metric.htm
Number of hits on this page:
When the worlds of Metric, Anglosaksism and Imperialism collide....
To: Offroad@off-road.com
From: Willem-Jan Markerink
Date sent: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 12:16:35 +0000
Subject: Re: Lada Niva 91
Send reply to: Offroad@off-road.com
On 26 Mar 97 at 16:35, BASS Equipamentos Ltda. wrote:
> I am sorry < I normally use metric units .....
No need to say sorry, those darn Americans use the wrong system, and
on top of that are just lazy in math....;-))
The rest of the world uses the metric system....:-))
(I am currently trying to find a logic explanation why some US-made
bottles are rated in 'oz' (ounces), while the larger quantities of
the same product come in gallons. This is insane, how on earth do I
calculate such nightmarish idiosyncrasies?!? Even my scientific
technical handbook passes on this crap!)
> > * that is equal to 72
> H.P .
> > 11.6kgf.m/114N.m at 3.400 rpm that is right ( 84
> foot-pound , but I don't really know if I did the right conversion , please
> check )
1lbs-ft equals 1.36Nm
Some other used wrong things
- psi (pound per square inch); 14psi equals 1 bar (or properly 10^5 Pascal)
- mpg (mile per gallon): 1 mpg (mile per gallon (US gallon, not UK
gallon....8-))) equals 0.421km/liter
Willem (why can't they do as the rest of the world?) Jan
--
Bye,
_/ _/ _/_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/_/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
_/ _/ illem _/ _/ an _/ _/ _/ arkerink
_/_/_/
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
To: Offroad@off-road.com
From: Nekromncer@aol.com
Date sent: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 11:31:21 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Lada Niva 91
Send reply to: Offroad@off-road.com
In a message dated 97-03-27 06:17:21 EST, you write:
>No need to say sorry, those darn Americans use the wrong system, and
>on top of that are just lazy in math....;-))
>The rest of the world uses the metric system....:-))
Waaah! I don' wanna go to school Mommie! But you are correct, the Metric
system is vastly superior. If you had to beal with the crap we have, wouldn't
you hate math?
<$100 = 80gal. @ $1.25 per. gal. = 1200mi @ 15mpg >< 50mph (average) @ 5hpd
= 250mpd = 4.8d travel @ 15mpg & 80gal>
This is the only math I want to do and it is probably incorect anyway! I'll
stick to my Biopsychology major, thank you. Spelling, math, geeze...and I
thought this was a off-road mailing list LOL !!!
now I have a headache,
Geoff
To: Offroad@off-road.com
Subject: Re: Lada Niva 91
From: mikejeep@juno.com (Hilary M Kunz)
Date sent: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 09:28:35 EST
Send reply to: Offroad@off-road.com
On Thu, 27 Mar 1997 12:16:35 +0000 Willem-Jan Markerink
writes:
>On 26 Mar 97 at 16:35, BASS Equipamentos Ltda. wrote:
>
>> I am sorry < I normally use metric units .....
>
>No need to say sorry, those darn Americans use the wrong system, and
>on top of that are just lazy in math....;-))
>The rest of the world uses the metric system....:-))
>
>(I am currently trying to find a logic explanation why some US-made
>bottles are rated in 'oz' (ounces), while the larger quantities of
>the same product come in gallons. This is insane, how on earth do I
>calculate such nightmarish idiosyncrasies?!? Even my scientific
>technical handbook passes on this crap!)
>
Jan,
Our measuring system is much easier than that complicated metric
system. I mean all that math required to convert to metrics makes it
just too hard. A 350 is a 5.7, but not quite exactly. A 351 is a 5.8,
but so is a 355. I would guess that a kilometer (.6 miles) is ok for
smaller countries, but it is already 3,000 miles across the US, and 1,500
north to south. Why make the country bigger? How do you figure that
out? Is it 3,000 times .6, or times 1.6?
This new one, CV, well, I learned a while back not to take an
independent front 4x4off road, so CV joints are out:-)
We know that the scientists like math, that's why they use metric
measurements to figure stuff out, then they convert to inches, feet,
yards & miles to make it easy to use.
