I worked at a cabinet factory back in the late 1980s. Everything in the shop was manufactured under the metric system because they said there was far less wasted materials that way. I thought that logic was very interesting at the time and so it stuck in my memory. Looking back on it, it was much easier taking measurements and doing basic math with the metric system.
Three Countries that Do Not Use the Metric System
- Thread starter bluestream
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Bluestream
I just asked the question why the delay? As far as I know every car made in the US is metric. So why is the complete conversion so slow.
After years of wondering the same thing, here's what I've come up with.
The US is a huge society and economy, with a lot of complex and interdependent institutions. There's a LOT that needs changing. And crucially, the change can't really be gradual without causing a lot of headaches in the meantime.
Also, there's just not a lot of need to change the institutions that don't yet use metric. For the most part, we already use it where it's important (e.g. science, engineering, etc.). So, when we talk about the US "not being on the metric system," we're talking about more day-to-day things where it's less important to have the metric system's advantages.
Low need + high cost = not gonna happen any time soon.
I also suspect that part of it is the general American tendency to assume that whatever we do is best, especially if it's the opposite of what Europeans and academics do.
I just asked the question why the delay? As far as I know every car made in the US is metric. So why is the complete conversion so slow.
After years of wondering the same thing, here's what I've come up with.
The US is a huge society and economy, with a lot of complex and interdependent institutions. There's a LOT that needs changing. And crucially, the change can't really be gradual without causing a lot of headaches in the meantime.
Also, there's just not a lot of need to change the institutions that don't yet use metric. For the most part, we already use it where it's important (e.g. science, engineering, etc.). So, when we talk about the US "not being on the metric system," we're talking about more day-to-day things where it's less important to have the metric system's advantages.
Low need + high cost = not gonna happen any time soon.
I also suspect that part of it is the general American tendency to assume that whatever we do is best, especially if it's the opposite of what Europeans and academics do.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Garak,
even worse, we have a street in this town called "inch" street, commemorating the difficulties that were had in building and testing a factory in the states, shipping it to Australia, and trying to build an SMLE to the British design drawings.
I can only imagine. The volume system disparities between the U.S. and Canada were not helpful when it came to our integrated economies, and created nothing but confusion when comparing fuel mileage across the border. I remember as a kid going to the States, my dad perturbed at the size of the American gallon reducing his MPG. And, it gives us some strange package sizes, still, like the 4.73 L SOPUS packages (5 U.S. quarts). Even bushels have different sizes on either side of the border.
Personally, I have no problem converting, and dimensional analysis is simplistic. But, that's not the case for everyone, and there's a reason that scientists don't piddle around in Imperial or U.S. measurements.
Garak,
even worse, we have a street in this town called "inch" street, commemorating the difficulties that were had in building and testing a factory in the states, shipping it to Australia, and trying to build an SMLE to the British design drawings.
I can only imagine. The volume system disparities between the U.S. and Canada were not helpful when it came to our integrated economies, and created nothing but confusion when comparing fuel mileage across the border. I remember as a kid going to the States, my dad perturbed at the size of the American gallon reducing his MPG. And, it gives us some strange package sizes, still, like the 4.73 L SOPUS packages (5 U.S. quarts). Even bushels have different sizes on either side of the border.
Personally, I have no problem converting, and dimensional analysis is simplistic. But, that's not the case for everyone, and there's a reason that scientists don't piddle around in Imperial or U.S. measurements.
What was Arlo Guthrie "Coming into Los Angeles" with?
Originally Posted By: Trav
Product quality can be just as good with the inch system as metric if you have skilled people doing assembly work.
That's where the problem lies, most of the street morons they allow to graduate high school today cant read precision measuring tools so manufacturers rely on automation and accept sloppy fits.
A monkey can read a "mike" in metric.
The inch system is an archaic out of date system that needs throwing out.
When I worked at a tire shop we had to read brake pad depth, in 1/32nds as part of the multi point inspection. Well, the inspection sheet wanted 1/32nds, it was pre-printed out-of-house.
