--watts. Familiarity with the metric system would have saved a couple of Mars missions and about a gazillion dollars.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I really dont understand how it can make more sense. Do you really think anyone can remember all these numbers? (examples below)
a 2X4 board = 5.08 x 10.16 (cm) a 1x6 board = 2.54 x 15.24 (cm) an 8 foot long stud = 2.4384 (meters) 4x8 foot sheet of plywood = 1.2192 x 2.4384 (meters) 30 miles per hour = 48280.32 meters per hour 1 yard of carpeting = 0.9144 meters of carpeting
How can you call this simple? 2x4 is easy to remember, not 5.08 x 10.16.....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@UNLISTED.com says...

Ah, but a 2x4 is 1.5" x 3.5". ;-)
--
Keith

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@UNLISTED.com wrote:

And right there demonstrates why we are still stuck with this abortion of a ?system?. People who think that if you work in metric, you have to convert it to English. One of the dumbest arguements agains changing that was ever made.
Please tell me why you would want to know what the English measure was for a metric piece of lumber.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Harry K wrote:
...

To find out how it spans studs 16" OC, perhaps?
The problem is primarily in having to mix the two and irregardless of the theoretical niceties of metric vis a vis English, there is a history dating back several hundred years that can't be whisked away--if, for nothing else, for those raised using English, despite "book-larnin' " about MKS, it just "ain't natural". As a trained engineer working w/ metric for 30 years, there still isn't the inate "feel" for ordinary day-to-day things in metric measures that there is for English. I just don't think that I'm really putting in 19 l instead of 5 gal so it's "only" 76.5 c/l instead of $2.90 /gal -- no, all I'm thinking is the producers are making a killing at $75/bbl.
Similarly, it's going to be d-- near 100 out this afternoon...I don't feel a bit cooler at whatever it is in C and I have to stop and calculate it out rather than "just knowing".
And, even as we continue to teach mks in school, the common usage remains (and will remain for the foreseeable future).
Also, I don't really agree w/ the argument advanced earlier that there are really that many fewer sizes in metric--in actuality, it seems to me there tend to be more, at least in the smaller sizes where it seems you find stuff every mm.
I do agree that the 70s/80s transition period with mismatched fasteners on a single product was an abomination--I had one of them as well.
I'm not sure how much it really affects US industry's overall efficiency--as someone else noted, most export sales are and have been metric for quite some time now and a great portion of that production is not in the US anyway. I'm sure there is some affect, but doubt it would make a huge difference in competitive balance if it were to disappear overnight (which of course, it can't owing to all the above historical considerations).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dpb wrote:

Good valid points about what your are used to. The changeover, if it ever occurs, will not be painless of course but the pain won't last long. In a few years everyone except a few would be wondering why they fought it. England made the change and never looked back.
There would remain the problem of matching up metric with stuff built under the English system but it can be done (England for one).
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Harry K wrote:

...
...
...
That's what I recall the mantra being about the time my kids started school--as is typical in the US, however, being no widespread public "mandate", there was no way to get a universal acceptance and the movement floundered. Despite the (more-or-less) common language, there's a big difference between public/government dynamics in the US vis a vis England. I don't foresee a switch in common usage for a long time (TM). Even the campaigns for metric road signs (about as painless as it gets) are all gone afaict.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:
[...]

Australia went cold turkey years ago. Worked like a charm. New generations never even heard of the old system.
U.S. made a timid attempt years ago to put BOTH on road signs, e.g. as a "transition. Of course people only looked at the familar system, so that went nowhere and was abandoned,

Antediluvian
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.