Without getting into country bashing, when the English used the
English system, they were the pre-eminent country in the world (according
to their history). They went metric, and what happened?
I tried to learn Hectares when I was a kid, but the measurement
made no sense to me, so I stayed with the acres, which are based upon
rods - now that's an easy system to understand.
A metric ton - now that is an interesting one. They finally
figured out that they can't measure ships and cargo in cc's, so they
adopted US measurements.
How big would 33's be? 850's don't sound right.
A 383 stroker wouldn't sound as good as a 6.5.
Would a Dana 60 be a 1.1K?
Liters I understand, that's a quart, give or take. Why would I
want to put a lot more gas in my 26 gallon tank? What, 100 liters or so?
I don't even want to go there with my 65 gal RV tank. The last time I
bought gas by the liter (in Japan), it was much more expensive, and you
didn't get as much:-)
Although women's weights go down, their waists get bigger!
When the hundred yard dash became the 100 meter dash, the times
got worse - did anyone else notice that?
I'm getting too far off track here, I guess that everyone just
needs to adapt to the way we do it:-))
OBTW, I enjoy the Lada saga, sounds like fun, and that's why we
do what we do, to have fun!
Mike Kunz
81 CJ-5, 33-12.50 Yokohama Mud Diggers, 5" lift, shackle reverse,
355 ci Chevy, SM420, 4.11:1, 1000 RTI (20 degree ramp), 869 RTI
(23 degree ramp)
US Navy, San Diego 4 Wheelers, CA4WDC, BRC, Tread Lightly!
Visit the San Diego 4 Wheelers webpage:
http://home.earthlink.net/~bobstickney/index.html
Going downhill is easy, gravity sucks!!!!
To: Offroad@off-road.com
Date sent: Fri, 28 Mar 97 11:03:00 PST
From: SteveX Shoop
Subject: Metrics (was: Lada Niva 91)
Send reply to: Offroad@off-road.com
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 09:28:35 EST
From: mikejeep@juno.com (Hilary M Kunz)
>> I am sorry < I normally use metric units .....
>
>No need to say sorry, those darn Americans use the wrong system, and
>on top of that are just lazy in math....;-))
>The rest of the world uses the metric system....:-))
>
>(I am currently trying to find a logic explanation why some US-made
>bottles are rated in 'oz' (ounces), while the larger quantities of
>the same product come in gallons. This is insane, how on earth do I
>calculate such nightmarish idiosyncrasies?!? Even my scientific
>technical handbook passes on this crap!)
>
As an American and an Automotive Engineer, I hate the way we are doing
it. Metrics use this delightful thing called "logic."
And, as strange as it sounds, my 1982 Chev S-10 and my 1984 Chev
Cavalier both contained strictly metric bolts, etc; but then my 1987
Chev Astro is SAE.
Duh.
If it ever goes to vote, I'm for metrics; plus, I intend to push it on
my poor children when they're old enough =).
Steve Shoop
1994 Suzuki Sidekick JX; stock, except for lots of electronic toys.
1987 Chevy Astro CL; stock, except for trashed crankshaft.
1984 Chevy Cavalier CS with almost 200K miles on original, never
rebuilt engine.
To: Offroad@off-road.com
From: "BASS Equipamentos Ltda."
Subject: Lada Niva 91 - Metric Units .
Date sent: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:18:55 -0000
Send reply to: Offroad@off-road.com
I think we messed up
Well , I work all my time with diferent units , as a chemical engineer I
have to use material and units from everywhere , I think I lose 10 % of my
calculator time just "translating it" .
I won't say the metric sistem is the best , but when it was created (
France , around 1770 ) the idea was to create a patern to avoid
misunderstandings betwenn measurings and avoid also stealing .
1 pound wasn't always a pound , and the pour fellow that was traing to buy
cattle from other country had to find out what a "arroba" was .
So a group got together and decided to do a very simple and repetitive
method .
First they designed the meter , it would be defined by a fraction of the
earth diameter .
So wheight woud be linked , a ton would be the weight of a cubic meter of
water , liter the 1/1000 part and so on .
