On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)


The ability to deal with whatever comes your way is handy, most things these days typically having been designed by Frankenstein or relative if you catch my drift.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:42:21 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)


The ability to deal with whatever comes your way is handy, most things these days typically having been designed by Frankenstein or relative if you catch my drift.

g This has been one of my hobby horses for decades. I had to write
an article about it in the late '70s, so I went first to Caterpillar.
"What are you talking about?" they asked. "We're 100% metric."

Within a few years, most of the automobile industry was, too. Now
they're 100% metric, as well. So is all of US science, medicine, and
most of our other volume manufacturers.

I went to NIST. You'd think they'd be the biggest pro-metric folks on
the continent. Their reaction? Officially, "Its a bad thing to be
using inch measures." Unofficially, "Eh," accompanied by a shrug.

The conclusion is this: Where it matters, we're already 100% metric.
Where it doesn't, we're *still* mostly converted to metric. Most of
our use of inch/pound etc. ("customary units") is in consumer products
for lengths and volumes. It really doesn't matter a whit for them.
They aren't converting erg-seconds to femtowatts.

Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

--
Ed Huntress

On Jan 27, 8:24*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

--
Ed Huntress

1960 Military requires semiconductors to be good for 125 degrees C.

Engineer writing acceptance test is sure that the lab has only
Fahrenheit thermometers so changes 125 C to 257 degrees F. Acceptance
lab has only Centigrade thermometers. Tech heats semiconductors to
257 C. All semiconductors no longer work.


Dan

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:15:08 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Jan 27, 8:24*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

--
Ed Huntress

1960 Military requires semiconductors to be good for 125 degrees C.

Engineer writing acceptance test is sure that the lab has only
Fahrenheit thermometers so changes 125 C to 257 degrees F. Acceptance
lab has only Centigrade thermometers. Tech heats semiconductors to
257 C. All semiconductors no longer work.


Dan

Stupidity will always find a way.

--
Ed Huntress

On Jan 27, 9:34*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:15:08 -0800 (PST), "



wrote:
On Jan 27, 8:24*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

--
Ed Huntress

1960 Military requires semiconductors to be good for 125 degrees C.

Engineer writing acceptance test is sure that the lab has only
Fahrenheit thermometers so changes 125 C to 257 degrees F. *Acceptance
lab has only Centigrade thermometers. *Tech heats semiconductors to
257 C. *All semiconductors no longer work.

Dan

Stupidity will always find a way.

--
Ed Huntress

Yeah but if the U.S. went to Centigrade there would be one less way.
And I would not remember that the melting point of copper is about
1100 degrees but not remember if that is C or F. Or that a oxy acet
flame is 6300 degrees either C or F.

It is just one more way the U.S. is shooting itself in the foot as far
as trade.


Dan

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:44:50 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Jan 27, 9:34*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:15:08 -0800 (PST), "



wrote:
On Jan 27, 8:24*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

--
Ed Huntress

1960 Military requires semiconductors to be good for 125 degrees C.

Engineer writing acceptance test is sure that the lab has only
Fahrenheit thermometers so changes 125 C to 257 degrees F. *Acceptance
lab has only Centigrade thermometers. *Tech heats semiconductors to
257 C. *All semiconductors no longer work.

Dan

Stupidity will always find a way.

--
Ed Huntress

Yeah but if the U.S. went to Centigrade there would be one less way.
And I would not remember that the melting point of copper is about
1100 degrees but not remember if that is C or F. Or that a oxy acet
flame is 6300 degrees either C or F.

It is just one more way the U.S. is shooting itself in the foot as far
as trade.


Dan

Well, I feel for you Dan. FWIW, the melting point of copper that you
remember is in C. And the O/A flame is in F. g

There is no good reason to try to remember both. If those things are
important to you, just get used to using and remembering one or the
other. If you're relating them to highly technical information, I'd
recommend C. Or K....damn that Kelvin...

--
Ed Huntress

On 1/27/2012 8:44 PM, wrote:
....

It is just one more way the U.S. is shooting itself in the foot as far
as trade.