Nuts to that. My calculated eyeball can see 7mm left. Let the service writer do the math. That would have been somewhere around 1/4" (8/32) and 9/32, maybe even 10/32, er, 5/16. Aaaaugh!
Then you explain to the customer that they have 3/16 and when they get to 1/8 or 3/32 it's time for new pads... glazed look.
Product quality can be just as good with the inch system as metric if you have skilled people doing assembly work.
That's where the problem lies, most of the street morons they allow to graduate high school today cant read precision measuring tools so manufacturers rely on automation and accept sloppy fits.
A monkey can read a "mike" in metric.
The inch system is an archaic out of date system that needs throwing out.
When I worked at a tire shop we had to read brake pad depth, in 1/32nds as part of the multi point inspection. Well, the inspection sheet wanted 1/32nds, it was pre-printed out-of-house.
Nuts to that. My calculated eyeball can see 7mm left. Let the service writer do the math. That would have been somewhere around 1/4" (8/32) and 9/32, maybe even 10/32, er, 5/16. Aaaaugh!
Then you explain to the customer that they have 3/16 and when they get to 1/8 or 3/32 it's time for new pads... glazed look.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I also suspect that part of it is the general American tendency to assume that whatever we do is best, especially if it's the opposite of what Europeans and academics do.
Yup, it makes us feel special.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...ric#Post3809333
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2015/07/us/metric-road-american-story/
I also suspect that part of it is the general American tendency to assume that whatever we do is best, especially if it's the opposite of what Europeans and academics do.
Yup, it makes us feel special.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...ric#Post3809333
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2015/07/us/metric-road-american-story/
To summarize my posts in the previous metric threads:
Could the rest of the world stop using Intermodal Containers please? You've moved on and cannot be seen using non-metric units of measurement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_container
Hold out a piece of string.
Divide it by 2. Easy, right?
Divide it by 4. Good.
Divide it by 10. This is left as an exercise for the reader.
2 over 4 and 4 over 8 are the same number
..within California, 1 out of 4 kids (15 year olds) can't understand in a 4-part multiple choice test, they can't understand that 2 over 4 and 4 over 8 are the same number. So, 25% of the population right there is possibly then to be underclass. -Lee Ohanian
Last, but not least (illustrating the usability a measurement system to people):
Could the rest of the world stop using Intermodal Containers please? You've moved on and cannot be seen using non-metric units of measurement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_container
Hold out a piece of string.
Divide it by 2. Easy, right?
Divide it by 4. Good.
Divide it by 10. This is left as an exercise for the reader.
2 over 4 and 4 over 8 are the same number
..within California, 1 out of 4 kids (15 year olds) can't understand in a 4-part multiple choice test, they can't understand that 2 over 4 and 4 over 8 are the same number. So, 25% of the population right there is possibly then to be underclass. -Lee Ohanian
Last, but not least (illustrating the usability a measurement system to people):
I was taught both in school. I see no need for the US to change over fully. As another person said earlier the end result is the same thing regardless of the system used to measure it. Why this is such a big deal to people is beyond me?
What we have works. The lamest argument I hear is the metric system is easier. Not really. Especially not for people that are used to the other. IT is also yet another instance of laziness. Oh, the US system is too hard to learn and use. Boo Hoo.
This whole convert to the metric system bull hooey is like wanting a universal language or currency. Just no need for it.
What we have works. The lamest argument I hear is the metric system is easier. Not really. Especially not for people that are used to the other. IT is also yet another instance of laziness. Oh, the US system is too hard to learn and use. Boo Hoo.
This whole convert to the metric system bull hooey is like wanting a universal language or currency. Just no need for it.
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
My 9th grade physical science teacher made us learn Metric, stating that it would be the future, and that we would most likely be using it and nothing else from college on.
I started high school in the late 90's. Predicting the future is hard...
They did the same thing to me. Only difference is that it was in the late 60's. I guess as Led Zep stated, the song remains the same.
My 9th grade physical science teacher made us learn Metric, stating that it would be the future, and that we would most likely be using it and nothing else from college on.
I started high school in the late 90's. Predicting the future is hard...