Power and torque were also defined this way , so if I have to check the
data I can do it easily .
To go with temperature , 0 degrees celsius would be water freezing , 100
boiling ...... at atmospheric pressure .
In farenheit you must remember that those point are 32 and 212 , otherweise
there is no way to check experimentally ..........
It also aded a point that is easy error following , If I say my height is
1,7 means that I am between 1,65 m and 1,75 m but if I say I am 1,66 the
error goes down , by simply using metric you can easily spot the error in a
measurament . hardly done on other units but already embeded on it .
So goes on ....... by the way , I think whe say we use a 2.3 liters engine
because it sound a lot better than a 2268 c.c.
The bad about " american , english , and otherwise " is that you don't
really know if you are transforming it well , I got crazy some days ago
traiyng to figure out what the size of a barrel because the paper I had on
my hand just said barrel and my conversion table showed 6 diferent types
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I lived in the U.S. and got quite handy , so I don't really find their
system hard when you get in touch , I think anyone will say the same about
metric .
Want to get crazy ? look at this
steres -
long ton
Short ton
Inperial long ton
Poundals
Candeli
Miners inch
And try to figure out what they mean easily !!!!!!!!!!!
Christian Maciel
Bass@alphanet.com.br
CJ-5 1979
Lada Niva 91^M
To: Offroad@off-road.com
From: Jon@AppliedThought.com (Jon Hylands)
Subject: Re: metric feet and ounces per mile...
Date sent: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 04:34:45 GMT
Organization: Applied Thought, Inc.
Send reply to: Offroad@off-road.com
On Fri, 28 Mar 1997 22:21:16 EST, mikejeep@juno.com (Hilary M Kunz)
wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 1997 16:46:18 -0300 (EST) brew@nutecnet.com.br writes:
> >p.s. when will the U.S. start using real gallons, that is to say,
> >imperial gallons ?? Just a question.
>
> How many liters to that English Gallon?
4.54 vs. about 3.8 for a US gallon...
See, that's why cars in Canada get better gas mileage ;-)
There's more gas in each gallon :-)
Later,
Jon
-------------------------------------------------------------
_____________
|| || Jon Hylands Jon@AppliedThought.com
||\ \ || http://www.AppliedThought.com/jon/jeep
[]||_\____\____||[]
\|__---------__|/ '85 CJ-7 2.5L T4 Dana 300
_|_/( )|||( )\_|_ AMC 20 Detroit Summers Bros.
/___\ ||||| /___\ Dana 30 open 3.54 R&P
{\!\}\@|||||@/{/!/} 2 1/2" Lift 32" Mud TA's
{\!#############!/} Off-Your-Rockers
{\!\} \_/ {/!/} Custom On-Board Air (York)
{\!\} {/!/} Custom On-Board Welder (Delco)
-------------------------------------------------------------
To: Offroad@off-road.com
From: Willem-Jan Markerink
Date sent: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 22:40:34 +0000
Subject: Re: metric feet and ounces per mile...
Send reply to: Offroad@off-road.com
On 29 Mar 97 at 4:34, Jon Hylands wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 1997 22:21:16 EST, mikejeep@juno.com (Hilary M Kunz) =
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 28 Mar 1997 16:46:18 -0300 (EST) brew@nutecnet.com.br writes:
> > >p.s. when will the U.S. start using real gallons, that is to say,=20
> > >imperial
> > > gallons ?? Just a question.
> >=20
> > How many liters to that English Gallon?
>
> 4.54 vs. about 3.8 for a US gallon...
4.546 to be more exact (not sure if this ultimo exacto though!), so
that should be 4.55 if you start chopping digits....;-))
3.785 for the US gallon for that matter, so 3.8 is correct.
Willem (I feel like being on a VOC sail ship centuries ago, where
fooling each other with sizes was considered the acid test of
professional trade) Jan
--
Bye,
_/ _/ _/_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/_/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
_/ _/ illem _/ _/ an _/ _/ _/ arkerink
_/_/_/
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
To: LandCruisers@tlca.org
Send reply to: LandCruisers@tlca.org
Date sent: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 15:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Stephen J. Kramer"
Subject: Re: LandCruisers Digest V2 #228
>
> actually one ton u.s. is 2000kg a metric is a little different.