In all the ways US trade has a problem, this one is _not_ one any
longer. I've disagreed w/ Ed a bunch, but on this one he's spot
on--where it matters the US has been metric for a long time already;
where it isn't, it just doesn't matter at all.

--

On Jan 27, 10:15*pm, dpb wrote:

In all the ways US trade has a problem, this one is _not_ one any
longer. *I've disagreed w/ Ed a bunch, but on this one he's spot
on--where it matters the US has been metric for a long time already;
where it isn't, it just doesn't matter at all.

--

It does to me. I have inch and metric wrenches and sockets. I have
inch and metric taps and dies. So it costs me time to find out which
tool I need to use and money because I need two sets of tools. My
lathe does inch threading with no problem, but needs manually changing
gears to do metric threading. So more time gone. My dial calipers
are inch. I do have digital calipers, but they are not as accurate as
my inch micrometers. So it matters, Not that it can not be done, but
it is a pain that is not necessary.


Dan

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 05:18:17 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Jan 27, 10:15*pm, dpb wrote:

In all the ways US trade has a problem, this one is _not_ one any
longer. *I've disagreed w/ Ed a bunch, but on this one he's spot
on--where it matters the US has been metric for a long time already;
where it isn't, it just doesn't matter at all.

--

It does to me. I have inch and metric wrenches and sockets. I have
inch and metric taps and dies. So it costs me time to find out which
tool I need to use and money because I need two sets of tools. My
lathe does inch threading with no problem, but needs manually changing
gears to do metric threading. So more time gone. My dial calipers
are inch. I do have digital calipers, but they are not as accurate as
my inch micrometers. So it matters, Not that it can not be done, but
it is a pain that is not necessary.


Dan

Here's a suggestion, Dan: Throw your inch-measuring tools out. Why are
you measuring in inch units to begin with?

Oh, you have some old plans or old devices that are made in inch
dimensions? Well, throw them out, too!

Then you'll be all metric -- pure as driven snow. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Jan 28, 10:03*am, Ed Huntress wrote:


Here's a suggestion, Dan: Throw your inch-measuring tools out. Why are
you measuring in inch units to begin with?

Oh, you have some old plans or old devices that are made in inch
dimensions? Well, throw them out, too!

Then you'll be all metric -- pure as driven snow. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I suppose you want me to burn my house down too.

Thank god electricity is all metric.

Dan

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 09:51:11 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Jan 28, 10:03*am, Ed Huntress wrote:


Here's a suggestion, Dan: Throw your inch-measuring tools out. Why are
you measuring in inch units to begin with?

Oh, you have some old plans or old devices that are made in inch
dimensions? Well, throw them out, too!

Then you'll be all metric -- pure as driven snow. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I suppose you want me to burn my house down too.

Only if you're using micrometers for C-clamps.


Thank god electricity is all metric.

Yes, I noticed that all my wires are metric. I can tell because I can
measure them with a metric micrometer.

--
Ed Huntress

On 1/27/2012 8:24 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Ed wrote in message ...


Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.


When I worked as a QA Inspector in a sheet metal shop, one of our
customers was a German owned company. Some of the drawings received from
them had both metric and U.S. dimensions on the same drawing.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:29:32 -0500, bobm46 wrote:

On 1/27/2012 8:24 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Ed wrote in message ...


Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.


When I worked as a QA Inspector in a sheet metal shop, one of our
customers was a German owned company. Some of the drawings received from
them had both metric and U.S. dimensions on the same drawing.

I think that a lot of Europeans, and Japanese, with whom I've worked a
lot more, think that we don't understand what metric is, and that we
don't have the tools to measure it. g

A Japanese engineer I used to work with used to struggle with a piece
of paper and a calculator when he talked to me, converting metric
dimensions into inch -- with fractions rather than decimal inches.
Maybe he thought I was a house carpenter. g

--
Ed Huntress

On 1/28/2012 1:35 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:29:32 -0500, wrote:

On 1/27/2012 8:24 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Ed wrote in message ...


Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.


When I worked as a QA Inspector in a sheet metal shop, one of our
customers was a German owned company. Some of the drawings received from
them had both metric and U.S. dimensions on the same drawing.

