I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of the crap
measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the world
uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G

Lee wrote:

| Why shouldn't I go to what the
| rest of the world uses? Metric.

No reason not to. If you do, then I'll join you as soon as I can by
metric sized tools, bits, wood, etc at a better price than I can buy
inch sizes...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

ooops sorry Morris
"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...
Lee wrote:

| Why shouldn't I go to what the
| rest of the world uses? Metric.

No reason not to. If you do, then I'll join you as soon as I can by
metric sized tools, bits, wood, etc at a better price than I can buy
inch sizes...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

Not looking at tools etc. Looking at replacing fractional US measurements
"Morris Dovey" No reason not to. If you do, then I'll join you as soon as
I can by
metric sized tools, bits, wood, etc at a better price than I can buy
inch sizes...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

Lee wrote:
Not looking at tools etc. Looking at replacing fractional US measurements

So, do what you want. What are you measuring and why would it make any
difference to anyone else but you?

Me, I'm same age, trained as engineer so mks are familiar in their
place, but for day-to-day usage, British measurements are just what
"comes naturally". For measuring in woodworking a 64th is more than
adequate for virtually any and everything, a 32nd is usually good enough
except for matching joints where to make things easy one generally uses
a marking gauge and transfer marks, not actual physical measurements,
anyway. For estimating, I _know_ what an inch is in terms of a length
of particular finger joint, eight inches is a convenient spread, lots of
practice lets me pace of a yard pretty doggone accurately, ... Any of
those in even cgs units is something I'd have to start over at age 8 to
have a hope of learning with such fluency. No point in it as far as I
can see...

$0.02, ymmv, etc., of course, ...

--

"Morris Dovey" No reason not to. If you do, then I'll join you as soon as
I can by
metric sized tools, bits, wood, etc at a better price than I can buy
inch sizes...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On Oct 11, 6:12 pm, "Lee" wrote:
I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of the crap
measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the world
uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G

I grew up with metric. A 10cm x 10cm Cube of water weighs a kilo and
is a litre as well. (At 4C)
Then, after I graduated high school in The Netherlands, I came to
Canada. Inches and feet and pounds and gallons..then baaaaack again to
metric.

Now I buy my meat by the pound, my gas by the litre and my solid
surface sheets 30 INCHES by 12 FEET.
Half of a quarter is an eigth. 30+ degrees C is not hot, 90 F is hot.
2 pints of beer is not a lot, a litre is.
A ton is as heavy as a tonne, as far as I am concerned, and the whole
world should switch over to smidgens and tiches.

"Robatoy" wrote

A ton is as heavy as a tonne, as far as I am concerned, and the whole
world should switch over to smidgens and tiches.

While I much prefer RCH's and gnats asses, I do occasionally use the metric
side of a ruler when I can't extrapolate the precision I want with the inch
side ... but remembering which mark it was ten minutes later can be a big
problem.

And, I have gotten real good at converting fractions to decimal equivalents
for entry in my CAD program, mainly because it's easier to enter distances
for that particular software that way as it is "default", and I can't ever
remember from one boot to the next how to change "default".

(There's a common thread, but I can't remember what it was ...)

But, I fondly remember, and could still make immediate change in a poker
game to this day, in guinea's, sovereigns, half sovereigns, pounds, crowns,
half crowns, florins, shillings, pence, sixpence, threepence, halfpenny and
farthings ... and am saddened that they are things of the past.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/30/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Lee" wrote:

I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of
the crap
measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the
world
uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G

Time is on the side of metric.

40 years ago when the metric change was proposed, the investment in
tooling, supplies, supporting infrastructure in the USA was
tremendous.

Today a lot of that investment has become obsolete or consumed.

The change today would be easier, tomorrow easier yet.

Lew

on 10/11/2007 7:33 PM Lew Hodgett said the following:
"Lee" wrote:


I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of

the crap

measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the

world

uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G


Time is on the side of metric.

40 years ago when the metric change was proposed, the investment in
tooling, supplies, supporting infrastructure in the USA was
tremendous.


Yes, and those companies that made tools, now could sell twice as many
tools than if there was only one measurement.
"A set of SAE wrenches and a set of Metric wrenches, please."

Today a lot of that investment has become obsolete or consumed.

The change today would be easier, tomorrow easier yet.

Lew





--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

"willshak" wrote in message
...
on 10/11/2007 7:33 PM Lew Hodgett said the following:
"Lee" wrote:


I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of

the crap

measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the

world

uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G


Time is on the side of metric.

40 years ago when the metric change was proposed, the investment in
tooling, supplies, supporting infrastructure in the USA was
tremendous.


Yes, and those companies that made tools, now could sell twice as many
tools than if there was only one measurement.
"A set of SAE wrenches and a set of Metric wrenches, please."


Autos need metric (with a few exceptions) and everything else of any size
uses SAE, so they do sell both. My auto set in metric is growing.

Today a lot of that investment has become obsolete or consumed.

The change today would be easier, tomorrow easier yet.

Lew





--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

It has always confused me that while many Americans were vehemently
opposed to metric, they still measure weapons in it. 9mm etc.

I'm numerically dyslexic, which makes numbers hard for me anyway. I
also have the disadvantage of going to school so that I finished here
in Australia in 1972. This meant I was taught in imperial but those in
the year behind me were taught in metric. So now I have both in my head
arguing with each other.

On the whole though, with my particular disability metric is easier.

Mekon

In article , v wrote:
It has always confused me that while many Americans were vehemently
opposed to metric, they still measure weapons in it. 9mm etc.

