Thanks: 0
Needs Pictures: 0
Picture(s) thanks: 0
Results 31 to 45 of 128
Thread: Metric Vs Imperial
-
17th December 2004, 11:30 AM #31
I even had to change all my shifters to cope with metric when it came in
As for fuel, I suspect that metric works well for oil companies, when we get a price rise up goes petrol 10c a litre, there would have been riots if the price had gone up 45c a gallon (I know, it's the same but just making a point).Stupidity kills. Absolute stupidity kills absolutely.
-
17th December 2004 11:30 AM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Age
- 2010
- Posts
- Many
-
17th December 2004, 12:14 PM #32
G'day All.
Working in a sawmill as I do, We use both.
Eg: 4x4 1/3.6
4x2 12/2.7 etc etc etc .
At home I use both.
for fine work it is mm
for longer work it is feet & inches with mm.
Eg: 7'5" + 17mm.
Have yet to have a bad measuring f#ckup.
Hooroo.
Regards, Trevor
Grafton
-
17th December 2004, 07:21 PM #33Senior Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- Location
- Adelaide, SA
- Age
- 88
- Posts
- 239
Note my age! I use both and like most posters find metric much easier if you have to do any arithmetic. I remember being taught how to add/subtract/multiply and divide fractions but I can't remember when I last did it.
I generally use tapes etc. that have both (although the wrong edge problem is a curse) but I frequently find it easier to read the imperial side when having to read at a distance or at an awkward angle. The figures tend to be bigger!
Agree that metres and millimetres are the only things to use. Never centimetres. They are for dressmakers! (They have to buy 2 metres of 42 inch material which seems better than 2.7 metres of 2x3) Who remembers decametres!
CheersGeoffS
-
17th December 2004, 10:40 PM #34Novice
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- BEGA. N.S.W.
- Posts
- 16
Millimetres for woodworkers,centremeters for dressmakers. Give me a left handed metric tape anyday(for woodwork)of course.
Andre
-
17th December 2004, 11:13 PM #35GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- Sydney,Australia
- Posts
- 3,157
OK, I think the main reason for stuff ups with Metric tapes is the poor marking system - it is for me. The Imperial rules seem to have a secondary and often tertiary set of markings - black inches, then red feet printed next to the inches, and sometimes they have a total inches marking as well.
I find I tend to slip 100mm relatively easily, so I mark twice - this also catches the eye trick of hitting the wrong 1 cm major tick mark - the square won't line up so I get a warning that something is wrong.
As for the 'rest of the world is metric' arguement - HA! Double HA! - MauserWerk is Imperial ( a friend spent 3 months doing a 'post-graduate' in firearms fitting there), and if you look around you can find rulers marked '1 Zoll = 25.4mm' - intended for the Austrian or German markets. I often find French internet sites with Pieds and Pounds - the Metric stuff is for 'Government work', a fair part of the population still use a bastard Imperial or other traditional local system of measurements.
Just like the Euro-sausage and Euro-beer, the local product is more human-friendly. Remember this when you string your bow - the distance from the string at rest to the back of the grip is a fistmele. At least we gave up on the cubit & ell.
-
18th December 2004, 01:41 AM #36Originally Posted by bsrlee
-
18th December 2004, 03:28 AM #37Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- Western Sydney
- Posts
- 234
The metric system has one major fault. By definition, each metric unit is greater or less than the next by a factor of 10. That is just too large a step. It explains the ease of making mistakes when measuring in metric.
There is a good scientific reason for the problem and Derek touched on it earlier. The human brain cannot instantly recognise quantities greater than three or four.
For example, imagine you're a prehistoric hunter and you bring back the day's catch of rabbits, lizards, or whatever and proudly drop them on the cave floor for SWMBO's inspection.
If there's two or three, she'll recognize the total instantly, belt you over the ear and send you back out to get more for the cave-kids. If there's four or five, it will take a fraction of a second for her to recognise how many there are. You might just have time to duck. If there's six or seven, she'll have to mentally count them. If there's nine or ten, she'll definitely have to take off her thongs and tick them off on her pinkies.