> jere
>
A bit of clarification:
One ton is 2240 lbs, sometimes referred to as a long ton, but in the U.S.
a ton usually refers to 2000 lbs, also called a short ton. A metric ton
or tonne is 1000 kilogram (1 megagram). One kilogram is 2.2046 U.S. lbs,
so one ton U.S. is actually 0.9072 metric tons or 907.2 kg.
Steve Kramer
To: Offroad@offroadlist.com
From: "Mike Graham"
Date sent: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 07:56:56 +0000
Subject: Re: Subject: Handy tap and die set
Send reply to: Offroad@offroadlist.com
On 28 Apr 98 at 19:48, Willem-Jan Markerink wrote:
> You might want to investigate 'nut-serts', mounted in a similar way
> and for similar applications as pop-rivets. Drill a hole, and pop a
> nut tightly to the sheet metal. Same thing even exists as
> bolt-serts, attaching a bolt to a previously drilled hole. And like
> pop-rivets, all without requiring access to the rear (they call it
> therefore 'blind-pop/nail', 'blind-nut' and 'blind-bolt' in Holland)
I use those, and they're very handy, but I haven't found them in
metric yet.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Graham, ,
Owner and operator of The Chew Toy (or "That Bitch")
1981 BJ42 Toyota LandCruiser diesel.
To: Offroad@offroadlist.com
Date sent: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 06:02:37 -0700
Subject: Re: Subject: Handy tap and die set
From: mikejeep@juno.com (H. Mike Kunz)
Send reply to: Offroad@offroadlist.com
On Wed, 29 Apr 1998 07:56:56 +0000 "Mike Graham"
writes:
>On 28 Apr 98 at 19:48, Willem-Jan Markerink wrote:
>
>> You might want to investigate 'nut-serts', mounted in a similar way
>> and for similar applications as pop-rivets. Drill a hole, and pop a
>> nut tightly to the sheet metal. Same thing even exists as
>> bolt-serts, attaching a bolt to a previously drilled hole. And like
>> pop-rivets, all without requiring access to the rear (they call it
>> therefore 'blind-pop/nail', 'blind-nut' and 'blind-bolt' in Holland)
>
> I use those, and they're very handy, but I haven't found them in
>metric yet.
>
Why would they need to be metric? Since the new threads are all part of
your new fabrication, would you need to use existing fasteners? I know
that every metric rig I've had I bit by bit converted to American,
anyway, as the fasteners failed, I tapped them out to American rather
than get a whole new metric tap and die set. If you are worried about
having a mix, most cars built today (including my Mitsubishi) have both
metric and American fasteners.
Mike Kunz
81 CJ5, 355 ci SBC, SM420, 75:1 crawl, 33-12.50 Dunlop Radial Mud Rovers,
1373 RTI
US Navy, President San Diego 4 Wheelers, CA4WDC, Blue Ribbon Coalition
Visit the San Diego 4 Wheelers webpage at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~bobstickney/index.html
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
To: Offroad@offroadlist.com
From: "Mike Graham"
Date sent: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 18:56:23 +0000
Subject: Re: Subject: Handy tap and die set
Send reply to: Offroad@offroadlist.com
On 29 Apr 98 at 6:02, H. Mike Kunz wrote:
> > I use those, and they're very handy, but I haven't found them in
> >metric yet.
> >
> Why would they need to be metric?
Everything else on the rig is metric, and I prefer metric. What's
the wrench size between a 10mm and 12mm? 11mm. Easy. What's the
size between 3/8 and 1/2"? 7/16". A pain in the ass to remember,
especially when you get into sixty-fourths, etc. I don't want to
have to do math when I'm lying on my back in the mud under a
truck asking someone for a wrench.
> converted to American, anyway, as the fasteners failed, I tapped
> them out to American rather than get a whole new metric tap and die
> set. If you are worried about having a mix, most cars built today
> (including my Mitsubishi) have both metric and American fasteners.
