converting

[Finnbear]

And did you do that without a calculator?


In metric, you could.

I didn't do it without a calculator but a quick bit of mental math will give me a damn good estimate too. In my head 5/12 is about .4 and 7/12 is about .6 so 13.4 x 7.6 is 101.84 which is plenty close if we're estimating. In any case where absolute accuracy is required a calculator will be available and then all this arguing about whose system is better doesn't mean squat. It all depends on which system you learned as a kid - that is the one you will be most comfortable and proficient with.
Finnbear

 

[turnkey4099]

My point was that my 12 year old could do it when he was 10 so how hard could it be?

Your original point was that the english system was simple because it was divisible by several numbers (addressing only the foot/inch measure and conveniently leaving out things such as liquid measure, yards, miles and a host of other illogical parts of it). I showed by a simple example that the it is not 'simple' as it calls for multiple calculations for such a simple job as finding the middle of a line. That as 12 year old boy could do it has nothing to do with the question of it being simple, only addresses 'easy'.

I notice you didn't try to show your calculations for the square footage.

Harry K

 

[lumberjackau]

has anyone tried converting currency from the english pound, shilling, pence to dollars? (the dollar I might add is a decimal system which is similar to metric). But nuff off that. The mills I send timber to measure the lumber lenghts in metric but the dimensions are still in inches, so you get a 2"x4"x 2.4m instead of 2"x4"x8'. I live in Australia now, grew up in the states, raised with the inch, feet, yards, mile thing, now I am getting used to the metric system, bit tough at first but you get used to it. At least they converted to the dollar from from the old pound note, don't think I could of handled that.

 

[sawn_penn]

The lousy thing about the english system is that the units keep changing in odd ways as the scale changes.

Metric is great for most things, but I have noticed that people who have grown up 100% metric are not as good at estimating as people who grew up without metric.

I'm not sure if this is caused by metric or calculators.

 

[Finnbear]

Your original point was that the english system was simple because it was divisible by several numbers (addressing only the foot/inch measure and conveniently leaving out things such as liquid measure, yards, miles and a host of other illogical parts of it). I showed by a simple example that the it is not 'simple' as it calls for multiple calculations for such a simple job as finding the middle of a line. That as 12 year old boy could do it has nothing to do with the question of it being simple, only addresses 'easy'.

I notice you didn't try to show your calculations for the square footage.

Harry K

Sorry, Go back and read again. I made no such point about being divisible by several numbers. That was xander9727. And as far as the finding the middle of the line it is still simple to do in the english system if that is what you were taught as a youngster. If you learned on the metric system then that system will seem easier to you. Neither system is better they just each seem better to the people who learned them growing up. I grew up a carpenter's son and was reading blueprints and laying out floors and walls and roofs before I was a teenager. The english system is very comfortable to me as I have been using it all my life. As far as my calculations for the square footage - if you are referring to my estimate then you also need to read again as I stated that I used "mental math" and did the math "in my head". No calculations to show - I just know the times tables and how to add/subtract.
Finnbear

 

[turnkey4099]

Sorry, Go back and read again. I made no such point about being divisible by several numbers. That was xander9727. And as far as the finding the middle of the line it is still simple to do in the english system if that is what you were taught as a youngster. If you learned on the metric system then that system will seem easier to you. Neither system is better they just each seem better to the people who learned them growing up. I grew up a carpenter's son and was reading blueprints and laying out floors and walls and roofs before I was a teenager. The english system is very comfortable to me as I have been using it all my life. As far as my calculations for the square footage - if you are referring to my estimate then you also need to read again as I stated that I used "mental math" and did the math "in my head". No calculations to show - I just know the times tables and how to add/subtract.
Finnbear

My apologies. I didn't notice that you weren't the person I thought I was replying to.

Good point about 'what you grew up with". I grew up with the english system and didn't see the point of the metric when we were forced to study it in school. Then I wound up for a total of 9 1/2 years overseas in various locations. Did a bunch of home repair and carpentry type stuff over there almost having to use metric and came to see the simplicity of the system. I actually regretted having to revert back to the english system.

Harry K

 

[Finnbear]

My apologies. I didn't notice that you weren't the person I thought I was replying to.

Good point about 'what you grew up with". I grew up with the english system and didn't see the point of the metric when we were forced to study it in school. Then I wound up for a total of 9 1/2 years overseas in various locations. Did a bunch of home repair and carpentry type stuff over there almost having to use metric and came to see the simplicity of the system. I actually regretted having to revert back to the english system.

