[[email protected]]

I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to.

I bought a used Makita table saw at a garage sale. It needed a few
repairs which I took care of. I got a downloaded PDF file from their
Makita website to help me determine what went where. I got it all
together and it works except the rip fence is missing a bolt that
makes it clamp sloppily. My parts can does not have anything that
will fit, so I'm off to the hardware store later today. The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that? I am assuming the "M" means metric. Is that correct? I am
assuming 6X16 means 16 threads per inch. (that looks about right),
but what is the "6"? 6 centimeters long, or is it 6cm thick? There's
a number missing either way......

Now looking at it in SAE terms, it's about 1/4" thick, fine threaded,
and 1/2 to 5/8 inches long, and the head is roughly 3/8" hex.

Damn I hate metric ****...... I wish I had been born 100 years sooner
so I'd never have to get frustrated by this metric crap. I was born
in America, that means I should be speaking English, and using inches
and feet, not speaking a foreign language or using goddamn metrics
from countries that dont know how to measure things. Yep. metrics are
one of my top pet peeves that really **** me off........

At least they dont have the rip fence ruler in metric, or I would have
not bought the saw. At my age, I am too old to change to metrics
anyhow.

Mark

[John Grabowski]

Here is a conversion chart that you might find useful:
http://www.mrelectrician.tv/conversi.../drilltap.html




wrote in message
...
I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to.

I bought a used Makita table saw at a garage sale. It needed a few
repairs which I took care of. I got a downloaded PDF file from their
Makita website to help me determine what went where. I got it all
together and it works except the rip fence is missing a bolt that
makes it clamp sloppily. My parts can does not have anything that
will fit, so I'm off to the hardware store later today. The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that? I am assuming the "M" means metric. Is that correct? I am
assuming 6X16 means 16 threads per inch. (that looks about right),
but what is the "6"? 6 centimeters long, or is it 6cm thick? There's
a number missing either way......

Now looking at it in SAE terms, it's about 1/4" thick, fine threaded,
and 1/2 to 5/8 inches long, and the head is roughly 3/8" hex.

Damn I hate metric ****...... I wish I had been born 100 years sooner
so I'd never have to get frustrated by this metric crap. I was born
in America, that means I should be speaking English, and using inches
and feet, not speaking a foreign language or using goddamn metrics
from countries that dont know how to measure things. Yep. metrics are
one of my top pet peeves that really **** me off........

At least they dont have the rip fence ruler in metric, or I would have
not bought the saw. At my age, I am too old to change to metrics
anyhow.

Mark

[Joseph Meehan]

wrote:
I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to.

I bought a used Makita table saw at a garage sale. It needed a few
repairs which I took care of. I got a downloaded PDF file from their
Makita website to help me determine what went where. I got it all
together and it works except the rip fence is missing a bolt that
makes it clamp sloppily. My parts can does not have anything that
will fit, so I'm off to the hardware store later today. The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that? I am assuming the "M" means metric. Is that correct? I am
assuming 6X16 means 16 threads per inch. (that looks about right),
but what is the "6"? 6 centimeters long, or is it 6cm thick? There's
a number missing either way......

Now looking at it in SAE terms, it's about 1/4" thick, fine threaded,
and 1/2 to 5/8 inches long, and the head is roughly 3/8" hex.

Damn I hate metric ****...... I wish I had been born 100 years sooner
so I'd never have to get frustrated by this metric crap. I was born
in America, that means I should be speaking English, and using inches
and feet, not speaking a foreign language or using goddamn metrics
from countries that dont know how to measure things. Yep. metrics are
one of my top pet peeves that really **** me off........

At least they dont have the rip fence ruler in metric, or I would have
not bought the saw. At my age, I am too old to change to metrics
anyhow.

Mark


You might find the following helpful

http://www.sosmath.com/tables/sae/sae.html

http://www.namrick.co.uk/boltspec.asp

If we had switched to metric 100 years ago we all would have been better
off. :-)


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

[Doug Miller]

In article , wrote:
I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to.

I bought a used Makita table saw at a garage sale. It needed a few
repairs which I took care of. I got a downloaded PDF file from their
Makita website to help me determine what went where. I got it all
together and it works except the rip fence is missing a bolt that
makes it clamp sloppily. My parts can does not have anything that
will fit, so I'm off to the hardware store later today. The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that? I am assuming the "M" means metric. Is that correct?

So far...