But *NOT* my 'cruiser. It is pure metric, and nothing else may
touch her! I carry metric tools, and I'm laughing. I even have
metric drill bits to drill the holes for my metric taps, and life is
bliss.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Graham, ,
Owner and operator of The Chew Toy (or "That Bitch")
1981 BJ42 Toyota LandCruiser diesel.
To: Offroad@offroadlist.com
Subject: Re: Subject: Handy tap and die set
Date sent: Thu, 30 Apr 1998 01:56:16 -0600
From: Drew Eckhardt
Send reply to: Offroad@offroadlist.com
In message <199804292257.PAA21038@suv.com>, mike@headwaters.com writes:
>On 29 Apr 98 at 6:02, H. Mike Kunz wrote:
> Everything else on the rig is metric, and I prefer metric. What's
>the wrench size between a 10mm and 12mm? 11mm. Easy. What's the
>size between 3/8 and 1/2"? 7/16".
The number is irrelevant, since it's the one physically located between
the 3/8" and 1/2" clips.
>A pain in the ass to remember, especially when you get into
>sixty-fourths, etc.
This is a strawman. In the automotive world, everything but the
electrical system has fastners big enough to be in sixteenth inch
increments.
Irregardless of your organizational (apart from my toolbox, I'm a slob)
or mathamatical skills, with a little experience, you can eyeball the common
bolts and get it right. A bit more, and you'll know that the center harmonic
balancer bolt on a small chevy takes a 5/8" deep socket, its three friends
have 9/16" heads, Toyota Land Cruiser drive shaft bolts need a 14mm tool,
etc.
>I don't want to
>have to do math when I'm lying on my back in the mud under a
>truck asking someone for a wrench.
If the fastner is too big or small for you to eyeball it, take the
appropriate rack of sockets with you. You won't have to wait,
and don't have to worry about it.
> But *NOT* my 'cruiser. It is pure metric, and nothing else may
>touch her! I carry metric tools, and I'm laughing. I even have
>metric drill bits to drill the holes for my metric taps, and life is
>bliss.
Unless you have to go to the hardware store, and pick out a bolt,nut,tap,or
die based on memory. With standard, you have coarse and fine. With metric,
you may have 1, 1.5, and 2 mm pitches for one size; unless it's something
wierd, in which case you might have a .8 that no hardware store stocks.
Between the pitch varieties, different head sizes, and .5mm increments on
medium sized fastners that you'll never be able to eyeball, it's a real
nightmare.
--
Home Page
For those who do, no explanation is necessary.
For those who don't, no explanation is possible.
To: Offroad@offroadlist.com
From: "Mike Graham"
Date sent: Thu, 30 Apr 1998 08:02:52 +0000
Subject: Re: Subject: Handy tap and die set
Send reply to: Offroad@offroadlist.com
On 30 Apr 98 at 1:56, Drew Eckhardt wrote:
> The number is irrelevant, since it's the one physically located
> between the 3/8" and 1/2" clips.
8-) There's still pain when you're putting them back on the clips
if you used a few sockets in a row, if you know what I mean.
> This is a strawman.
A strawman?
> In the automotive world, everything but the
> electrical system has fastners big enough to be in sixteenth inch
> increments.
Try drilling a hole to be tapped. You need oddball sizes like
13/64 etc etc.
> Irregardless
Please don't use that 'word'. It's a pet peeve of mine.
"Irrespective" or "Regardless". Pick one.
> of your organizational (apart from my toolbox, I'm a
> slob) or mathamatical skills, with a little experience, you can
> eyeball the common bolts and get it right.
Sure you can eyeball them, as long as you only have one standard on
your truck. If you can tell a 3/8 bolt head from a 10mm bolt head at
a glance, then you're a far better man than I am! (assuming the heads
are unmarked).
> If the fastner is too big or small for you to eyeball it, take the
> appropriate rack of sockets with you. You won't have to wait, and
> don't have to worry about it.
Unless the person is driving 'Bigfoot' I'm not going to have the
*room* to be selecting tools by any other than the 'braille' method.
