Thread: Metric Vs Imperial

Originally Posted by silentC

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?

Why don't you say what you mean Mr Silent. You obviously are very prejudiced against the Imperial system, which does actually have some good points.

Don't beat around the bush just say it. You freely admit you work in multiples of the imperial system anyway

Actually I find lengths like 2.4, 1.8, 900 etc very handy to work with.

Isn' that a bit hypocritical.

Cheers

I think there are a lot of people blaming the metric system for something that hasn't got anything to do with the metric system:

The argument about wanting a 6ft long piece of wood and having to buy 2.1m is largely irrelevant. Most things we buy come in fixed quantaties and if we want less, we normally have to pay for the extra. You wouldn't go into a pub in England and ask for 9/16ths of a pint - beer comes in halves, pints and jugs and you have to buy one of them. Same as wood - it comes in fixed lengths and if you want an amount that is in between two standard lengths then you have to buy the extra. The only way that it is an issue with the metric system is that if 1800mm is a standard length and you want 6ft then 1800 is just a little bit too short.

And the issue about inchs being eaier to divide is also over played - an imperial ruler is marked in 1/8 and 1/16 etc which is fine if all you do is divide by multiples of 2 but if you want to divide by 3 or 5 etc then it's no easier than metric.

Simon

Originally Posted by Termite

The official measurement system in Australia is Metric and has been for quite some time. Live with it.

EOS

Originally Posted by vsquizz

Why don't you say what you mean Mr Silent. You obviously are very prejudiced against the Imperial system, which does actually have some good points.

OK, well to be honest this is probably true. I was in 4th class when Metric came in and I've never learned a trade, so I've mostly kept inches at arm's length. For 4 years after school, I worked in a sheetmetal works and then a glazier so there were plenty of old fellas coming in with their inches and feet, which I could handle well enough.

But no, my point is that whilst the arithmetic may be easier, applying the result is not necessarily as easy. With inches, you end up with lots of odd fractions. With millimetres you end up with decimal places. Either way, unless you are working to extreme tolerances, you are going to have to make compromises when you take you pencil from behind your ear and apply it to the timber.

Does anybody bother trying to mark 33.33 mill for three spaces on a 100mm board, or do you just mark 2 at 33.3 and one at 33.4. OK, I don't even do that. The two outside ones will be 33 and the middle one will be 34. Sue me.

The point is that so far the arguments put up for Imperial really just go back to what you are used to.

You freely admit you work in multiples of the imperial system anyway Isn' that a bit hypocritical.

Actually, it is probably more habit than anything else. Inches and feet were long gone from the building world when I started out of school. The multiples of 300, 900, 1200, 1800, 2100, 2400 etc. already existed when I came on the scene, so they are second nature to me now. I can look at something and say 'that is 1800'. The fact that it is based on an original size of 6' means nothing.

In fact, I would argue that the 6'/1800mm sheet size has more to do with ease of handling than feet and inches. It's probably the widest sheet that an average person could lift with a hand on each edge. 2'/600mm is a good width for benchtops. 7ft/2100mm is a good height for a door.... and so on...

Originally Posted by silentC

Does anybody bother trying to mark 33.33 mill for three spaces on a 100mm board, or do you just mark 2 at 33.3 and one at 33.4. OK, I don't even do that. The two outside ones will be 33 and the middle one will be 34. Sue me.

Originally Posted by simon c

I think there are a lot of people blaming the metric system for something that hasn't got anything to do with the metric system:

You wouldn't go into a pub in England and ask for 9/16ths of a pint - beer comes in halves, pints and jugs and you have to buy one of them.
Simon

******************************************************
G'day mates, in Metric V Imperial...to me it's as simple as this. I no longer work in engineering and since taking a liking to woodwork I have never had to shave off 1, 2 or 3 thou' from a piece of wood...don't believe it could be done anyway .
But if the old true and tried Imperial system is good enough to be retained by the Yanks and Canadians (in woodwork/building in timber), the worlds airforces and world airlines, the worlds navies and the worlds merchant fleets, the worlds precious metals markets! Oh! and...Pommy pubs that sell "Imperial" halfs, pints and jugs...last time I was there a jug equaled 1 "Imperial" gallon.
Then it's good enough for me!
Anyway, how happy would Simon be if he ordered a pint and the publican said you have to pay for a litre...but don't worry...I'll just pour the extra down the sink and serv you your pint! Bet that would make you sit-up and take notice!

