I don't get it, why is metric better?

[Leon]

No +1 says it all. +1.00 simply says the same thing with more numbers. ;~)

[Leon]

Now you have cut out 90% of the world and they will not understand that. LOL

[Swingman]

And despite their much loved use of the metric system, they continue to weigh themselves in "stones" and tell time in "fortnights".

How much do ya weight mate?, Why fourteen stone, when I weighed a fortnight ago.

Nothing consistent about the POME's ..

;)

[dpb]

On 08/07/2016 12:09 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: ...

A) Yes, that's true and for everyday use, it's a good-enough reason.

B) No (at least I) don't expect them to adapt to us, I just don't want them (or some DC bureaucrat) forcing _us_ (as in US) to switch things that don't need to be switched just for the sake of it.

Wasn't going to but what the heck, having come this far... :)

C) It's been the fortunate position of US by dint of its combination of resources plus the economic and governing systems to build a sufficiency that that is so (others having to use our system, languages, etc.). Getting to that point collectively to be able to create a similar condition was a prime reason for the EU which then created for the most part the switch in industrial US.

D) Again, "learning how to use other methods" isn't the issue; I don't think there's anybody who's responded in the (apparently now interminable :) ) thread who doesn't "know how"; it's that for much use and particularly that of everyday use there really is no clear advantage in changing and (as I've also noted earlier) the denizens here are mostly old fogeys and we see no reason to switch just for the sake of switching. We don't export the weather, the roads are where they've always been, "a mile a minute" is _far_ more convenient that whatever it works out to in kpm, etc., etc., etc., ... OTOH, US manufacturing switched decades ago for all that export so what has been important already is.

[dpb]

On 08/07/2016 11:51 AM, Larry Blanchard wrote: ...

I seriously doubt it. It's primarily owing to the level of instruction we give as compared to the rest of the world at that age any more...we've regressed significantly in rigor since the 20s (and particularly since the 50s/60s) while the rest of the world has really redoubled their effort to close what was "way back when" a gap the other direction.

Add to that such a high proportion of totally disfunctional inner-city and large-city school systems, on an average basis it's no wonder.

[Jack]

I think you are all wrong. When measuring stuff in a wood shop, matters little if you use inches, metric or foobars. The problem comes with nuts, bolts and machine screws. I began rebuilding engines when I was

15 years old, and everything US was in inches. All our tools were inches. When metric started, I guess in the 70's, I bought a set of metric wrenches and sockets, less than a 50-100 bucks I reckon in extra tools. The pain was keeping them separate, and figuring out if bolts were metric or inches. Still, not a big deal, just a royal PIA.

Today, I have a 40 year collection of Imperial nuts, bolts and machine screws, all separated neatly in little drawers, all sizes, lengths and so on. When I tossed out anything with a bunch of easily accessible nuts and bolts, I would rip them out, sort them and save them for future use. Off the top of my head I'd say I have at least 100 drawers with separate compartments for this stuff, which has been immensely useful over the years. Now, lots of stuff is metric, and I'd have to double my storage to keep all this stuff neat and easily accessible. It's impossible to judge the size of things when you throw metric into the mix. "Is this a

12mm nut or 1/2". So nothing to do with fear.

If I were born with metric, I would be super happy if everything stayed metric. I wasn't, I was born with imperial, and I'd be super happy if everything stayed imperial. It's not a matter of what is better, or fear, stubbornness and independence. It is simply a matter of simplicity, efficiency and convenience. I would mainly prefer to have one set of tools, one set of hardware. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed, so were off to the land of 12.7mm or .472 inches and 200 drawers of hardware.

[dpb]

On 08/07/2016 1:35 PM, Jack wrote: ...

...

But the dimensions are just the tip of the iceberg...there's UNC/NF, Grade 2, 5, 8 (in common use plus several others less so) just for SAE. Metric has its own combinatorial explosion as well.

On the farm with equipment of all ages, spare parts stores are a _major_ headache indeed (and no little expense besides the space issues).

[notbob]

What!? No Whitworth?

nb

[Leon]

Unless you design an build and buy standard sized lumber.

[dpb]

On 08/07/2016 8:42 AM, dpb wrote: ...

In the same vein as a lesser-importance "Don't tread on me!" banner...

[Ed Pawlowski]

We could phase into that simplicity, efficiency, and convenience, but as long as a bunch of stubborn old fogeys keep Imperial, we all will. No sense phasing all fasteners into metric is there? Our great grandchildren will be having this same conversation and 200 boxes of nuts and bolts.

[graham]

Nor BSF (British Standard Fine).

[graham]

Over 60 years ago, my uncles would take me with them when they went to repair machinery on farms. I was the gofer and when they sent me to fetch a 1/2" wrench (spanner) I would sometimes return with a BSF rather than an AF one. I learned a lot of interesting words:-)

[graham]

Ever heard of the Gimli Glider?

[dadiOH]

How about, "What we use now works fine and has for a long time"?

Personally, I think 16.18743 hectares and a mule sucks :)

[dpb]

On 08/07/2016 2:28 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: ...

New stuff has migrated, but there's much existing that isn't cost-effective to yet junk that isn't so it's a fact of current life. You would prefer to junk all the '55 TBirds still in collections just because they're not?

If we could rewrite history perhaps, but things didn't evolve that way. Even Dr Who seems to be only moderately successful in his maneuvering in that dimension; we seem even less successful as far as fixing it after the fact.

But I'll repeat one last time and then I'm going to retire other than some really different angle if it should appear, the issue regarding the switchover has been resolved by US manufacturers for decades; they build to what their customer base demands. This is almost completely universal now if not that new products are metric and old are documented as needed if that's the economic solution. There's absolutely no need for any conversion to alternate measurement system for routine day-to-day quantities if the public is happy as is as is clearly the case for the vast majority.

But, to bring back something at least remotely wood-related, even in at least Canada that is what you seem to wish for, they still build frame housing on imperial measures of 16" OC, just they measure/write it as some mishmash of decimal numbers in cm or mm. That _can't_ be convenient.

[Dave in SoTex]

Still 2 to 3 times more than I would have guesstimated.

It's specific gravity is a little over 8 pounds/gallon.

Dave in SoTex

[dpb]

On 08/07/2016 2:50 PM, graham wrote: ...

No, I hadn't or if had, totally forgotten about it.

See, there's a perfect reason why _shouldn't_ change! Screwed up royally that undoubtedly would have added the correct fuel amount if the calc's had been done as always had done... :)

[Unquestionably Confused]

Brilliant, Leon. Simply brilliant!

Only better analogy I can come up with would be "Chinese Algebra" LOL!

[krw]

I don't care about its size when I want to buy film for my camera. It's a name (I didn't say "brand").

Don't be an asshole. I had a Canuck car and never did get used to the speedometer. It's fine for the speed limit but other uses (like time to destination) it's a PITA.

You're deaf, then. It costs a *huge* pile of money to convert everything (and everyone) and there is _no_ reason *TO* change. It works just fine as it is.