I grab a few sockets, put them in a pocket, and wedge myself under
the truck. When I'm in mud I'd prefer not to have to roll my head
around in it, so staring straight up is my usual procedure.
> Unless you have to go to the hardware store, and pick out a
> bolt,nut,tap,or die based on memory.
Why would this be a problem? I carry bolts of various sizes.
'Cruisers are pretty good for standardizing on bolts, although they
*do* use the Japanese standard. With a few exceptions (like
M10x1.25) the bolts are very easy to find. I live in Canada; I can
buy them at many hardware stores (of course a regular hardware store
might not have a decent grade of bolt), but every fastener place that
I've walked into in this country has had a good selection of metric
fasteners. Oddly enough, it seems that *every* fastener store has
one guy there who just can't handle the concept of metric. You
ask for a 10mm nylock nut and they look at you like you just started
speaking in Gaelic. Even more odd, is that they seem to feel
pride in not understanding it, or having nothing to do with it.
Avoid these guys, and you're laughing.
> With standard, you have coarse
> and fine. With metric, you may have 1, 1.5, and 2 mm pitches for
> one size;
This is true, but there are generally only two pitches of each size
in common use. There are only a few oddball sizes that I've found on
the 'cruiser. I've got a bin of metric bolts that I buy at a local
automotive hardware place, and I just grab handfuls of what he
stocks, because he stocks the common sizes, and I've replaced bolts
on everything from my 'cruiser to a Samurai to a Ford Mustang and
have not yet met a metric thread that I didn't have. I stock six
bolt sizes in different lengths.
> a .8 that no hardware store stocks. Between the pitch varieties,
> different head sizes,
Yes, the different head sizes can be a pain. The Japanese standard
varies from the German standard. I prefer the German standard,
because with all else remaining equal I feel that the bigger the bolt
head is the less likely I am to round it off.
> and .5mm increments on medium sized fastners
> that you'll never be able to eyeball, it's a real nightmare.
I'm not sure what you mean here... .5mm increments of what? Head
size? Thread pitch? I've never knowingly seen a fractional
millimeter head size.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Graham, ,
Owner and operator of The Chew Toy (or "That Bitch")
1981 BJ42 Toyota LandCruiser diesel.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G T H E M E T R I C S Y S T E M
1 million microphones = 1 megaphone
1 million bicycles = 2 megacycles
2000 mockingbirds = 2 kilomockingbirds
10 cards = 1 decacards (or is it 52 cards = 1 deck-a-cards?)
1/2 lavatory = 1 demijohn
1 millionth of a fish = 1 microfiche
453.6 graham crackers = 1 pound cake
10 rations = 1 decoration
10 millipedes = 1 centipede
3-1/3 tridents = 1 decadent
10 monologs = 5 dialogues
2 monograms = 1 diagram
8 nickles = 2 paradigms
FROM: Erk@btinternet.com
SUBJECT: Re: The US is already 100% metric (was: Why the speed of light is...)
DATE: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:08:16 GMT
ORGANIZATION: BT Internet
NEWSGROUPS: sci.physics.particle,sci.physics.relativity,sci.astro,sci.optics
On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 21:31:42 GMT, alfred_einstead@my-deja.com wrote:
>In article <39A438DF.31B55E49@hia.no>,
> paul.b.andersen@hia.no wrote:
>
>From Starshipper :
>>Why can't you talk in feet and inches like normal people?
If we are reverting to pre-metric measurements, would that be Imperial
("English") feet and inches or American feet and inches?
The US inch and the English inch were slightly different, the modern
"metricified" 2.54 cm definition is a third, averaged-and-rounded
version that was a compromise between the ~2.55 and ~2.53 versions
used on different sides of the Atlantic.
Then there are different sorts of ounce, different sorts of barrel (I
think the US oil barrel is the same as the pld Imperial eel barrel,
which is probably defined as being the volume needed to hold a certain
weight of eels, with the weight defined in hundredweights), and so on.