I am
assuming 6X16 means 16 threads per inch. (that looks about right),

Threads per *inch* on a *metruc* bolt??? Think about it a bit...

but what is the "6"?

Diameter in millimeters

6 centimeters long, or is it 6cm thick?

6cm *thick* would be one hell of a bolt. Think about it a bit...

There's a number missing either way......

True enough. The missing number is the thread pitch. 6x16 means 6mm in
diameter x 16mm long.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

[Avery]

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:25:16 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
wrote:

wrote:
I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to.

I bought a used Makita table saw at a garage sale. It needed a few
repairs which I took care of. I got a downloaded PDF file from their
Makita website to help me determine what went where. I got it all
together and it works except the rip fence is missing a bolt that
makes it clamp sloppily. My parts can does not have anything that
will fit, so I'm off to the hardware store later today. The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that? I am assuming the "M" means metric. Is that correct? I am
assuming 6X16 means 16 threads per inch. (that looks about right),
but what is the "6"? 6 centimeters long, or is it 6cm thick? There's
a number missing either way......

Now looking at it in SAE terms, it's about 1/4" thick, fine threaded,
and 1/2 to 5/8 inches long, and the head is roughly 3/8" hex.

Damn I hate metric ****...... I wish I had been born 100 years sooner
so I'd never have to get frustrated by this metric crap. I was born
in America, that means I should be speaking English, and using inches
and feet, not speaking a foreign language or using goddamn metrics
from countries that dont know how to measure things. Yep. metrics are
one of my top pet peeves that really **** me off........

At least they dont have the rip fence ruler in metric, or I would have
not bought the saw. At my age, I am too old to change to metrics
anyhow.

Mark


You might find the following helpful

http://www.sosmath.com/tables/sae/sae.html

http://www.namrick.co.uk/boltspec.asp

If we had switched to metric 100 years ago we all would have been better
off. :-)


You would still be better off if you did it tomorrow.

What's the impediment except for guys like the OP.

All of your multinationals manufacture things for the rest of the
world in metric sizes. Your manufacturing industries would be much
more competitive if they turned over to the right side. The only thing
that keeps imperial measurements going is a reasonably large domestic
market, and that will evaporate in the next few years in the face of
foriegn competition (China).

[[email protected]]

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:51:40 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

In article , wrote:
I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to.

I bought a used Makita table saw at a garage sale. It needed a few
repairs which I took care of. I got a downloaded PDF file from their
Makita website to help me determine what went where. I got it all
together and it works except the rip fence is missing a bolt that
makes it clamp sloppily. My parts can does not have anything that
will fit, so I'm off to the hardware store later today. The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that? I am assuming the "M" means metric. Is that correct?

So far...

I am
assuming 6X16 means 16 threads per inch. (that looks about right),

Threads per *inch* on a *metruc* bolt??? Think about it a bit...

OOPS..... I guess it would be a sin and sentence to hell to use the
word "inch" on a metric bolt. I suppose it's threads per kilometer or
some such nonsense. This alone is proof that metrics are meant to
drive people insane. They are made for the criminally insane, because
after using them, one has an urge to kill whoever made the bolt
metric.

but what is the "6"?

Diameter in millimeters

6 centimeters long, or is it 6cm thick?

6cm *thick* would be one hell of a bolt. Think about it a bit...

There's a number missing either way......

True enough. The missing number is the thread pitch. 6x16 means 6mm in
diameter x 16mm long.

Thanks for the info, and yeah, it's MM not cm....
So, are all metric bolts the same thread pitch since they dont list
it???

It's so much easier to say I need a 1/4" bolt 1" long with 24 threads
per inch.

I think all metric bolts should be sent back to their own country of
origin, and the US governement should ban them in the US. If for no
other reason, they are anti-patriotic. America was built with inches,
feet, yards and miles..........

[DT]

In article ,
says...

I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to... The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that?


It's a standard 6mm bolt, 16mm long. Metric specs usually don't add the thread
pitch unless it is a extra fine or coarse thread instead of the standard.

--
Dennis

[Harry K]

DT wrote:
In article ,
says...

I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to... The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that?


It's a standard 6mm bolt, 16mm long. Metric specs usually don't add the thread
pitch unless it is a extra fine or coarse thread instead of the standard.

--
Dennis

Ayup and another good example of the bennies of the metric system.
Fewer different sizes in anything, fewer wrench sizes, fewer bolt
sizes, fewer thread pitches, etc. I hated it when I rotated back to
the states after years overseas and had to go back to this abortion we
call a 'system'.