This is the prime reason for difficulty in visualising metric sizes and distances. For example, can you visualise the height of someone 183cm tall as distinct from 182cm or 173cm? It is easy to make a mistake of 1 or 10 because metric units are large in relation to sub-units. Changing from cm to decimetres or metres doesn't help. Then you're comparing 18.3 against 18.2 and 17.3 or 1.83 against 1.82 and 1.73. Increments of 10 are just too big.
So how can imperial be any easier? Because one can always break imperial units into sub-units of no more than four. Ah, you say, how can that be when there are twelve inches in a foot? Easy! Those of us who grew up with imperial have developed the habit of instantly and effortlessly visualising feet as made up of 4 lots of 3 inches or 3 lots of 4 inches or two lots of 6 inches. We think of a yard as 3 units of a foot or 4 lots of 9 inches. Nine inches, of course, is three lots of 3 inches. Six inches can be two lots of 3 inches or 3 lots of 2 inches or 4 lots of 1 and a half inches. Lovely! Makes it easy to space things equally whether dividing by 2, 3 or 4.
Now, what's a metre divided by three? Oh! 33.333cm or 333.33 mm. Won't find that mark on your metric rule, will you darl?
Of course, imperial gets tougher when you have to divide by 5 or 10. That's when the 1/10th of an inch ruler divisions come into play and we switch to a mixture of decimal and imperial, e.g. 2' or 24" divided by 5 becomes 4.8 inches.
For measurements in fractions of an inch, as Derek indicated, those who think in imperial regard inches as consisting of 2 x 1/2" or 4 x 1/4". Those units are broken down into 1/8", 1/16", 1/32" and 1/64" but never dividing by more than 4. That is why it is easier to spot a mistake in imperial - because you can instantly recognise quantities or divisions of 4 or less
and are less likely to be out by one, let alone by ten.
And now, since its past this caveman's bedtime, the defence rests! Its over to the prosecution.
regards
Coldamus
-
18th December 2004, 04:34 AM #38
Coldamus
I totally and utterly agree. You put it far, far better than I.
Regards from Perth
Derek
-
18th December 2004, 09:55 AM #39For example, can you visualise the height of someone 183cm tall as distinct from 182cm or 173cm?
180cm is sort of average
190cm is kind of tall
200cm is really tall
170cm is kind of short
A little under 6" is average
6'4" is kind of tall
etc.
Those of us who grew up with imperial have developed the habit of instantly and effortlessly visualising feet as made up of 4 lots of 3 inches or 3 lots of 4 inches or two lots of 6 inches
Now, what's a metre divided by three? Oh! 33.333cm or 333.33 mm. Won't find that mark on your metric rule, will you darl?
The only problem I can see with metic is the some of the damned ruler makers don't make the 5mm marks standout. Get a ruler that does and your life will be complete.Photo Gallery
-
18th December 2004, 10:32 AM #40Originally Posted by Coldamus
-
18th December 2004, 11:15 AM #41Senior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 158
The comment about the Americans use of the system is right. Some little while ago, I was on another forum and using a large paddle stirred things up on the question of metric and imperial - there was an minor explosion.
I don't think Neil will mind if I insert the following link for those who are interested in the American reaction to this topic.
Link
CheersPete J
-
18th December 2004, 03:58 PM #42Deceased
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- ...
- Posts
- 7,955
Originally Posted by Coldamus
Peter.
-
18th December 2004, 06:56 PM #43Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- Western Sydney
- Posts
- 234
Originally Posted by Grunt
In a way, you've accepted that yourself by saying that you prefer a ruler with emphasis on the 5mm marks. When you are measuring 7mm or 8mm, you probably start from the 5mm mark and count forward or start from 10 and count back. With the benefit of an emphasised 5 mm mark, you may be able to go directly to the 7 or 8 mm mark without counting, but most people can't. Without that emphasis, no-one can do it consistently. Anyone who says they can is lying - they are actually counting back from the ten mark. Sure it doesn't take long but they are counting nevertheless.
Originally Posted by Grunt
regards
Coldamus
-
18th December 2004, 10:29 PM #44Retired
- Join Date
- May 1999
- Location
- Tooradin,Victoria,Australia
- Age
- 73
- Posts
- 11,918
I find the best metric tape measure to be a Stanley 8M that is all metric. Serial no. is 30-459.
-
19th December 2004, 09:42 AM #45Originally Posted byDriver of the Forums
Lord of the Manor of Upper Legover