DUmmy suggests that Obama adopt use of metric system

[Thor]

12 mm is close to 7/16th, close enough to use and not round off the bolt head. 13 mm is 1/2".  I have both types tools in my rollaway.  The stupid thing is this was tried in the 70s (circa 73-75, pre-Carter) and it didn't work. It's just another stupid idea to get the US to conform with the rest of the world. And these libtards accuse us Conservatives of being "conformists"......

[Chris]

The all important question, how to measure your drugs.

Well, duh.  A "happy" ounce is 32 grams.  A skimpy ounce is 28.  Enough for a couple bowls or a half-way decent penner.

[LC EFA]

12 mm is close to 7/16th, close enough to use and not round off the bolt head. 13 mm is 1/2".  I have both types tools in my rollaway.  The stupid thing is this was tried in the 70s (circa 73-75, pre-Carter) and it didn't work. It's just another stupid idea to get the US to conform with the rest of the world. And these libtards accuse us Conservatives of being "conformists"......

Think of how much it'd cost to change over... Politicians would be rubbing their hands together with glee thinking of ways to get their cut.

I just own both sets of tools, as does pretty much everyone who has mechanical tools.

[Chris]

Think of how much it'd cost to change over... Politicians would be rubbing their hands together with glee thinking of ways to get their cut.

You think that's why Obama is pushing it?

[rich_t]

It's the "broken window" economics theory.  All the (currently emplyed) mechanics that work on SAE equipment will have to purchase metric tools to comply with the ObamaFurhrer's demands.  Didn't Congress pull this shit during Nixon?  I remember there was some sort of government "suggestion" that we all switch over to the metric system.


jmho, but I prefer the metric system (mostly from working on Hondas).  A 10mm is a hell of a lot easier to figure than a 3/4 versus a 5/16.

Every mechanic I know already has a metric as well as SAE tools in their kit.  (I am talking about auto mechanics)

[EastFacingNorth]

I can use metric and US measurements fairly interchangeably.

The degree of precision is the same. The way we quantify it differs.

Most engineering measurements here are in mm and things are made to that scale ... ie if you have a metric fitting for a hose it will be for example 12mm , not 1/2" (circa 12.5mm). The hose itself is metric so if you were to express it's size in US terms it would come out as something like .4899...."

Is only when it comes to interoperability, where people have issues. Like having to own 2 sets of tools.

Right, but say you're dividing up a ten-meter length of something-or-other (maybe a wall?) into three equal pieces.  Each of those pieces is going to be 3.33333... meters in length.  Or three meters, 33 cm, 3.333333... mm.  Point is, you're still dealing with a repeating decimal.  Of course that isn't an unsurmountable obstacle by any means, but it can be inconvenient.  Now, if the length were 10 yards, each section would be exactly ten feet.  Dividing each of those sections would leave subsections of exactly three feet and four inches.  It's only until you divide those subsections by three again that you run into the repeating decimal problem - which isn't as much a problem as the US system is designed to work with fractions as well as decimal expansions - I don't know if the same is true for the standard use of SI measurements, but it would seem silly to me if it weren't.

Dividing by three isn't an altogether uncommon occurrence, yet insisting upon a base-10 system for linear measure makes it a pain in the ass.

[LC EFA]

Right, but say you're dividing up a ten-meter length of something-or-other (maybe a wall?) into three equal pieces.  Each of those pieces is going to be 3.33333... meters in length.  Or three meters, 33 cm, 3.333333... mm.  Point is, you're still dealing with a repeating decimal.  Of course that isn't an unsurmountable obstacle by any means, but it can be inconvenient.  Now, if the length were 10 yards, each section would be exactly ten feet.  Dividing each of those sections would leave subsections of exactly three feet and four inches.  It's only until you divide those subsections by three again that you run into the repeating decimal problem - which isn't as much a problem as the US system is designed to work with fractions as well as decimal expansions - I don't know if the same is true for the standard use of SI measurements, but it would seem silly to me if it weren't.

Dividing by three isn't an altogether uncommon occurrence, yet insisting upon a base-10 system for linear measure makes it a pain in the ass.

While I can see your point, I might add that in the case stated, it would be setup at 333.3mm and the 0.03' mm isn't really important in that sort of application as the 0.00122..." is less than the thickness of the paint on the new wall.

Things that require more precision than that would have been built that way to begin with.

The smallest unit I use by hand is 0.1 mm and that's pretty much as fine as what one would wish to go in most common applications. Any more than that and you need a machine to correctly position the tool or the part to begin with . Of course I also own a micrometer , which is accurate down to 0.0005mm and when one gets down to that level of precision it's really splitting hairs as to what's better.

[thundley4]

Wouldn't changing to the metric system also necessitate changing nearly every zoning and construction code? Even our basic land measurements go back to being based on feet and yards.  I can remember back in the 70's the push to go go metric. It sucked then and it still sucks.

[LC EFA]

Wouldn't changing to the metric system also necessitate changing nearly every zoning and construction code? Even our basic land measurements go back to being based on feet and yards.  I can remember back in the 70's the push to go go metric. It sucked then and it still sucks.

I dunno , my house is on land measured in links and chains and was built pre decimalization, I never have problems when I do renovations. I don't see that it needs to be modified even in our decimal system. One can still measure the distance accurately , just use a imperial measuring device (or a metric one if your land is on a newer surveyed plan).

[thundley4]

I was thinking about building codes that give specific measurements for load bearing walls vs non load bearing, roofing, etc.  I know some of the  local ones here specify inches and feet. i.e. 16 or 24 on center.