Harry K

[Edwin Pawlowski]

wrote in message
I bought a used Makita table saw at a garage sale.
The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that? I am assuming the "M" means metric. Is that correct?

You can be assured th at anything made overseas is metric. 90% of the world
is speaking hte same tooling lanugage, but the US persists with a strange
system.


I am
assuming 6X16 means 16 threads per inch. (that looks about right),
but what is the "6"? 6 centimeters long, or is it 6cm thick? There's
a number missing either way......

Nope, with metric, yo don't need to know the thread pits except in a few
unusual cases. That is mm, not cm and it is 16 mm long.


Damn I hate metric ****...... I wish I had been born 100 years sooner
so I'd never have to get frustrated by this metric crap. I was born
in America, that means I should be speaking English, and using inches
and feet, not speaking a foreign language or using goddamn metrics
from countries that dont know how to measure things. Yep. metrics are
one of my top pet peeves that really **** me off........

Many people feel that way but eventuall we get educated and find that our
system is the strange one and metric is sooooo much easier. If the 10mm
socket is too small, the 12 mm is too big, you can be sure that 12mm is the
right one. No 17/32 to figure out.


At least they don't have the rip fence ruler in metric, or I would have
not bought the saw. At my age, I am too old to change to metrics
anyhow.

When I started working at my present employer, we had some imported machines
(none made in the US any more) and I had to learn metric. It takes about a
day and a half and you realize it is easier to think in bars and
millimeters. The medical field has used metric forever. It just makes
sense, just like our money system that you like compared to shillings and
quid and lira. Of course, we have to change some of our old sayings , like
trying to stuff 10 kilos of **** in an 8 kilo bag.

Learn it, for it is not going away.

[Chris Lewis]

According to :
On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:51:40 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:
Threads per *inch* on a *metruc* bolt??? Think about it a bit...

OOPS..... I guess it would be a sin and sentence to hell to use the
word "inch" on a metric bolt.

Why would they pervert the metric system by using a foreign measurement?

I suppose it's threads per kilometer or
some such nonsense.

Actually, it's threads per mm. A 6mm bolt standard thread is
1.0 threads per mm.

This alone is proof that metrics are meant to
drive people insane. They are made for the criminally insane, because
after using them, one has an urge to kill whoever made the bolt
metric.

No, one gets the urge to kill whomever came up with the SAE sillyness.
#6 bolts? Furlongs? Chains? Rods? Cubits? Hogsheads? Barrels
(all 30+ different sizes)? "penny sizes" for nails? Gah.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[Richard J Kinch]

Chris Lewis writes:

Actually, it's threads per mm.

Nope. English is threads per unit length; metric is unit length per
thread, the inverse.

[Chris Lewis]

According to Richard J Kinch :
Chris Lewis writes:

Actually, it's threads per mm.

Nope. English is threads per unit length; metric is unit length per
thread, the inverse.

I thought so at first too, but when I checked tables, seemed t'other
way around. But seems like I misread the table. You're right. Oops ;-)

http://www.boltdepot.com/fastener-in...ead-Pitch.aspx
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[Doug Miller]

In article .com, "Harry K" wrote:

Ayup and another good example of the bennies of the metric system.
Fewer different sizes in anything, fewer wrench sizes, fewer bolt
sizes, fewer thread pitches, etc. I hated it when I rotated back to
the states after years overseas and had to go back to this abortion we
call a 'system'.

I'm perfectly comfortable with either one -- but what just drives me up the
wall is manufacturers who *mix* the two in the same machine. Used to have a
'78 Oldsmobile that was like that. Never knew which set of wrenches to grab
when I tried to do anything with it.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

[Noozer]

Thanks for the info, and yeah, it's MM not cm....
So, are all metric bolts the same thread pitch since they dont list
it???

Nope... metrix bolts are measured in how far from thread to thread.

It will most likely be an M6x1x16, meaning 6mm in diameter, 1mm from thread
to thread and 16mm long.

It's so much easier to say I need a 1/4" bolt 1" long with 24 threads per
inch.

Naw...

M6x1x16 is just as easy as 1/4"x1 UNC

[Richard J Kinch]

Noozer writes:

M6x1x16

That's not the proper designation. See _Machinery's Handbook_.

[Briggs]

Noozer wrote:
Thanks for the info, and yeah, it's MM not cm....
So, are all metric bolts the same thread pitch since they dont list
it???

Nope... metrix bolts are measured in how far from thread to thread.

