Thread: Metric Vs Imperial

The article gives no technical reasons against using the metric system, its all a problem in the authors head. He can't remember because its not what he was born and bred on. I sometimes have the same problem. Maybe for me imperial may be better, its certainly what I use in machining.

However, having regularly trained young people into their first real job in life I can tell you they suffer no such problems or confusion. That is unless they have been cross trained.

Metric makes scale conversion, drafting and technical design so much easier its not funny. It all becomes straight decimal mathematics.

Cheers from both sides of the fence.

G'day All,

I was working in the UK (W. Yorkshire) back when the Poms brought in the Metric system and you get no cigar for guessing which system I would rather have stayed with…If you say, Imperial, your right!
And I’ll tell you why, back then I could drop-in to a timber yard and order 84x4”x2”x8’ Pine, 10x6”x2”x 14’ HW and so-forth and I would receive timbers of those dimensions, most timbers were 8’, 14’ or whatever length I had ordered, plus an inch or two of waste.
Anyway at the time I was working on replacing skirting boards in a house…now I don’t recall just how many feet of new skirting boards I needed but it was a fair bit of skirting…I went and seen the bloke in the timber yard and gave him my order, for let’s say 250’ of 4” skirting board…this bloke who knew me quite well says “we’ll have to give you the boards in metric measurements Bill”
“I don’t care if you give me the boards in Chinese Yen or Yang’s, just so long as I end- up with 250ft, says I” !
Later that day I picked-up the timber and started the job the following morning…Well folks I almost got to the end of the job and what did I discover?...You guessed it! There was a full wall and a bit of skirting boards missing! About 18” in all, so I toddled off back to the yard, with my order and delivery docket, to check with my supplier on the "missing" timber.
Well I finally got my missing timber that I had paid for…but I first had to convince that bloke that 6’ of timber was still 6’ of timber and it didn’t matter how it was measured or in what country it was measured or purchased!

He tried to tell me that if I wanted 6’ of timber then I would have to order 2.1m! But I don’t want 2.1m of timber…I want 6’! If I buy 2.1m I’ll have 10 and 11/8” of waste timber and that is too much waste!
He then tells me he will supply me with 6’ pieces of timber…but! I will have to pay for 2.1m plus 10p for each piece he cut down to 6’!

I told the bloke what I thought of the metric system and how it was being used to screw people…forcing them to buy much longer pieces of timber than they need!
His reply to this statement? “Just pass the costs on to your clients Bill, they won’t know”!
Now I don’t mind paying for 6’ 2” of timber even if I waste the 2” BUT! I’ll be dammed if I’ll ever be happy paying for 2.1m of timber when I know I’ll be chucking about 27cm in the bin!

And so it has continued to today! We are forced into buying timbers much longer than we need! Simply because some scumbags wanted to make even more millions from the population! They charge us and we can only pass on the cost…for a lot of waste timber!
In an earlier post I asked if anyone had any ideas on why we Aussies pay almost a thousand buck more to build a 12’x16’ timber shed than our American counterparts…and don’t forget! The yank builder has to purchase much more materials to build his shed stronger (lots of snow and high winds) than we Aussies do!
Well perhaps I have answered my own question! The reason why an American builder can build a timber shed so much cheaper than we Aussies?
When they order 4, 6, 8 or whatever foot of timber…they get and are charged for that amount!
But we Aussies have to wear these greedy suppliers supplying us and charging us for almost a foot more of timber…per piece…that we don’t need or want!
So do I prefer Metric over Imperial? No Way Hozay! To me the Metric system…in buying timber…has only opened the door "real wide" to robber baron suppliers :mad
If those suppliers were able to grow big and fat using the Imperial system...just think how much fatter (richer) the baskets have got by going Metric!

Bill from Geelong…kando…with a little help from my friends.

I am another "old" woodworker who made the change from imperial to metric.

These days I am happily thinking metric and have given up the mental translation process that was needed to get a picture in my mind of what a metric measurement actually meant.

The one advantage of imperial is that rulers, tapes etc are easier to read because of the different lengths of the intermediate marks.