They did the same thing to me. Only difference is that it was in the late 60's. I guess as Led Zep stated, the song remains the same.
About changing from one system to another.
In Europe many national currencies were replaced with euro currency in 2002. The fixed exchange rate for our Finnish markka was 5.94573. I.e. one euro was about six markkas.
I admit that it was painful at first to use the new currency. At the beginning you had to convert everything in your head from euros back to markkas to understand the prices. But within a year or so the euro currency started to feel more natural. On daily purchases there was no need to convert prices back to markka anymore.
Now after more than ten years I don’t miss or think (or even remember) markka anymore. It’s a thing of the past now. And there are clear benefits from eurozone also. With a common currency it’s easier to travel and do web purchases within Europe. And as euro and dollar are in practice on par, it’s easy to understand the US prices too without any extra calculations.
Sure, sometimes people think nostalgically about the old markka. And it’s fun to do the conversion back to markka to emphasize that something is expensive. For example an apartment that costs 200k euros. Wow, that’s over one million markkas!!
But on daily life I’m sure that everyone in Finland have fully adapted to the euro currency.
I’m sure that it would be the same learning process for you too if you changed from the imperial system to the metric system. Maybe it would be a pain for a year but after ten years you would be fully adapted to the new system.
In Europe many national currencies were replaced with euro currency in 2002. The fixed exchange rate for our Finnish markka was 5.94573. I.e. one euro was about six markkas.
I admit that it was painful at first to use the new currency. At the beginning you had to convert everything in your head from euros back to markkas to understand the prices. But within a year or so the euro currency started to feel more natural. On daily purchases there was no need to convert prices back to markka anymore.
Now after more than ten years I don’t miss or think (or even remember) markka anymore. It’s a thing of the past now. And there are clear benefits from eurozone also. With a common currency it’s easier to travel and do web purchases within Europe. And as euro and dollar are in practice on par, it’s easy to understand the US prices too without any extra calculations.
Sure, sometimes people think nostalgically about the old markka. And it’s fun to do the conversion back to markka to emphasize that something is expensive. For example an apartment that costs 200k euros. Wow, that’s over one million markkas!!
But on daily life I’m sure that everyone in Finland have fully adapted to the euro currency.
I’m sure that it would be the same learning process for you too if you changed from the imperial system to the metric system. Maybe it would be a pain for a year but after ten years you would be fully adapted to the new system.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Win
Anyone that wants to use metric, can. Why do we need yet another mandate telling us what to do?
Would it really be "another" mandate? I suspect that various jurisdictions and businesses in the States would get into loads of trouble if they decided to change road signs to read cubits and speed signs to read angstroms per second and sold gas by the bushel and food weight by the newton, arbitrarily and without a mandate telling/authorizing what to do. Weights and measures departments are in place to prevent accidental and intentional confusion and shenanigans. If I'm selling gas in the U.S., I am selling by what someone else has defined as a U.S. gallon, to someone else's accepted error measurement, and legally codified, not some U.S. gallon that I redefine myself, nor a unit that I make up myself, nor something that actually exists but that no customer would understand.
Originally Posted By: Grandpa Simpson
My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it!
If U.S. automakers were allowed to report miles per Imperial gallon instead of the U.S. gallon doled out at your pumps, it sure would look good in print at least. The definitions of the measures used are important, along with setting out which ones can be used.
I found this, in light of how long this debate has been going on:
Anyone that wants to use metric, can. Why do we need yet another mandate telling us what to do?
Would it really be "another" mandate? I suspect that various jurisdictions and businesses in the States would get into loads of trouble if they decided to change road signs to read cubits and speed signs to read angstroms per second and sold gas by the bushel and food weight by the newton, arbitrarily and without a mandate telling/authorizing what to do. Weights and measures departments are in place to prevent accidental and intentional confusion and shenanigans. If I'm selling gas in the U.S., I am selling by what someone else has defined as a U.S. gallon, to someone else's accepted error measurement, and legally codified, not some U.S. gallon that I redefine myself, nor a unit that I make up myself, nor something that actually exists but that no customer would understand.
