Why are SAE sockets formatted in fractions?

[D60]

To go back to your given examples, "SAE" is a common term to refer to fractional hardware and tools.

Nobody is selling "break pads" by that spelling. It's not an accepted term, no matter how many dopes have used the wrong word.

So much this. I was trying to stay out of the pedantic weeds, but I would argue saying "SAE" is more akin to calling a supercharger a blower or an aggressive cam a bumpy stick.

Basically, it's slang and while it shouldn't fly in a technical white paper, we all know what it means in a forum like this which is more like casual conversation among, well, bench racers (keyboard racers) than your final dissertation for an engineering degree.

Next pedantic argument: "Nothing 'flies' in a technical written paper, dude!" Yep, that's because it's a figure of speech and does not refer to any physical object actually taking flight.

 

[ZeeOSix]

So much this. I was trying to stay out of the pedantic weeds, but I would argue saying "SAE" is more akin to calling a supercharger a blower or an aggressive cam a bumpy stick.

If you read the link in my last post, the fastener industry has been using the term "SAE fasteners" (which require the matching SAE tools) ever since the early 1900s. The SAE standardize that fastener and tool system for the American auto industry a very long time ago, and that's why the term "SAE fasteners and tools" is entirely valid and accurate.

 

[Lenny5160]

If you read the link in my last post, the fastener industry has been using the term "SAE fasteners" (which require the matching SAE tools) ever since the early 1900s. The SAE standardize that fastener and tool system for the American auto industry a very long time ago, and that's why the term "SAE fasteners and tools" is entirely valid and accurate.

It's a valid pedantic argument to state that current SAE standards use metric measurements, so saying "SAE" to mean "not metric" is inaccurate. But, we all know what it means and I really can't recall tools being differentiated by any other terms.

 

[ZeeOSix]

It's a valid pedantic argument to state that current SAE standards use metric measurements, so saying "SAE" to mean "not metric" is inaccurate. But, we all know what it means and I really can't recall tools being differentiated by any other terms.

Yes, the SAE has defined both English/Imperial fasteners and also metric fasteners, but the Imperial system was used by SAE way before metric came along in the US automotive industry. Obviously, the fasteners and tools that use factional inch measurements (the English/Imperial system) are different than the fasteners that use the metric system. My argument is that the term "SAE fasteners" is not a "made-up" definition of the fasteners and tools by "bench racers". The term is used because the SAE is officially behind it all, not "bench racers".

 

[Exhaustgases]

Yes ! I liked that link above.
So it is interesting that those SAE wrenches were not marked in inch fractional bolt head dimensions. As written here.

(((((Finally, another wrench stamped SAE, with ends marked 3/8 and 7/16. In fact, the 3/8 end measures .570 inch (instead of .375") and the 7/16 end measures .640 inch (instead of .4375). Again, a sloppy fit on a 9/16" and 5/8" A/F bolt head. These are exactly the A/F dimensions specified under the SAE criteria for these diameters of bolts. )))))

 

[ZeeOSix]

Yes ! I liked that link above.
So it is interesting that those SAE wrenches were not marked in inch fractional bolt head dimensions. As written here.

(((((Finally, another wrench stamped SAE, with ends marked 3/8 and 7/16. In fact, the 3/8 end measures .570 inch (instead of .375") and the 7/16 end measures .640 inch (instead of .4375). Again, a sloppy fit on a 9/16" and 5/8" A/F bolt head. These are exactly the A/F dimensions specified under the SAE criteria for these diameters of bolts. )))))

They went for a sloppy fit back in those days. Guess they liked rounded off hex bolt heads, lol.

 

[Rmay635703]

Torque specs are way more complicated than that, regardless if the fastener is SAE or metric.

They are and they’re also not so long as you have hard joints and best practices followed. If your not building a toaster use grade 8, flanged, spiralic or deformed, coarse thread, then the torque range is always the same.

American here - the metric system is far, far superior, logical, and easier to use.

Metric measurements are superior, metric hardware standards are absolutely horrific.

SAE you have one common standard, metric there are a dozen competing ones.

They went for a sloppy fit back in those days. Guess they liked rounded off hex bolt heads, lol.

Coated and flanged fasteners used to have immense variations allowed, good riddance to grade 2, cast and DAC

Sadly pipe thread (and other) fittings have minimal control on the outer diameter so you still have to deal with sloppy fit up.

It's a valid pedantic argument to state that current SAE standards use metric measurements, so saying "SAE" to mean "not metric" is inaccurate. But, we all know what it means and I really can't recall tools being differentiated by any other terms.

You do realize most metric fasteners do not follow SAE standards?

See this chart (available various places online) of some of the metric hardware standards you are forced to commonly use in the US commodity market.

How many do you suppose are SAE?

Metric has a British metric
a German metric and Asian metric and
a French metric which are at the same time sort of comparable/ compatible but also may require completely different tools to install.

This moronic assembly of standards is why metric costs more and is more prone to error in the real world.
If you say choose one and stick with it, first expect to double hardware costs and second which one? Everybody is doing their own thing. Not much different than 120 years ago before SAE existed or the difference between USS AG VRS SAE standards