Cheers mates,

kando...Geelong.

But if the old true and tried Imperial system is good enough to be retained by the Yanks and Canadians (in woodwork/building in timber), the worlds airforces and world airlines, the worlds navies and the worlds merchant fleets, the worlds precious metals markets! Oh! and...Pommy pubs that sell "Imperial" halfs, pints and jugs...last time I was there a jug equaled 1 "Imperial" gallon.
Then it's good enough for me!

I think this is more a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Doesn't mean it's any better, just cheaper not to change it.

I'm not sure that doing something just because the Yanks do is a good enough argument

BTW save the 300mm offcut, you can use it as a nogging. Oh, and if you don't want the extra bit of beer, give it to me

Originally Posted by kando

Anyway, how happy would Simon be if he ordered a pint and the publican said you have to pay for a litre...but don't worry...I'll just pour the extra down the sink and serv you your pint... But if the old true and tried Imperial system is good enough to be retained by ... the worlds airforces and world airlines, the worlds navies and the worlds merchant fleets, the worlds precious metals markets

If I went into a bar and they told me they were metric and sold drinks by the litre then I would buy a half litre - it's really quite simple and happens all the time in continental europe. Victorians who go to NSW order schooners or midis when there - they don't try to get the barman to sell them a pot.

Not sure how much of the world you've included but very little of the airforces, airlines, navies etc use imperial - probably just the US and people who were taught and still speak in the "old language". And when selling precious metals, prices are normally converted to metric first.

But don't get me wrong, I'm NOT trying to say that metric is better - I just disgree that imperial is better.

In my view the issue is not whether one system is better than another. Rather, the issue is about the relative strengths and weaknesses of each, and how this affects us in woodworking.

The strength of the Metric system is the ease of calculation. No question. The strength of the Imperial system is the easier visual recognition of graduations of length. At least in my experience.

Any tool makers or printers out there who want to produce a better (spatially) designed Metric rule?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Well I did say about the imperial system

which does actually have some good points.

But I'm not sure what they are.....................

I have no problem with mm and metres...but I really think the chain and the acre was a far more useable unit of measure.

Cheers from he who resides on 1/9th of a hectare:confused: :confused:

Cheers

Originally Posted by vsquizz

.but I really think the chain and the acre was a far more useable unit of measure.

After all if we didn't have the chain, we wouldn't know how long to make a cricket pitch.....

or flush the loos come to think of it.

Pull the metre doesn't sound right.

P

I’m happy to muck along with both. Exclusively use metric for project (furniture requiring precise measurement) but equally happy to drop tools and search for that 2 foot off-cut in the wood pile, or a board about an inch thick, and I estimate the guy’s height at 6ft 4, and would run a mile to see a 36-24-36 curve. But the thickness of my pencil lead must be .5mm and the window size about 6ft by 4ft unless I need the frame size of 1800 x 1200. Easy – what’s the worry? Unless you want a clip around the ear with a lump of “4 be 2” or should that be 100 x 50!!

Aussieglen (aged 30 when Metric hit)

Originally Posted by bitingmidge

After all if we didn't have the chain, we wouldn't know how long to make a cricket pitch.....

And where would SWMBO attach the ball??

Cheers

I also have been involved in the carpentry trade for 45 years. The major problem is not what units are used to complete a project but in repairing a project. A dressed 4 x 2 used to be 37/8 by 17/8. Now it is 92mm x 42mm quite a bit smaller. Plywood is still actually in imperial sizes but sold by a nominal metric size. Unfortunately that does not apply to all sheet materials. Doors are now smaller than the old imperial sizes, making a replacement job a bit more difficult. I have difficulty when a client gives me a size for a project, and doesn't mention it was in centimetres. Building trades generally only use metres and millimetres. The rag trades use centimetres. That makes dealing with women for that special box, cupboard etc. just that bit more interesting.
Jim