Why METRIC!!!!!!
02-16-2005, 09:35 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Maineville, Ohio
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all while typing on a computer that has a 19" lcd monitor that isnt even 19" diagonal..... some people cant even deal with one unit.... much less 3+ units....
02-16-2005, 11:52 AM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cummins Technical Center, IN
Posts: 6,564
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
5 Posts
Originally posted by infidel
I have no problem at all with metric, in fact find it easier, but can't stand it when it's mixed up with standard.
I have no problem at all with metric, in fact find it easier, but can't stand it when it's mixed up with standard.
If metric is good enough-- USE IT
If SAE is good enough-- USE IT
I actually prefer metric in most cases-- it's easier to find the next size up or down-- no need for my foggy mind to process fractions!
jlh
02-16-2005, 02:42 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Corpus Christi, Tx.
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When faced with a mixed bag of nuts...
metric Crescent Wrenches & metric ChanneLocks, and metric Vice-Grips for what the metric ChanneLocks won't turn!
IF those 3 won't fit, there's always that metric "Victor" smokewrench!!!
Welcome to the new "metric" world!
metric Crescent Wrenches & metric ChanneLocks, and metric Vice-Grips for what the metric ChanneLocks won't turn!
IF those 3 won't fit, there's always that metric "Victor" smokewrench!!!
Welcome to the new "metric" world!
02-16-2005, 02:54 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Denison, TX
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has taken me a while to process the visual size of a nut or bolt into metric. I did learn, for example, that if it looks like 5/8" then it is 16mm.
So remember that;
5/16" = 8mm
5/8" = 16mm
15/16" = 24mm
This has helped me translate what I see into metric.
Daniel
So remember that;
5/16" = 8mm
5/8" = 16mm
15/16" = 24mm
This has helped me translate what I see into metric.
Daniel
02-16-2005, 03:00 PM
#24
It's like trying to learn French or some other language. You see the word or hear the word and have to translate into english in your mind to understand.
Once you are truly fluent you will be able to "think" in French or Think in Metric.
Once you are truly fluent you will be able to "think" in French or Think in Metric.
02-16-2005, 03:36 PM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Corpus Christi, Tx.
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by tool
It's like trying to learn French or some other language. You see the word or hear the word and have to translate into english in your mind to understand.
Once you are truly fluent you will be able to "think" in French or Think in Metric.
It's like trying to learn French or some other language. You see the word or hear the word and have to translate into english in your mind to understand.
Once you are truly fluent you will be able to "think" in French or Think in Metric.
I definitely wasn't "thinking" metric!!!! I was "thinking" what I'd like to do the "xxx xx x xxxxx" that allowed mixed hardware in the same application!!!
Keith
02-16-2005, 03:40 PM
#27
Hahaha, yeah I fully understand, just seems stupid.......
You could use the tactic of my buddy and his VW based Sandrail.
No Metric tools for him. Heat the socket up with the torch and then drive it on with a hammer!!
You always get a tight fit. No stripped corners.
You could use the tactic of my buddy and his VW based Sandrail.
No Metric tools for him. Heat the socket up with the torch and then drive it on with a hammer!!
You always get a tight fit. No stripped corners.
02-16-2005, 05:42 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Concord, CA USA
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by CarlJensen
Anybody remember the old Whitworth metric system? Had Brit motorcycles with it. Had to have THREE tool sets!!
Anybody remember the old Whitworth metric system? Had Brit motorcycles with it. Had to have THREE tool sets!!
Oh, and J. Jones - welcome!
Dale
02-16-2005, 07:24 PM
#30
I was banned per my own request for speaking the name Pelosi
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bristol Michigan
Posts: 1,908
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by edwinsmith
It's all about what you're used to. I find the metric system easier to use and much easier to learn. Everything is based on powers of 10. Our system is based on inches, feet, yards, rods, miles, chains, and whatever else they had to measure against.
Here's an interesting bit on the spacing of railroad tracks:
Railroads
Does the statement, "We've always done it that way" ring any bells? Read to the end.
The US standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That's an exceedingly odd number. Why was that gauge used?
Because that's the way they built them in England, and English expatriates built the US Railroads.
Why did the English build them like that?
Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used.
Why did "they" use that gauge then?
Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.
Okay! Why did the wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing?
Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads in England, because that's the spacing of the wheel ruts.
So who built those old rutted roads?
Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (and England) for their legions. The roads have been used ever since. And the ruts in the roads?
Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome, they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing.
The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot. And bureaucracies live forever.
So the next time you are handed a specification and wonder what horse's *** came up with it, you may be exactly right, because the Imperial Roman war chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the back ends of two war horses.
Now the twist to the story...
When you see a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory at Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is about as wide as two horses' behinds.
So, a major Space Shuttle design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of a horse's ***. .... and you thought being a HORSE'S *** wasn't important!
It's all about what you're used to. I find the metric system easier to use and much easier to learn. Everything is based on powers of 10. Our system is based on inches, feet, yards, rods, miles, chains, and whatever else they had to measure against.
Here's an interesting bit on the spacing of railroad tracks:
Railroads
Does the statement, "We've always done it that way" ring any bells? Read to the end.
The US standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That's an exceedingly odd number. Why was that gauge used?
Because that's the way they built them in England, and English expatriates built the US Railroads.
Why did the English build them like that?
Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used.
Why did "they" use that gauge then?
Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.
Okay! Why did the wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing?
Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads in England, because that's the spacing of the wheel ruts.
So who built those old rutted roads?
Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (and England) for their legions. The roads have been used ever since. And the ruts in the roads?
Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome, they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing.
The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot. And bureaucracies live forever.
So the next time you are handed a specification and wonder what horse's *** came up with it, you may be exactly right, because the Imperial Roman war chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the back ends of two war horses.
Now the twist to the story...
When you see a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory at Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is about as wide as two horses' behinds.
So, a major Space Shuttle design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of a horse's ***. .... and you thought being a HORSE'S *** wasn't important!