I think that a lot of Europeans, and Japanese, with whom I've worked a
lot more, think that we don't understand what metric is, and that we
don't have the tools to measure it.g

A Japanese engineer I used to work with used to struggle with a piece
of paper and a calculator when he talked to me, converting metric
dimensions into inch -- with fractions rather than decimal inches.
Maybe he thought I was a house carpenter.g


After re-reading my post and your reply I think that I should be more
specific. For instance,they would call out the length and width in
metric, then spec the hole distances in U.S., the hole diameters in U.S
with a metric thread. It was not to bad for me but the CNC programmers
and the machinist always complained.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:44:15 -0500, bobm46 wrote:

On 1/28/2012 1:35 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:29:32 -0500, wrote:

On 1/27/2012 8:24 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Ed wrote in message ...


Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.


When I worked as a QA Inspector in a sheet metal shop, one of our
customers was a German owned company. Some of the drawings received from
them had both metric and U.S. dimensions on the same drawing.

I think that a lot of Europeans, and Japanese, with whom I've worked a
lot more, think that we don't understand what metric is, and that we
don't have the tools to measure it.g

A Japanese engineer I used to work with used to struggle with a piece
of paper and a calculator when he talked to me, converting metric
dimensions into inch -- with fractions rather than decimal inches.
Maybe he thought I was a house carpenter.g


After re-reading my post and your reply I think that I should be more
specific. For instance,they would call out the length and width in
metric, then spec the hole distances in U.S., the hole diameters in U.S
with a metric thread. It was not to bad for me but the CNC programmers
and the machinist always complained.

Oh, jeez. That is a problem.

Did you ever find out why they did that?

--
Ed Huntress

On 1/28/2012 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:44:15 -0500, wrote:

On 1/28/2012 1:35 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:29:32 -0500, wrote:

On 1/27/2012 8:24 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Ed wrote in message ...


Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.


When I worked as a QA Inspector in a sheet metal shop, one of our
customers was a German owned company. Some of the drawings received from
them had both metric and U.S. dimensions on the same drawing.

I think that a lot of Europeans, and Japanese, with whom I've worked a
lot more, think that we don't understand what metric is, and that we
don't have the tools to measure it.g

A Japanese engineer I used to work with used to struggle with a piece
of paper and a calculator when he talked to me, converting metric
dimensions into inch -- with fractions rather than decimal inches.
Maybe he thought I was a house carpenter.g


After re-reading my post and your reply I think that I should be more
specific. For instance,they would call out the length and width in
metric, then spec the hole distances in U.S., the hole diameters in U.S
with a metric thread. It was not to bad for me but the CNC programmers
and the machinist always complained.

Oh, jeez. That is a problem.

Did you ever find out why they did that?

Not for sure. But I always suspected that the original drawings came
from Germany all metric and they were redrawn here at the local plant.
Why this would happen I do not know.

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...


Thank god electricity is all metric.

Yes, I noticed that all my wires are metric. I can tell because I can
measure them with a metric micrometer.


Actually, that's a bit of a mess, too....

--SEE:

http://www.global-electron.com/wiresizes.htm

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:21:41 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .


Thank god electricity is all metric.

Yes, I noticed that all my wires are metric. I can tell because I can
measure them with a metric micrometer.


Actually, that's a bit of a mess, too....

--SEE:

http://www.global-electron.com/wiresizes.htm

Ah, it was a joke. If I can measure it with a metric micrometer...oh,
never mind. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

In article , huntres23
@optonline.net says...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:42:21 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)


The ability to deal with whatever comes your way is handy, most things these days typically having been designed by Frankenstein or relative if you catch my drift.

g This has been one of my hobby horses for decades. I had to write
an article about it in the late '70s, so I went first to Caterpillar.
"What are you talking about?" they asked. "We're 100% metric."

Within a few years, most of the automobile industry was, too. Now
they're 100% metric, as well. So is all of US science, medicine, and
most of our other volume manufacturers.

I went to NIST. You'd think they'd be the biggest pro-metric folks on
the continent. Their reaction? Officially, "Its a bad thing to be
using inch measures." Unofficially, "Eh," accompanied by a shrug.