It will most likely be an M6x1x16, meaning 6mm in diameter, 1mm from thread
to thread and 16mm long.

It's so much easier to say I need a 1/4" bolt 1" long with 24 threads per
inch.

Naw...

M6x1x16 is just as easy as 1/4"x1 UNC

Metric makes a lot more sense (it was designed that way). We just know
what we're used to. For example, what horsepower light bulbs do you
use? I don't know either, I use the dreaded metric unit--watts.
Familiarity with the metric system would have saved a couple of Mars
missions and about a gazillion dollars.

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:17:29 GMT, Briggs
wrote:

Noozer wrote:
Thanks for the info, and yeah, it's MM not cm....
So, are all metric bolts the same thread pitch since they dont list
it???

Nope... metrix bolts are measured in how far from thread to thread.

It will most likely be an M6x1x16, meaning 6mm in diameter, 1mm from thread
to thread and 16mm long.

It's so much easier to say I need a 1/4" bolt 1" long with 24 threads per
inch.

Naw...

M6x1x16 is just as easy as 1/4"x1 UNC

Metric makes a lot more sense (it was designed that way). We just know
what we're used to. For example, what horsepower light bulbs do you
use? I don't know either, I use the dreaded metric unit--watts.
Familiarity with the metric system would have saved a couple of Mars
missions and about a gazillion dollars.




I really dont understand how it can make more sense. Do you really
think anyone can remember all these numbers? (examples below)

a 2X4 board = 5.08 x 10.16 (cm)
a 1x6 board = 2.54 x 15.24 (cm)
an 8 foot long stud = 2.4384 (meters)
4x8 foot sheet of plywood = 1.2192 x 2.4384 (meters)
30 miles per hour = 48280.32 meters per hour
1 yard of carpeting = 0.9144 meters of carpeting

How can you call this simple?
2x4 is easy to remember, not 5.08 x 10.16.....

[Keith Williams]

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 05:17:29 GMT, Briggs
wrote:

Noozer wrote:
Thanks for the info, and yeah, it's MM not cm....
So, are all metric bolts the same thread pitch since they dont list
it???

Nope... metrix bolts are measured in how far from thread to thread.

It will most likely be an M6x1x16, meaning 6mm in diameter, 1mm from thread
to thread and 16mm long.

It's so much easier to say I need a 1/4" bolt 1" long with 24 threads per
inch.

Naw...

M6x1x16 is just as easy as 1/4"x1 UNC

Metric makes a lot more sense (it was designed that way). We just know
what we're used to. For example, what horsepower light bulbs do you
use? I don't know either, I use the dreaded metric unit--watts.
Familiarity with the metric system would have saved a couple of Mars
missions and about a gazillion dollars.




I really dont understand how it can make more sense. Do you really
think anyone can remember all these numbers? (examples below)

a 2X4 board = 5.08 x 10.16 (cm)
a 1x6 board = 2.54 x 15.24 (cm)
an 8 foot long stud = 2.4384 (meters)
4x8 foot sheet of plywood = 1.2192 x 2.4384 (meters)
30 miles per hour = 48280.32 meters per hour
1 yard of carpeting = 0.9144 meters of carpeting

How can you call this simple?
2x4 is easy to remember, not 5.08 x 10.16.....

Ah, but a 2x4 is 1.5" x 3.5". ;-)

--
Keith

[z]

Harry K wrote:
DT wrote:
In article ,
says...

I think this might be metric bolts because they dont appear to be SAE.
I am puzzled what they are referring to... The parts
list in that PDF file show this bolt as "Hex Bolt M6X16". WTF is
that?


It's a standard 6mm bolt, 16mm long. Metric specs usually don't add the thread
pitch unless it is a extra fine or coarse thread instead of the standard.

--
Dennis

Ayup and another good example of the bennies of the metric system.
Fewer different sizes in anything, fewer wrench sizes, fewer bolt
sizes, fewer thread pitches, etc. I hated it when I rotated back to
the states after years overseas and had to go back to this abortion we
call a 'system'.

It's good in the kitchen, so you don't have to start converting
teaspoons to cups or whatever when you're scaling a recipe up or down.

[z]

Chris Lewis wrote:
According to :
On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 11:51:40 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:
Threads per *inch* on a *metruc* bolt??? Think about it a bit...

OOPS..... I guess it would be a sin and sentence to hell to use the
word "inch" on a metric bolt.

Why would they pervert the metric system by using a foreign measurement?