>From paul.b.andersen@hia.no:
>> Since the U.S. is essentially the only remaining holdout left
>> still using the irrational mess called the ``English'' (non)system...
>
>All systems are irrational, except God's units (h-bar = c = G = 1).
>With that aside, it's worth pointing out that there is no such thing
>as the "English" system anymore. The US is fully metric, and the
>units feet, inches and miles are metric units with the equivalences:
>
> 1 inch = 2.54 cm; 1 ft = 30.48 cm
> 1 mile = 1609.344 meters
>
>Also, there is no such thing as a fundamental length unit anymore,
>since the meter is now defined as 1/299792458 light-seconds.
I quite liked one suggested idea for a new US unit of length, which
would be the length of a pendulum that swung once per second at sea
level at a particular latitude. That was at least something that could
be measured fairly accurately with a high-quality timepiece on most
continents.
(unlike the poxy French definition for the metre, which (I think) was
something like the supposed distance between Paris and the North pole,
divided by a big number ... not a measurement that you can make
conveniently in the lab when you want to calibrate your equipment ...
and the French standards folks are supposed to have gotten it badly
wrong anyway).
>(And certainly 299792458 is no less difficult to memorize than simple
>numbers like 2.54, 1609.344, 30.48, 12 and 5280).
I quite like the fact that you can quote the speed of light as being
~300,000 km/s, and only be out by less than one part in a thousand.
(but of course this is a fluke)
>It's also worth pointing out that 10 is not a rational choice for
>multiples for units (except to misguided French revolutionaries and
>socialists).
And American revolutionaries!
Just be thankful that the US currency was designed to have 100 cents
to the dollar (like those revolutionary Frenchies), rather than the
pounds-shillings-pence system of the Old Imperial Oppressors.
In the UK, we didn't get rid of that particular albatross until the
1970's.
>Numbers like 60 and 12 are because of their
>divisibility properties. 10 is merely anthropomorphic, which is
>itself grounds for disqualification.
Yup, it's a shame that the old "six-finger" genetic variation isn't
more common, it'd have been nice if the species had standardised on
base 12 instead of base 10.
However, having standardised on base ten, do we then want to have to
force schoolkids to learn a hybridised system that switches between
five different number bases depending on the magnitude, just to be
able to use everyday weights and measures?
Imperial measures wouldn't be so bad if they had committed to either
base 16 or base 12 for /everything/, but there's a kind of
higgledy-piggledy mixture of base 12, base 16, base 10, base 3 and
even base 14, and there's not a consistent rule for deciding which
number bases apply at which scales.
There are sixteen ounces to a pound, fourteen pounds to a stone, and I
don't honestly have any idea how many stones to a ton.
An inch is divided into sixteenths, there are twelve inches to a foot,
there are three feet to a yard, and so on.
=Erk=
PS, methinks the US officially converted to the metric system by Act
of Congress way back in Eighteen Something, making the metric units
the country's preferred official units. States weren't actually
forbidden to use the old units, but I don't think they were allowed to
discriminate against contract tenders written in the new SI units, and
they were probably /supposed/ to start migrating schoolkids to the new
system ASAP ...
FROM: jac@dirac.csit.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
SUBJECT: Re: The US is already 100% metric (was: Why the speed of light is...)
DATE: 21 Feb 2001 05:01:10 GMT
ORGANIZATION: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute
NEWSGROUPS: sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.optics
... physics cross-post sent to sci.physics where it belongs ...
In article <963mp2$4t2$1@merope.saaf.se>
pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter) writes:
>
>But most convenient of all would base 12 be, because then you
>can easily split things up in 2, 3, 4 or 6 parts.
By that reasoning, base 60 is best because that allows you to
divide by 5 (and 10) as well. Which is one of the reasons
the Babylonians used it and why we still use 360 degrees.
--
James Carr http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/
"The half of knowledge is knowing where to find knowledge" - Anon.
Motto over the entrance to Dodd Hall, former library at FSCW.
FROM: "Habbi"
SUBJECT: Re: metric to english?