The conclusion is this: Where it matters, we're already 100% metric.
Where it doesn't, we're *still* mostly converted to metric. Most of
our use of inch/pound etc. ("customary units") is in consumer products
for lengths and volumes. It really doesn't matter a whit for them.
They aren't converting erg-seconds to femtowatts.

Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

We're "metric" for certain values of "metric". Calling a 7/16 bolt
"11.11mm" on the drawing it "metric" but it doesn't really do anything
for clarity.

In article 17f3f903-3963-4037-b0cb-c18f16de42b7
@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com, says...

On Jan 27, 9:34*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:15:08 -0800 (PST), "



wrote:
On Jan 27, 8:24*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

--
Ed Huntress

1960 Military requires semiconductors to be good for 125 degrees C.

Engineer writing acceptance test is sure that the lab has only
Fahrenheit thermometers so changes 125 C to 257 degrees F. *Acceptance
lab has only Centigrade thermometers. *Tech heats semiconductors to
257 C. *All semiconductors no longer work.

Dan

Stupidity will always find a way.

--
Ed Huntress

Yeah but if the U.S. went to Centigrade there would be one less way.
And I would not remember that the melting point of copper is about
1100 degrees but not remember if that is C or F. Or that a oxy acet
flame is 6300 degrees either C or F.

It is just one more way the U.S. is shooting itself in the foot as far
as trade.

How so? Nobody really gives a crap if the screws used to hold their
iphone together are inch, metric, Whitworth, or Klingon as long as they
hold the iphone together.

In article 8b854deb-5c55-4815-87ce-
, says...

On Jan 27, 10:15*pm, dpb wrote:

In all the ways US trade has a problem, this one is _not_ one any
longer. *I've disagreed w/ Ed a bunch, but on this one he's spot
on--where it matters the US has been metric for a long time already;
where it isn't, it just doesn't matter at all.

--

It does to me. I have inch and metric wrenches and sockets. I have
inch and metric taps and dies. So it costs me time to find out which
tool I need to use and money because I need two sets of tools. My
lathe does inch threading with no problem, but needs manually changing
gears to do metric threading. So more time gone. My dial calipers
are inch. I do have digital calipers, but they are not as accurate as
my inch micrometers. So it matters, Not that it can not be done, but
it is a pain that is not necessary.

Well if that sort of thing is such a big issue for you, never buy a '72
Volvo. I had '72 Volvo that had SAE, Metric, and Whitworth on it (at
least the only wrench that would fit one particular nut was Whitworth--I
didn't check the thread). Seems that the Swedes were at that time even
more "backward" than we ignorant colonials.

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:38:32 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article , huntres23
says...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:42:21 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)


The ability to deal with whatever comes your way is handy, most things these days typically having been designed by Frankenstein or relative if you catch my drift.

g This has been one of my hobby horses for decades. I had to write
an article about it in the late '70s, so I went first to Caterpillar.
"What are you talking about?" they asked. "We're 100% metric."

Within a few years, most of the automobile industry was, too. Now
they're 100% metric, as well. So is all of US science, medicine, and
most of our other volume manufacturers.

I went to NIST. You'd think they'd be the biggest pro-metric folks on
the continent. Their reaction? Officially, "Its a bad thing to be
using inch measures." Unofficially, "Eh," accompanied by a shrug.

The conclusion is this: Where it matters, we're already 100% metric.
Where it doesn't, we're *still* mostly converted to metric. Most of
our use of inch/pound etc. ("customary units") is in consumer products
for lengths and volumes. It really doesn't matter a whit for them.
They aren't converting erg-seconds to femtowatts.

Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

We're "metric" for certain values of "metric". Calling a 7/16 bolt
"11.11mm" on the drawing it "metric" but it doesn't really do anything
for clarity.

Right. You may recall that the US automobile industry spent a couple
of years diddling with what they called "soft metrics." They were inch
values converted to metric, and they produced results like your
example.

Here's a fairly current drafting manual on the subject:

"2.2 Soft Metric – Soft metric conversion drawings maintain the
original inch design but are converted to express
the units of measurement in the SI metric language, including
dimensioning and tolerancing in millimeters (mm).
Soft conversion drawings are used when expensive tooling and
production equipment cannot be immediately
replaced or when the transition period to metric is limited. Soft
metric may also include using metric fasteners."

http://www.draftingzone.com/contentl...pdf&fileType=P

It's been decades since it happened in the car business, but my
recollection is that they used inch fasteners, expressed in metric
conversions, at the time.