I suppose it's threads per kilometer or
some such nonsense.

Actually, it's threads per mm. A 6mm bolt standard thread is
1.0 threads per mm.

This alone is proof that metrics are meant to
drive people insane. They are made for the criminally insane, because
after using them, one has an urge to kill whoever made the bolt
metric.

No, one gets the urge to kill whomever came up with the SAE sillyness.
#6 bolts? Furlongs? Chains? Rods? Cubits? Hogsheads? Barrels
(all 30+ different sizes)? "penny sizes" for nails? Gah.

And of course, a barrel of crude oil is not 55 gallons.
And even though it's English measure, a pint here is not the same as an
English pint.

Geez, even the British got rid of their old currency with the various
tuppence fuppence bob quid crown shilling crap.

--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[dpb]

Harry K wrote:
wrote:
....
How can you call this simple?
2x4 is easy to remember, not 5.08 x 10.16.....

And right there demonstrates why we are still stuck with this abortion
of a ?system?.
People who think that if you work in metric, you have to convert it to
English. One of the dumbest arguements agains changing that was ever
made.

Please tell me why you would want to know what the English measure was
for a metric piece of lumber.

To find out how it spans studs 16" OC, perhaps?

The problem is primarily in having to mix the two and irregardless of
the theoretical niceties of metric vis a vis English, there is a
history dating back several hundred years that can't be whisked
away--if, for nothing else, for those raised using English, despite
"book-larnin' " about MKS, it just "ain't natural". As a trained
engineer working w/ metric for 30 years, there still isn't the inate
"feel" for ordinary day-to-day things in metric measures that there is
for English. I just don't think that I'm really putting in 19 l
instead of 5 gal so it's "only" 76.5 c/l instead of $2.90 /gal -- no,
all I'm thinking is the producers are making a killing at $75/bbl.

Similarly, it's going to be d-- near 100 out this afternoon...I don't
feel a bit cooler at whatever it is in C and I have to stop and
calculate it out rather than "just knowing".

And, even as we continue to teach mks in school, the common usage
remains (and will remain for the foreseeable future).

Also, I don't really agree w/ the argument advanced earlier that there
are really that many fewer sizes in metric--in actuality, it seems to
me there tend to be more, at least in the smaller sizes where it seems
you find stuff every mm.

I do agree that the 70s/80s transition period with mismatched fasteners
on a single product was an abomination--I had one of them as well.

I'm not sure how much it really affects US industry's overall
efficiency--as someone else noted, most export sales are and have been
metric for quite some time now and a great portion of that production
is not in the US anyway. I'm sure there is some affect, but doubt it
would make a huge difference in competitive balance if it were to
disappear overnight (which of course, it can't owing to all the above
historical considerations).

[Doug Miller]

In article , wrote:


I really dont understand how it can make more sense. Do you really
think anyone can remember all these numbers? (examples below)

a 2X4 board = 5.08 x 10.16 (cm)
a 1x6 board = 2.54 x 15.24 (cm)
an 8 foot long stud = 2.4384 (meters)
4x8 foot sheet of plywood = 1.2192 x 2.4384 (meters)
30 miles per hour = 48280.32 meters per hour
1 yard of carpeting = 0.9144 meters of carpeting

How can you call this simple?
2x4 is easy to remember, not 5.08 x 10.16.....

You're totally missing the point. Under the metric system, things are sold in
metric units -- not in the metric equivalents of imperial units.

For example, a Canadian car has a speedometer that displays speed in kph
(kilometers per hour), the speed limit signs are posted in kph, and the
distances on the highway signs are in kilometers. No big deal. You see a sign
that says "Toronto -- 100km", you look at your speedometer and see that you're
going 80kph, and you know that you'll be there in an hour and a quarter.

Carpet and cloth are sold by the meter. Gasoline and milk are sold by the
liter. Meat and nails are sold by the kilogram. Nobody bothers doing any
conversions, because it isn't necessary.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

[Larry Bud]

I really dont understand how it can make more sense. Do you really
think anyone can remember all these numbers? (examples below)

a 2X4 board = 5.08 x 10.16 (cm)

Why would you make a board 5.08 x 10.16cm? You would make it 5x10.

a 1x6 board = 2.54 x 15.24

2.5 x 15

an 8 foot long stud = 2.4384 (meters)

2.5 meters



4x8 foot sheet of plywood = 1.2192 x 2.4384 (meters)

1.2x2.4, or 1.5 x 2.5

Get it?