DATE: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:50:16 GMT
ORGANIZATION: ISLAND TEL
NEWSGROUPS: rec.autos.4x4
"Stewbaby" wrote in message
news:n4q1vt8njc4tqpndjaubiiq0g72hclcglr@4ax.com...
> Uh... I don't know how to "fix" your problem, but the English use the
> metric system (Celsius/Centigrade instead of Fahrenheit). Therefore,
> your subject line is incorrect, as Metric IS English (or at least
> English is Metric).
>
> A simple system where 0° is the temperature at which water freezes (at
> sea level) and 100° is when it boils.
>
> Most of the planet use this, as it is easier. No need to work out the
> 32° to 212° graduations. Maybe you should learn... be the first on
> your block to embrace the metric way of life!
>
> Perhaps you should have said "Metric to old-fashioned, traditional,
> conservative Imperial measurement conversion".
>
>
>
> On 12 Nov 2001 18:35:53 -0800, thompson_chris@hotmail.com (Chris)
> wrote:
>
> >I have a 1998-1999 Land Rover Discovery. I disconnected the battery
> >and when I plugged it back in, the climate control displays centigrade
> >now instead of ferenheit. How do I change this?? Please email me an
> >answer! Thanks!
> >
> >Chris
> >thompson_chris@hotmail.com
I read somewhere that in the old days 1400's etc measurements such as 1 foot
actually changed with a new king, it became the size of his foot. This
changed land measurements as well because an acre was so many feet by so
many feet.
From: Christopher Bell
To: 80scool@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [80] 1HD-FT & Cruise Control
Date sent: Sun, 23 May 2004 21:50:44 +0100
Send reply to: 80scool@yahoogroups.com
Gordon
Yes, I can get 31+ mpg on the motorway in cruise - it seems to settle happily at
about 67mph/2200rpm. Don't know what it would do at 60mph as I've never had the
patience to try. Strangely fuel economy is better in summer - maybe due to the
anti-waxing agents in winter fuel?
I'm still toying with the idea of one of those magnets on the fuel line that are
supposed to improve economy, I've found a place doing a money back deal if it
doesn't work. Still seems like voodoo science to me, do you suppose engines are
susceptible to placebo effects?
> My 1HD-FT regularly does better than 30 mpg (imperial) when on highway trip,
> largely using cruise control.
>
A bit disconcerting though, when on uphill, it decides to drop out of cruise.
Speed limit in eNZed is 100kmph - about 60mph (Imperial & Yankee) - could
never work out why the Boston Tea Party peeps came up with a short measure for
volume, but not for distance - anyone know the answer
Mine drops out of cruise if the speed falls 10mph below the set speed, just like
it says in the book. Never happens in normal driving, but can going up long
hills with the horse trailer on the back - I tend to floor the throttle in that
situation to preempt the jerk when it cuts out.
Apparently (so sayeth Google) the Imperial gallon was based on 10lbs of water in
1824, whereas the BTP brigade settled on a "wine gallon" of 231 cubic inches.
Note that this was in pre-prohibition days.....
I prefer imperial units for daily living (pint of milk/beer, gallon of fuel,
etc), but SI units for work (engineering) as I could never get my head round
slugs, dynes and the like.
I saw something a few months ago about LPG injection kit for diesels in eNZed
- about NZ$1k - about normal conversion rates dollar for pound - gas costs
heaps & so do McDonalds - I just don't know how you guys can afford to live
over ther
With some difficulty. I think we subsidise indolence too much, hence the high
cost of living. Also property prices here have reached ridiculous levels in the
last few years, driven mainly by shortage of supply.
Ho hum, I should be grateful for what I've got. Have just had a long but
successful day team showjumping with my 17 year old daughter: her team won, and
she got 3rd best overall. And (here's the LC content) I was so grateful when
tired at the end of the day to have such a stress-free drive home in my big
beast, as it makes towing, hill-starts and muddy fields such a breeze.
Christopher Bell
Devon, UK
1HD-FT
If you have any question, remark, comment, want to share some
philosophy or just want to express your opinion about these pages,
feel free to send email to:
w.j.markerink @ a1.nl
Back to main page & table of contents:
Main Page