I am now seeing metric rulers with an elongated 5 mm mark. That helps.

I still buy from my local merchant 2 metre lengths of 4" x2" and dual measure in timber is commonplace here except in the large diy sheds.

It took me a long time but I now do work in metric although i find I still think in imperial. Imperial sounds better anyway I mean 9 inches is easier for most to take in than 22.86!
On that not I'll depart
beejay1

Originally Posted by ozwinner

I like it best when you call out to someone else on the site, its 3 foot and 32 mm.


Al, the dislexic Brickie :confused:

Which reminds me of the carpenter on site who asked his apprentice to give him a measurement.
"It's two feet one and a bit." he replied, and the carpenter went spare. "What do you mean, "a bit" ?" he stormed. "How many times must I tell you? 'Be precise'. A big bit or a little bit?"

Kando/Bill,
timber in Australia is still sold in basically imperial lincrements:
900, 1200, 1500, 1800, 2100, 2400 etc etc
3', 4', 5', 6', 7', 8' etc etc
I think either the timber yard you were dealing with was trying to rip you off, or was run by an imbecile.

Mick

Imperial sounds better anyway I mean 9 inches is easier for most to take in than 22.86!

Now divide that measurement into 10 equal amounts for dovetails... without a calculator, metric wins every time, imperial you'd need half a sheet of A4 paper to work it out, metric is just one division sum!
If metric confuses you, forget centimeters just use millimeters, or remeber to add a zero to the cm too get it to sound right as in 128.4cms= 1280'4mm sounded.

Originally Posted by Kando

“I don’t care if you give me the boards in Chinese Yen or Yang’s, just so long as I end- up with 250ft, says I”

The point is Kando that you asked for 250 feet of skirting board. It doesn't matter if the board comes in 72 inch lengths or 20 metre lengths. 250 feet is an exact measurement. When this 250 feet is converted into metric you get 250 X 12 X 25.4 (to change it all into millimetres) = 76200mm = 76.2 metres. 76.2 metres supplied in 2.1 metre lengths will require 76.2 divided by 2.1 = 36.3 boards. Now, especially with skirting board, there is NO optimum size that can be used. It just doesn't matter what the lengths are so long as they are a reasonable length somewhere between 8 feet and infinity.
Really the whole thing was just the timber merchants misunderstanding of his business.
As to Arthur Marcels' lack of ability in the area of mensuration; as Squizzy said, Metric is heaps easier than imperial for almost everything.

Yep, I really can't see how Kando's story is an argument for imperial or against metric per se. It might be an argument against ordering in feet from a timber yard that works in metres. It looks more likely to me that the guy has done a rough estimation in his head based on equivalent metric sizes and consequently come up short.

Telling you that you have to order 2.1 metres if you want 6' is no different to telling you that you can only have a 7' length. The same amount of waste no matter how you measure it. What you really needed was 1.8 metres. My local Mitre 10 will dock me a 1.8 length if that's what I want but they prefer not to and charge $2.00 for the cut.

Originally Posted by kando

G'day All,
He tried to tell me that if I wanted 6’ of timber then I would have to order 2.1m! But I don’t want 2.1m of timber…I want 6’! If I buy 2.1m I’ll have 10 and 11/8” of waste timber and that is too much waste!
He then tells me he will supply me with 6’ pieces of timber…but! I will have to pay for 2.1m plus 10p for each piece he cut down to 6’!

Kando,

Why 2.1m? Where the heck did that come from? 2m I can understand if you go metric, but who wants 2.1m? Besides which 2m is already 6 inches more than you need for 6 feet.

Originally Posted by journeyman Mick

Kando/Bill,
timber in Australia is still sold in basically imperial lincrements:
900, 1200, 1500, 1800, 2100, 2400 etc etc
3', 4', 5', 6', 7', 8' etc etc
I think either the timber yard you were dealing with was trying to rip you off, or was run by an imbecile.