Do you have a problem with buying a 2 liter bottle of Coke? Of course
not, it's 2 liters. They don't package and label it as 2.15 quarts
bottle.

In the same sense, a 10mm bolts is called a 10mm bolt. It's not a
..3937" bolt.

It's just a matter of getting used to visualize a quantity or weight of
something using metric measurements.

[dpb]

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , wrote:

....

You're totally missing the point. Under the metric system, things are sold in
metric units -- not in the metric equivalents of imperial units.

For example, a Canadian car has a speedometer that displays speed in kph
(kilometers per hour), the speed limit signs are posted in kph, and the
distances on the highway signs are in kilometers. No big deal. You see a sign
that says "Toronto -- 100km", you look at your speedometer and see that you're
going 80kph, and you know that you'll be there in an hour and a quarter.

But I have to mentally compute (by 5/8 for convenient reasonable
approximation) to find out I'm actually only about 62 miles away!

Carpet and cloth are sold by the meter. ...

What are standard building dimensions as compared to US? Here, framing
is 16" OC so virtually all sheathing materials are 4' x 8' which is
both a convenient size for handling and works out evenly in both
directions. The "tubafor" has evolved over the years from being a
rough (green) sawn actual 2" x 4" through various finished sizes to the
now familiar 1.5" x 3.5". Precut studs are made for base and top
plates to end up w/ finished wall heights of 8' which accomodates 4'
wallboard w/o trimming. I've never built anything outside the US but w/
all the trade between the two and general dimensions of buildings there
certainly aren't far different than ours, I presume there's
considerable overlap?

[Michael Daly]

dpb wrote:

is 16" OC

16" translates into 400mm. Not so tough.

4' x 8'

1200mm x 2400mm and it divides by 400mm. You couldn't tell the difference in
metric vs Imperial sizes by eye.

You Yanks are just too insular. It's time to join the rest of the world.

Mike

[dpb]

Michael Daly wrote:
dpb wrote:

is 16" OC

16" translates into 400mm. Not so tough.

I just asked what actual dimensions were common...

....

You Yanks are just too insular. It's time to join the rest of the world.
....

Seem to be doing fine as is, but thanks for asking, anyway...

[Edwin Pawlowski]

"dpb" wrote in message
...

You Yanks are just too insular. It's time to join the rest of the world.
...

Seem to be doing fine as is, but thanks for asking, anyway...


Right, we're not insular, we buy everything from China. We let them figure
the metric stuff and sell it back to us or ship them oil.

[Joseph Meehan]

dpb wrote:
Michael Daly wrote:
dpb wrote:

is 16" OC

16" translates into 400mm. Not so tough.

I just asked what actual dimensions were common...

...

You Yanks are just too insular. It's time to join the rest of the
world. ...

Seem to be doing fine as is, but thanks for asking, anyway...

I really wish that were the case. Besides, why use a second rate
measurement system when we could go with a better one. inches, feet yards
rods miles (two kinds) and no easy conversions between any of them, while in
metric you only have to worry about meters and factor them up or down by
10's.


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

[Goedjn]

I really wish that were the case. Besides, why use a second rate
measurement system when we could go with a better one. inches, feet yards
rods miles (two kinds) and no easy conversions between any of them, while in

You forgot fathom, chains, furlong, leagues.

And to be offended that the plural for two of those is
the same as the singular.

There are 11 fathom in a surveyor's chain.

See? It's simple.

[Chris Lewis]

According to dpb :

What are standard building dimensions as compared to US? Here, framing
is 16" OC so virtually all sheathing materials are 4' x 8' which is
both a convenient size for handling and works out evenly in both
directions. The "tubafor" has evolved over the years from being a
rough (green) sawn actual 2" x 4" through various finished sizes to the
now familiar 1.5" x 3.5". Precut studs are made for base and top
plates to end up w/ finished wall heights of 8' which accomodates 4'
wallboard w/o trimming. I've never built anything outside the US but w/
all the trade between the two and general dimensions of buildings there
certainly aren't far different than ours, I presume there's
considerable overlap?

It's a trick of proportion. We average twice as tall as you guys,
so the building standards are based on entirely different numbers.

snicker ;-

In reality, Canada has evolved to a situation somewhat short of
where Europe is. All official weights and measures are MKS (metric),
such as surveys, standards etc. Schools teach very little of FPS
(Imperial aka "english"). The latest generation can pretty much
entirely avoid FPS until they're in the construction industry.