But in that industry, as well as many others, they've long since
converted to "hard" metrics.

--
Ed Huntress

Yeah but if the U.S. went to Centigrade there would be one less way.
And I would not remember that the melting point of copper is about
1100 degrees but not remember if that is C or F. Or that a oxy acet
flame is 6300 degrees either C or F.

It is just one more way the U.S. is shooting itself in the foot as far
as trade.

How so? Nobody really gives a crap if the screws used to hold their
iphone together are inch, metric, Whitworth, or Klingon as long as they
hold the iphone together.

And - since they thread into plastic, any of the above will work fine!

It happens that Richard formulated :
Yeah but if the U.S. went to Centigrade there would be one less way.
And I would not remember that the melting point of copper is about
1100 degrees but not remember if that is C or F. Or that a oxy acet
flame is 6300 degrees either C or F.

It is just one more way the U.S. is shooting itself in the foot as far
as trade.

How so? Nobody really gives a crap if the screws used to hold their
iphone together are inch, metric, Whitworth, or Klingon as long as they
hold the iphone together.

And - since they thread into plastic, any of the above will work fine!

Or even Coarse lol

--
John G

In article , huntres23
@optonline.net says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:38:32 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article , huntres23
says...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:42:21 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)


The ability to deal with whatever comes your way is handy, most things these days typically having been designed by Frankenstein or relative if you catch my drift.

g This has been one of my hobby horses for decades. I had to write
an article about it in the late '70s, so I went first to Caterpillar.
"What are you talking about?" they asked. "We're 100% metric."

Within a few years, most of the automobile industry was, too. Now
they're 100% metric, as well. So is all of US science, medicine, and
most of our other volume manufacturers.

I went to NIST. You'd think they'd be the biggest pro-metric folks on
the continent. Their reaction? Officially, "Its a bad thing to be
using inch measures." Unofficially, "Eh," accompanied by a shrug.

The conclusion is this: Where it matters, we're already 100% metric.
Where it doesn't, we're *still* mostly converted to metric. Most of
our use of inch/pound etc. ("customary units") is in consumer products
for lengths and volumes. It really doesn't matter a whit for them.
They aren't converting erg-seconds to femtowatts.

Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

We're "metric" for certain values of "metric". Calling a 7/16 bolt
"11.11mm" on the drawing it "metric" but it doesn't really do anything
for clarity.

Right. You may recall that the US automobile industry spent a couple
of years diddling with what they called "soft metrics." They were inch
values converted to metric, and they produced results like your
example.

Here's a fairly current drafting manual on the subject:

"2.2 Soft Metric ? Soft metric conversion drawings maintain the
original inch design but are converted to express
the units of measurement in the SI metric language, including
dimensioning and tolerancing in millimeters (mm).
Soft conversion drawings are used when expensive tooling and
production equipment cannot be immediately
replaced or when the transition period to metric is limited. Soft
metric may also include using metric fasteners."

http://www.draftingzone.com/contentl...pdf&fileType=P

It's been decades since it happened in the car business, but my
recollection is that they used inch fasteners, expressed in metric
conversions, at the time.

But in that industry, as well as many others, they've long since
converted to "hard" metrics.

The brake lines on my '97 Jeep have metric fittings on one end and
english on the other. Some fasteners are metric, others aren't. As of
'97, all fasteners on Chrysler products clearly were not metric
standard.

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 22:09:43 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article , huntres23
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:38:32 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article , huntres23
says...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:42:21 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)


The ability to deal with whatever comes your way is handy, most things these days typically having been designed by Frankenstein or relative if you catch my drift.

g This has been one of my hobby horses for decades. I had to write
an article about it in the late '70s, so I went first to Caterpillar.
"What are you talking about?" they asked. "We're 100% metric."

Within a few years, most of the automobile industry was, too. Now
they're 100% metric, as well. So is all of US science, medicine, and
most of our other volume manufacturers.