Originally Posted By: Grandpa Simpson
My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it!
If U.S. automakers were allowed to report miles per Imperial gallon instead of the U.S. gallon doled out at your pumps, it sure would look good in print at least. The definitions of the measures used are important, along with setting out which ones can be used.
I found this, in light of how long this debate has been going on:
Originally Posted By: splinter
Originally Posted By: Padawan
There's no mention in that article that folks in the UK still follow speed signs posted in MPH and measure their body weight in stone.
Whitworth spanners ftw!
When I was much younger, in England, we had to have A/F, Whitworth and Metric tools, it made a tool kit very expensive. I still have some Whitworth stuff, I don't know why I keep them.
Another strange one was when I was in Ireland in the mid 80s, distance on the roads was in miles and the motorway was in kilometers!
Regarding measuring instruments, I don't think that many today can read a vernier or a micrometer, metric or otherwise, most are digital now, even I have some!
Originally Posted By: Padawan
There's no mention in that article that folks in the UK still follow speed signs posted in MPH and measure their body weight in stone.
Whitworth spanners ftw!
When I was much younger, in England, we had to have A/F, Whitworth and Metric tools, it made a tool kit very expensive. I still have some Whitworth stuff, I don't know why I keep them.
Another strange one was when I was in Ireland in the mid 80s, distance on the roads was in miles and the motorway was in kilometers!
Regarding measuring instruments, I don't think that many today can read a vernier or a micrometer, metric or otherwise, most are digital now, even I have some!
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: nitehawk55
One thing I do recall for sure is it cost all the mechanics a lot to buy metric tools as well .
That's good for the economy I suppose....
One thing I do recall for sure is it cost all the mechanics a lot to buy metric tools as well .
That's good for the economy I suppose....
Exactly,
If you want to cook in metric, drive in metric, etc, you can today.
The signs and recipes may be in a different system, but don't let that prevent you from doing your work in your preferred system.
My wife thinks the thermostat is like an accelerator pedal an when she's cold, set it to 80. I don't see metric working in our home in this instance
Originally Posted By: Win
Who cares.
Anyone that wants to use metric, can. Why do we need yet another mandate telling us what to do?
If you want to cook in metric, drive in metric, etc, you can today.
The signs and recipes may be in a different system, but don't let that prevent you from doing your work in your preferred system.
My wife thinks the thermostat is like an accelerator pedal an when she's cold, set it to 80. I don't see metric working in our home in this instance
Originally Posted By: Win
Who cares.
Anyone that wants to use metric, can. Why do we need yet another mandate telling us what to do?
Originally Posted By: spackard
Hold out a piece of string.
Divide it by 2. Easy, right?
Divide it by 4. Good.
Divide it by 10. This is left as an exercise for the reader.
OK, while we are at it, divide it by 12...is that a comparable level of difficulty to 10 ?
What about thousandths ?
Yards ? they are 3s
5280 feet in a mile ??? what sort of folding exercise gets you that ???
Is the distance an ox could plough in one day really relevant these days ?
Standard is what makes people say "torque equals horsepower at 5252 RPM"
Hold out a piece of string.
Divide it by 2. Easy, right?
Divide it by 4. Good.
Divide it by 10. This is left as an exercise for the reader.
OK, while we are at it, divide it by 12...is that a comparable level of difficulty to 10 ?
What about thousandths ?
Yards ? they are 3s
5280 feet in a mile ??? what sort of folding exercise gets you that ???
Is the distance an ox could plough in one day really relevant these days ?
Standard is what makes people say "torque equals horsepower at 5252 RPM"
Originally Posted By: spackard
Hold out a piece of string.
Divide it by 2. Easy, right?
Divide it by 4. Good.
Divide it by 10. This is left as an exercise for the reader.
Is dividing by 2 or by 4 somehow prohibited in the decimal system?
Hold out a piece of string.
Divide it by 2. Easy, right?
Divide it by 4. Good.
Divide it by 10. This is left as an exercise for the reader.
Is dividing by 2 or by 4 somehow prohibited in the decimal system?
- Status
Similar threads