Residential construction _itself_ is still using an unchanged system
almost identical to yours. 2x4s, 8x2 sheets of construction plywood,
12/16/24" joist spacing etc. We do see sheet goods with metric
thickness measurements (eg: 11mm sheathing), and the odd bit of
sheet goods (normally not for construction) with metric dimensions -
eg: furniture grade plywoods or melamine - about an inch oversize.

It may seem confusing, but in practise it isn't.

I grew up in FPS, and now I'm equally comfortable in both systems.
[Except pascals. I hate pascals. They should use mm of mercury -
that I can visualize - it's been around far longer than our metric
"conversion".]

Given the education system, and another generation, only a few
industries will be doing much in the way of FPS, and we'll arrive
in a situation where we'll be viewing construction practise in the
same way you should be viewing that idiotic penny nail measurement
"standard".
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[Chris Lewis]

According to Goedjn :

I really wish that were the case. Besides, why use a second rate
measurement system when we could go with a better one. inches, feet yards
rods miles (two kinds) and no easy conversions between any of them, while in

You forgot fathom, chains, furlong, leagues.

And to be offended that the plural for two of those is
the same as the singular.

There are 11 fathom in a surveyor's chain.

Not to mention 2.75 fathoms in a rod.

See? It's simple.

[I _think_ fathom and chain both pluralize with ".s"]
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[Doug Miller]

In article . com, "dpb" wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

....

You're totally missing the point. Under the metric system, things are sold in
metric units -- not in the metric equivalents of imperial units.

For example, a Canadian car has a speedometer that displays speed in kph
(kilometers per hour), the speed limit signs are posted in kph, and the
distances on the highway signs are in kilometers. No big deal. You see a sign
that says "Toronto -- 100km", you look at your speedometer and see that
you're
going 80kph, and you know that you'll be there in an hour and a quarter.

But I have to mentally compute (by 5/8 for convenient reasonable
approximation) to find out I'm actually only about 62 miles away!

Naaaah. You're an hour away. Drive faster, you get there sooner; slower,
later. Who cares about the distance?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

[Harry K]

dpb wrote:
Harry K wrote:
wrote:
...
How can you call this simple?
2x4 is easy to remember, not 5.08 x 10.16.....

And right there demonstrates why we are still stuck with this abortion
of a ?system?.
People who think that if you work in metric, you have to convert it to
English. One of the dumbest arguements agains changing that was ever
made.

Please tell me why you would want to know what the English measure was
for a metric piece of lumber.

To find out how it spans studs 16" OC, perhaps?

The problem is primarily in having to mix the two and irregardless of
the theoretical niceties of metric vis a vis English, there is a
history dating back several hundred years that can't be whisked
away--if, for nothing else, for those raised using English, despite
"book-larnin' " about MKS, it just "ain't natural". As a trained
engineer working w/ metric for 30 years, there still isn't the inate
"feel" for ordinary day-to-day things in metric measures that there is
for English. I just don't think that I'm really putting in 19 l
instead of 5 gal so it's "only" 76.5 c/l instead of $2.90 /gal -- no,
all I'm thinking is the producers are making a killing at $75/bbl.

Similarly, it's going to be d-- near 100 out this afternoon...I don't
feel a bit cooler at whatever it is in C and I have to stop and
calculate it out rather than "just knowing".

And, even as we continue to teach mks in school, the common usage
remains (and will remain for the foreseeable future).

Also, I don't really agree w/ the argument advanced earlier that there
are really that many fewer sizes in metric--in actuality, it seems to
me there tend to be more, at least in the smaller sizes where it seems
you find stuff every mm.

I do agree that the 70s/80s transition period with mismatched fasteners
on a single product was an abomination--I had one of them as well.

I'm not sure how much it really affects US industry's overall
efficiency--as someone else noted, most export sales are and have been
metric for quite some time now and a great portion of that production
is not in the US anyway. I'm sure there is some affect, but doubt it
would make a huge difference in competitive balance if it were to
disappear overnight (which of course, it can't owing to all the above
historical considerations).

Good valid points about what your are used to. The changeover, if it
ever occurs, will not be painless of course but the pain won't last
long. In a few years everyone except a few would be wondering why they
fought it. England made the change and never looked back.

There would remain the problem of matching up metric with stuff built
under the English system but it can be done (England for one).

Harry K

[dpb]

Doug Miller wrote:
In article . com, "dpb" wrote:

....
But I have to mentally compute (by 5/8 for convenient reasonable
approximation) to find out I'm actually only about 62 miles away!