I went to NIST. You'd think they'd be the biggest pro-metric folks on
the continent. Their reaction? Officially, "Its a bad thing to be
using inch measures." Unofficially, "Eh," accompanied by a shrug.

The conclusion is this: Where it matters, we're already 100% metric.
Where it doesn't, we're *still* mostly converted to metric. Most of
our use of inch/pound etc. ("customary units") is in consumer products
for lengths and volumes. It really doesn't matter a whit for them.
They aren't converting erg-seconds to femtowatts.

Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

We're "metric" for certain values of "metric". Calling a 7/16 bolt
"11.11mm" on the drawing it "metric" but it doesn't really do anything
for clarity.

Right. You may recall that the US automobile industry spent a couple
of years diddling with what they called "soft metrics." They were inch
values converted to metric, and they produced results like your
example.

Here's a fairly current drafting manual on the subject:

"2.2 Soft Metric ? Soft metric conversion drawings maintain the
original inch design but are converted to express
the units of measurement in the SI metric language, including
dimensioning and tolerancing in millimeters (mm).
Soft conversion drawings are used when expensive tooling and
production equipment cannot be immediately
replaced or when the transition period to metric is limited. Soft
metric may also include using metric fasteners."

http://www.draftingzone.com/contentl...pdf&fileType=P

It's been decades since it happened in the car business, but my
recollection is that they used inch fasteners, expressed in metric
conversions, at the time.

But in that industry, as well as many others, they've long since
converted to "hard" metrics.

The brake lines on my '97 Jeep have metric fittings on one end and
english on the other. Some fasteners are metric, others aren't. As of
'97, all fasteners on Chrysler products clearly were not metric
standard.

g There have been some messes out there. Chrysler supposedly was
all-metric by the late '70s, and my '89 Caravan was, but I didn't try
to turn every nut and bolt.

Here are GM's metric standards for suppliers as of 1999. They include
soft metrics:

http://supplier.comauinc.com/gm/peas...h/fnldrft1.pdf

There probably are a few bits of inch/Imperial stuff out there. It may
be that a few suppliers are still covered by the soft-metric
standards.

--
Ed Huntress

In article , huntres23
@optonline.net says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 22:09:43 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article , huntres23
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:38:32 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article , huntres23
says...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:42:21 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)


The ability to deal with whatever comes your way is handy, most things these days typically having been designed by Frankenstein or relative if you catch my drift.

g This has been one of my hobby horses for decades. I had to write
an article about it in the late '70s, so I went first to Caterpillar.
"What are you talking about?" they asked. "We're 100% metric."

Within a few years, most of the automobile industry was, too. Now
they're 100% metric, as well. So is all of US science, medicine, and
most of our other volume manufacturers.

I went to NIST. You'd think they'd be the biggest pro-metric folks on
the continent. Their reaction? Officially, "Its a bad thing to be
using inch measures." Unofficially, "Eh," accompanied by a shrug.

The conclusion is this: Where it matters, we're already 100% metric.
Where it doesn't, we're *still* mostly converted to metric. Most of
our use of inch/pound etc. ("customary units") is in consumer products
for lengths and volumes. It really doesn't matter a whit for them.
They aren't converting erg-seconds to femtowatts.

Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

We're "metric" for certain values of "metric". Calling a 7/16 bolt
"11.11mm" on the drawing it "metric" but it doesn't really do anything
for clarity.

Right. You may recall that the US automobile industry spent a couple
of years diddling with what they called "soft metrics." They were inch
values converted to metric, and they produced results like your
example.

Here's a fairly current drafting manual on the subject:

"2.2 Soft Metric ? Soft metric conversion drawings maintain the
original inch design but are converted to express
the units of measurement in the SI metric language, including
dimensioning and tolerancing in millimeters (mm).
Soft conversion drawings are used when expensive tooling and
production equipment cannot be immediately
replaced or when the transition period to metric is limited. Soft
metric may also include using metric fasteners."

http://www.draftingzone.com/contentl...pdf&fileType=P

It's been decades since it happened in the car business, but my
recollection is that they used inch fasteners, expressed in metric
conversions, at the time.