Mick

Mick,

Thats a real cop out for the metric system. Using measures that are multiples of 12 only goes to show the deficiency of the metric system. Why would you want metric measures in multiple of 12? So you you can divide by 2, 3, 4 and 6 without any fiddly bits left over. But just try that with 10. See also below re Harry72

Originally Posted by Harry72

Now divide that measurement into 10 equal amounts for dovetails... without a calculator, metric wins every time, imperial you'd need half a sheet of A4 paper to work it out, metric is just one division sum!

Harry72,
Now divide that measurement into 12 or 6 or 4 or 3 equal amounts for dovetails... without a calculator, Imperial wins every time, metric you'd need half a sheet of A4 paper to work it out, Imperial is just one division sum!

I think this is a bit like an Englishman and a Frenchman debating which language is the best for poetry.

IMO the only advantage of imperial over metric is that if you are used to working in fractions then you can quickly divide and multiply. Since they don't teach that much in school anymore, it's not a lot of use going forward. They do teach kids how to use a calculator though. My HSC was the first year calculators were allowed into exams.

Stick with imperial if you like. Work with whatever you're comfortable with. Like it or not, we have a metric system, albeit one with a few compromises, like timber sizes going roughly in feet. Actually I find lengths like 2.4, 1.8, 900 etc very handy to work with.

BTW 2.1 metres is not a very common length but some material comes in random lengths and 2.1 would be one of them.

Originally Posted by Flow_Slow

Kando,

Mick,

Thats a real cop out for the metric system. Using measures that are multiples of 12 only goes to show the deficiency of the metric system. Why would you want metric measures in multiple of 12? So you you can divide by 2, 3, 4 and 6 without any fiddly bits left over. But just try that with 10. See also below re Harry72 !

Thats what Mick said

timber in Australia is still sold in basically imperial lincrements

Divisibles has not a lot to do with it. Its a fact we still have a hangover of conversion into "standard units" but there is rarely such a thing. Not in woodworking or in building. We have to do what the designer wants these days and with buildings going on boundary lines etc you rarely find a building which has roof trusses in perfect divisibles. The length of the timber is rarely perfect for the job. Metric or imperial has nothing to do with it. Every site plan or construction drawing I get is in metric.

Originally Posted by Flow_Slow

Harry72,
Now divide that measurement into 12 or 6 or 4 or 3 equal amounts for dovetails... without a calculator, Imperial wins every time, metric you'd need half a sheet of A4 paper to work it out, Imperial is just one division sum!

Thats a very very narrow view of one instance with a whole number. What if it were 11 ".

Personally I use both but when in Rome.....

Originally Posted by Flow_Slow

Kando,

Why 2.1m? Where the heck did that come from? 2m I can understand if you go metric, but who wants 2.1m? Besides which 2m is already 6 inches more than you need for 6 feet.



Mick,

Thats a real cop out for the metric system. Using measures that are multiples of 12 only goes to show the deficiency of the metric system. Why would you want metric measures in multiple of 12? So you you can divide by 2, 3, 4 and 6 without any fiddly bits left over. But just try that with 10. See also below re Harry72


Harry72,
Now divide that measurement into 12 or 6 or 4 or 3 equal amounts for dovetails... without a calculator, Imperial wins every time, metric you'd need half a sheet of A4 paper to work it out, Imperial is just one division sum!

Sorry Flow_Slow but these are not very good (read poor) arguments. The fact that the decimal number can be divided by 12 exactly is surely a plus, not a minus. But you miss the basic fact that they can be divided EXACTLY by 10 even after having been divided by 12 or 13 or any other number you can think of. All you ned to do is move the decimal point one numeral to the right.

As for the argument used againts Harry, try a piece of timber 9 13/16" and divide that equally using those same divisors.

I know what maths system I'd rather use.

11" divided into 12 equal amounts gives you 12 at 11/12". That's great if you have 12ths on your ruler. 11/4 = 2 3/4", that one is easy. 11/6 = 1 5/6". Has your ruler got 6ths on it? 11/3 = 3 2/3". No 3rds on my ruler. I've got 32nds, 16ths, 10ths, 8ths, quarters and halves on mine.

See where I'm going? It's great to be able to do simple arithmetic like this but what do you do with the answers?