Naaaah. You're an hour away. Drive faster, you get there sooner; slower,
later. Who cares about the distance?
,,,

I guess you didn't take the smiley at face value???

But, strangely enough, some folks _do_ have a yen to know the
distance---from my experience I hypothesis it tends to the folks in
cities and areas which aren't amenable to straight-line navigation
(such as the Eastern US w/ all the windy hills, etc.) that simply
consider distances as time. Being in and from an area that is all laid
off in sections, we navigate by section line and distances are what is
the innate feeling. As my other post notes, it's a case of what one is
familiar with, nothing else...

[dpb]

Harry K wrote:
dpb wrote:
....
The problem is primarily in having to mix the two and irregardless of
the theoretical niceties of metric vis a vis English, there is a
history dating back several hundred years that can't be whisked
away--if, for nothing else, for those raised using English, despite
"book-larnin' " about MKS, it just "ain't natural". ...
....
Good valid points about what your are used to. The changeover, if it
ever occurs, will not be painless of course but the pain won't last
long. In a few years everyone except a few would be wondering why they
fought it. England made the change and never looked back.
....

That's what I recall the mantra being about the time my kids started
school--as is typical in the US, however, being no widespread public
"mandate", there was no way to get a universal acceptance and the
movement floundered. Despite the (more-or-less) common language,
there's a big difference between public/government dynamics in the US
vis a vis England. I don't foresee a switch in common usage for a long
time (TM). Even the campaigns for metric road signs (about as painless
as it gets) are all gone afaict.

[Goedjn]

On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 23:23:31 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:

According to Goedjn :

I really wish that were the case. Besides, why use a second rate
measurement system when we could go with a better one. inches, feet yards
rods miles (two kinds) and no easy conversions between any of them, while in

You forgot fathom, chains, furlong, leagues.

And to be offended that the plural for two of those is
the same as the singular.

There are 11 fathom in a surveyor's chain.

Not to mention 2.75 fathoms in a rod.

See? It's simple.

[I _think_ fathom and chain both pluralize with ".s"]

"Full fathom five my father lies, of his bones are coral made. . ."
And the other one is furlong.

[Keith Williams]

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 23:23:31 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:

According to Goedjn :

I really wish that were the case. Besides, why use a second rate
measurement system when we could go with a better one. inches, feet yards
rods miles (two kinds) and no easy conversions between any of them, while in

You forgot fathom, chains, furlong, leagues.

And to be offended that the plural for two of those is
the same as the singular.

There are 11 fathom in a surveyor's chain.

Not to mention 2.75 fathoms in a rod.

See? It's simple.

[I _think_ fathom and chain both pluralize with ".s"]

"Full fathom five my father lies, of his bones are coral made. . ."
And the other one is furlong.

Pluralization of both with the 's' is correct.

Horse races are measured in furlongs:
http://www.nyra.com/chart/dailyentries.asp?track=B

--
Keith

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Goedjn wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 23:23:31 -0000, (Chris
"Full fathom five my father lies, of his bones are coral made. . ."
And the other one is furlong.


If the speed of sound is 750 miles per hour, please translate that into furlongs
per fortnight.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

[Keith Williams]

In article ,
VE says...
Goedjn wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 23:23:31 -0000, (Chris
"Full fathom five my father lies, of his bones are coral made. . ."
And the other one is furlong.


If the speed of sound is 750 miles per hour, please translate that into furlongs
per fortnight.

~2M furlongs/fortnight (FSF system was used as an example of what
not to use as a system of units in college physics)

--
Keith

[Goedjn]

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 11:25:51 -0400, Keith Williams
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 23:23:31 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:

According to Goedjn :

I really wish that were the case. Besides, why use a second rate
measurement system when we could go with a better one. inches, feet yards
rods miles (two kinds) and no easy conversions between any of them, while in

You forgot fathom, chains, furlong, leagues.

And to be offended that the plural for two of those is
the same as the singular.

There are 11 fathom in a surveyor's chain.

Not to mention 2.75 fathoms in a rod.

See? It's simple.

[I _think_ fathom and chain both pluralize with ".s"]

"Full fathom five my father lies, of his bones are coral made. . ."
And the other one is furlong.

Pluralization of both with the 's' is correct.

Pluralization of both with the 's' is common.
I suppose whether it's correct depends on
whether there's any meaning for 'correct' beyond
'a lot of people do it that way'.