But in that industry, as well as many others, they've long since
converted to "hard" metrics.

The brake lines on my '97 Jeep have metric fittings on one end and
english on the other. Some fasteners are metric, others aren't. As of
'97, all fasteners on Chrysler products clearly were not metric
standard.

g There have been some messes out there. Chrysler supposedly was
all-metric by the late '70s, and my '89 Caravan was, but I didn't try
to turn every nut and bolt.

Here are GM's metric standards for suppliers as of 1999. They include
soft metrics:

http://supplier.comauinc.com/gm/peas...h/fnldrft1.pdf

There probably are a few bits of inch/Imperial stuff out there. It may
be that a few suppliers are still covered by the soft-metric
standards.

One suspects that the real rule is that if they have to change any
tooling or do any redesign to use "hard metric" they won't bother,
they'll just redraw. Why redo the stress analysis on a small block
Chevy to see if metric rod bolts are OK when you can just make a metric
drawing of what you're already making?

J. Clarke Inscribed thus:

In article 8b854deb-5c55-4815-87ce-
, says...

On Jan 27, 10:15Â*pm, dpb wrote:

In all the ways US trade has a problem, this one is _not_ one any
longer. Â*I've disagreed w/ Ed a bunch, but on this one he's spot
on--where it matters the US has been metric for a long time
already; where it isn't, it just doesn't matter at all.

--

It does to me. I have inch and metric wrenches and sockets. I have
inch and metric taps and dies. So it costs me time to find out which
tool I need to use and money because I need two sets of tools. My
lathe does inch threading with no problem, but needs manually
changing
gears to do metric threading. So more time gone. My dial calipers
are inch. I do have digital calipers, but they are not as accurate
as
my inch micrometers. So it matters, Not that it can not be done,
but it is a pain that is not necessary.

Well if that sort of thing is such a big issue for you, never buy a
'72
Volvo. I had '72 Volvo that had SAE, Metric, and Whitworth on it (at
least the only wrench that would fit one particular nut was
Whitworth--I
didn't check the thread). Seems that the Swedes were at that time
even more "backward" than we ignorant colonials.

Has anybody counted how many different threads are used on a Myford
lathe ?

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 22:45:54 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 22:09:43 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article , huntres23
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:38:32 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article , huntres23
says...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:42:21 -0800, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:29:46 +0000 (UTC), "Kelly D. Grills"
wrote:

* Just Me :
If the US would get of it's arse and switch to metric like the rest
of the world it wouldn't be such a big thing,it's going to have to
eventually so why not just do it.

Yeah, that's what they told us in high school shop class... in 1974.

Physics class, too, in 1965. And science class, in 1960...

The drumbeat goes on. d8-)


The ability to deal with whatever comes your way is handy, most things these days typically having been designed by Frankenstein or relative if you catch my drift.

g This has been one of my hobby horses for decades. I had to write
an article about it in the late '70s, so I went first to Caterpillar.
"What are you talking about?" they asked. "We're 100% metric."

Within a few years, most of the automobile industry was, too. Now
they're 100% metric, as well. So is all of US science, medicine, and
most of our other volume manufacturers.

I went to NIST. You'd think they'd be the biggest pro-metric folks on
the continent. Their reaction? Officially, "Its a bad thing to be
using inch measures." Unofficially, "Eh," accompanied by a shrug.

The conclusion is this: Where it matters, we're already 100% metric.
Where it doesn't, we're *still* mostly converted to metric. Most of
our use of inch/pound etc. ("customary units") is in consumer products
for lengths and volumes. It really doesn't matter a whit for them.
They aren't converting erg-seconds to femtowatts.

Job shops still get a mess of both measures, and they're the ones who
have a right to be ****ed off about it. Otherwise, it's not really a
problem. And keep in mind that our dimensions for length are in
decimal units for most technical things, anyway. It matters little
whether you start with a meter or with an inch if you do that, as long
as you don't have to keep converting. And with computer controls, you
just push a button even for that.

For those reasons, it's mostly a tempest in a teapot. There are some
good reasons to go all-metric, but there are few people who would even
notice.