Harry K

In my day job I use both but I'm far more comfy with english. I work in the bearing and power transmission business and most ball, cylindrical, and spherical roller bearings are made to metric dimensions. It is really easy to say a 6207 ball bearing is 35x72mm but if I go to a machinist and tell him I want a shaft made for it then he wants me to tell him the shaft needs to be 1.3779" +/- whatever the correct tolerance is for the fit I require. I design a lot of retrofit drives for machinery and torque ratings in kN and power ratings in kW just don't ever seem as familiar as good old foot-pounds and HP ratings but I have to deal with the metric ratings because lots of machinery comes from across the pond. I'm much better at estimating in my head feet-per-minute than meters per minute just because the foot is my reference. My reference points are burned into my memory in english. A pound, a foot, a gallon, a yard, mile, ton, etc. are things I immediately relate measurements to. I can't pick something up and "feel" that it weighs about a kilogram but it sure does feel like 2 or 3 pounds to me.
Finnbear

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

I'm much better at estimating in my head feet-per-minute than meters per minute just because the foot is my reference. My reference points are burned into my memory in english. A pound, a foot, a gallon, a yard, mile, ton, etc. are things I immediately relate measurements to. I can't pick something up and "feel" that it weighs about a kilogram but it sure does feel like 2 or 3 pounds to me.
Finnbear

That's the big issue for most of us. I don't think I'll EVER get used to a weather forecast that tells me it's going to be a warm 22 degrees tomorrow.

But what we are USED to is one thing. What is SIMPLER and MORE LOGICAL is another.

The metric system is simple and logical. English units are neither.

But I'm still more comfortable in English units, because My reference points are burned into my memory in english

But I'm honest enough to recognize why, instead of trying to pretend that English units make sense.

 

[cord arrow]

but if I go to a machinist and tell him I want a shaft made for it then he wants me to tell him the shaft needs to be 1.3779" +/- whatever the correct tolerance is for the fit I require.

This'll be a long one.
I've owned two shops, the latter was very successful.
Our clients were all metric based, American Honda, Showa, TI Tech, etc.

I had a diverse workforce, this led to our success.

I've found:

The Brits are all about "class fits". They were invaluable. They didn't really give a crap about tolerances, they needed to know the "class" of the fit. Having been exposed to this only minimally in the past, I was quite intrigued. Turns out, ain't a bad way to get things done.

Had some Latino's, all metric. These were the guys I called in the middle of the night when Honda or Showa or Harley had a line down. There in a heartbeat. Triple time. No need to convert anything. Lines up, Honda's happy, I'm happy, they're really happy. Is it the best work my shop can turn out? No, it ain't gotta be. Good dudes. Delivered the part on their way home. Say what you want about the current administrations stand, these guys get the job done with no questions ask.

Then there's us. The stalwarts of the machining community. The day after, I'd give the "good ol' boys" the prints I'd devised to correct Honda/ Showa/Harley's issues long term. And they would in term "get the job done."

Whatever it takes. The world is a diverse arena, accept that no one way is the right way, don't be deliberately adverse to things that are not "comfortable", reach out, grab on. The horizons are waiting for you.

To watch these guys interact with one another was truly refreshing. The Brits, Latino's, a Japenese fellow, really, it doesn't get any better than that.

Good enough that the dead lines have ended for me. Now days I golf, garden, fish.

 

[Tonka56]

Who cares when water freezes or boils? Why use that as a standard?

Because it's the most abundant substance on the earth's surface.

 

[turnkey4099]

That's the big issue for most of us. I don't think I'll EVER get used to a weather forecast that tells me it's going to be a warm 22 degrees tomorrow.

But what we are USED to is one thing. What is SIMPLER and MORE LOGICAL is another.

The metric system is simple and logical. English units are neither.

But I'm still more comfortable in English units, because My reference points are burned into my memory in english

But I'm honest enough to recognize why, instead of trying to pretend that English units make sense.

Excellent post and lays it out much clearer than I did.

Harry K

 

[buzz sawyer]

A mile is derived from 8 furlongs, a furlong is 660 feet. A furlong was the average distance a horse could plow before taking a break. This is why an acre is 66 feet wide by 660 feet long. These are the best answers I can come up with off the top of my head. Please add more if you know more.

You're figures are correct and may actually be the origin, but I was looking for the standardized method of measurement. One horse may pull more or less than another.

I'll wait a bit before revealing the details.

Just realized this got posted on another thread - sorry, wasn't looking to hijack this one.