We're "metric" for certain values of "metric". Calling a 7/16 bolt
"11.11mm" on the drawing it "metric" but it doesn't really do anything
for clarity.

Right. You may recall that the US automobile industry spent a couple
of years diddling with what they called "soft metrics." They were inch
values converted to metric, and they produced results like your
example.

Here's a fairly current drafting manual on the subject:

"2.2 Soft Metric ? Soft metric conversion drawings maintain the
original inch design but are converted to express
the units of measurement in the SI metric language, including
dimensioning and tolerancing in millimeters (mm).
Soft conversion drawings are used when expensive tooling and
production equipment cannot be immediately
replaced or when the transition period to metric is limited. Soft
metric may also include using metric fasteners."

http://www.draftingzone.com/contentl...pdf&fileType=P

It's been decades since it happened in the car business, but my
recollection is that they used inch fasteners, expressed in metric
conversions, at the time.

But in that industry, as well as many others, they've long since
converted to "hard" metrics.

The brake lines on my '97 Jeep have metric fittings on one end and
english on the other. Some fasteners are metric, others aren't. As of
'97, all fasteners on Chrysler products clearly were not metric
standard.

g There have been some messes out there. Chrysler supposedly was
all-metric by the late '70s, and my '89 Caravan was, but I didn't try
to turn every nut and bolt.

Here are GM's metric standards for suppliers as of 1999. They include
soft metrics:

http://supplier.comauinc.com/gm/peas...h/fnldrft1.pdf

There probably are a few bits of inch/Imperial stuff out there. It may
be that a few suppliers are still covered by the soft-metric
standards.
My beef with GM concerns the spare tire attachment system on a 1990
Chebby Lumina APV. In Feb. 1997 on the way down I-75 I came out of the
motel to a flat tire. Out with the jack etc. and prepared to lower the
spare. I suspect my first action was in the wrong direction because as
soon as I applied pressure, the spare fell to the ground - guess I was
lucky it was still there. I collected the stray bits and from then
till summer I carried the spare internally.
In nice weather I attempted to remove the winch mechanism. I
determined that the attachment bolts had hex. heads that fit perfectly
in a 5/16 socket - OK, #10 machine screws seem somewhat inadequate,
but, if I'm very careful and get very lucky and use lots of
penetrating oil, I just might get things appart. Some time later, and
with the help of a cheater and 16 ounce hammer, I discovered that I
had odd looking 8M bolts.
After dismantling, cleaning, stuffing with grease and re-assembling
the winch, designing and machining a new cable end, I re-installed it
using standard 8M bolts. The spare was still there when second son's
step daughter demolished the vehicle ten years later.

On 3/4/2012 9:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

The brake lines on my '97 Jeep have metric fittings on one end and
english on the other. Some fasteners are metric, others aren't. As of
'97, all fasteners on Chrysler products clearly were not metric
standard.

g There have been some messes out there. Chrysler supposedly was
all-metric by the late '70s, and my '89 Caravan was, but I didn't try
to turn every nut and bolt.

Here are GM's metric standards for suppliers as of 1999. They include
soft metrics:

http://supplier.comauinc.com/gm/peas...h/fnldrft1.pdf

There probably are a few bits of inch/Imperial stuff out there. It may
be that a few suppliers are still covered by the soft-metric
standards.

Maybe those imperial fasteners were left over AMC parts!

David

On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 20:59:59 -0600, "David R. Birch"
wrote:

On 3/4/2012 9:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

The brake lines on my '97 Jeep have metric fittings on one end and
english on the other. Some fasteners are metric, others aren't. As of
'97, all fasteners on Chrysler products clearly were not metric
standard.

g There have been some messes out there. Chrysler supposedly was
all-metric by the late '70s, and my '89 Caravan was, but I didn't try
to turn every nut and bolt.

Here are GM's metric standards for suppliers as of 1999. They include
soft metrics:

http://supplier.comauinc.com/gm/peas...h/fnldrft1.pdf

There probably are a few bits of inch/Imperial stuff out there. It may
be that a few suppliers are still covered by the soft-metric
standards.

Maybe those imperial fasteners were left over AMC parts!

David

Waste not, want not...

--
Ed Huntress