Acually, for the most part, we don't. Most rifle and pistol calibers in the
U.S. are measured in decimal inches, e.g. .22, .308, .243, .357, etc.

And we still use the old Imperial gauge sizes for shotguns. (The .410 being an
exception, but that's decimal inches again.)

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

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

On Oct 29, 3:16 am, Mekon wrote:
It has always confused me that while many Americans were vehemently
opposed to metric, they still measure weapons in it. 9mm etc.

I'm numerically dyslexic, which makes numbers hard for me anyway. I
also have the disadvantage of going to school so that I finished here
in Australia in 1972. This meant I was taught in imperial but those in
the year behind me were taught in metric. So now I have both in my head
arguing with each other.

On the whole though, with my particular disability metric is easier.

Mekon

Miller won't admit to such trivial weapons as the 105 mm and 20 mm
canons, he just wants you to be wrong..

"Mekon" wrote in message
. ..

It has always confused me that while many Americans were vehemently
opposed to metric, they still measure weapons in it. 9mm etc.

Some weaponry, but far from all, or even most. Think of all of the decimal
calibers out there. Everything from .22 to .308 to .45 to .50.


--

-Mike-

Mekon wrote:

It has always confused me that while many Americans were vehemently
opposed to metric, they still measure weapons in it. 9mm etc.

I'm numerically dyslexic, which makes numbers hard for me anyway. I
also have the disadvantage of going to school so that I finished here
in Australia in 1972. This meant I was taught in imperial but those in
the year behind me were taught in metric. So now I have both in my head
arguing with each other.

On the whole though, with my particular disability metric is easier.

Mekon

I think most of those calibers were imported from Europe. Most small arms
are measured in decimal inches: 0.22-250, 0.22, .38, .357, .44, .45, .243,
etc.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Mike Dobony wrote:

Autos need metric (with a few exceptions) and everything else of any size
uses SAE, so they do sell both. My auto set in metric is growing.


I just use Metrinch http://www.mitools.com/combination/0076.php being my
current carry in the Land-Rover set!

I wrote a piece for an American engineering publication on the American
companies loosing trade as a result of sticking with 'English' imperial
and wierd American number threads, so being in England the advantage
of metric interchangability and easy calc. isn't lost on me!

Somebody wrote:

Autos need metric (with a few exceptions) and everything else of any
size
uses SAE, so they do sell both. My auto set in metric is growing.

Mine isn't, but maybe my mechanics is.

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...

"Lee" wrote:

I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of
the crap
measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the
world
uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G

Time is on the side of metric.

40 years ago when the metric change was proposed, the investment in
tooling, supplies, supporting infrastructure in the USA was
tremendous.

Today a lot of that investment has become obsolete or consumed.

Yeah - dream on, McDuff - any tool investment going on today still
has to be backwards compatible, so will continue to be English.... Seem
to recall published details more than a year ago that said "Metrication"
has been abandoned as not practical.

'Sides, if fractions bother so much, English dimensions can also be
indicated in decimals - have been for AGES..... Ever read a micrometer?

Lazy modern generation, anyway..... Leave 'em without a calculator
& they can't give correct change.

The change today would be easier, tomorrow easier yet.

Lew


Sorry - this is nothing more than an emotional issue - no science to
it at all.
NGA

"Not Gimpy Anymore" wrote in news:cycRi.35258
:

*snip*


Lazy modern generation, anyway..... Leave 'em without a calculator
& they can't give correct change.


You know, I once had a person use a calculator to give me change... and
she gave me the wrong amount! This was at the bank too!

Puckdropper
--
Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm

on 10/16/2007 8:19 PM Not Gimpy Anymore said the following:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
...

"Lee" wrote:


I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of

the crap

measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the

world

uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G

Time is on the side of metric.

40 years ago when the metric change was proposed, the investment in
tooling, supplies, supporting infrastructure in the USA was
tremendous.

Today a lot of that investment has become obsolete or consumed.


Yeah - dream on, McDuff - any tool investment going on today still
has to be backwards compatible, so will continue to be English.... Seem
to recall published details more than a year ago that said "Metrication"
has been abandoned as not practical.


It's practical, just not feasible.
'Sides, if fractions bother so much, English dimensions can also be
indicated in decimals - have been for AGES..... Ever read a micrometer?

Lazy modern generation, anyway..... Leave 'em without a calculator
& they can't give correct change.


The change today would be easier, tomorrow easier yet.

Lew



Sorry - this is nothing more than an emotional issue - no science to
it at all.
NGA





--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

Lee wrote:

I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of the crap
measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the world
uses? Metric.

I will as soon as I can buy a 11.90625 millimeter and 5.159375
millimeter socket (respectively).

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

Your missing my point. I am talking about using metric in the current time
for measuring...not replacing what we have now when it comes to tools
"Nova" wrote in I will as soon as I can buy a
11.90625 millimeter and 5.159375
millimeter socket (respectively).

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

Thu, Oct 11, 2007, 11:47pm (EDT+4) (Lee) doth sayeth:
Your missing my point. I am talking about using metric in the current
time for measuring...not replacing what we have now when it comes to
tools

So say you. I'd have changed years ago, but can't find a reliable
supplier of metric pencils.



JOAT
"I'm an Igor, thur. We don't athk quethtionth."
"Really? Why not?"
"I don't know, thur. I didn't athk."

Lee wrote:

Your missing my point. I am talking about using metric in the current time
for measuring...not replacing what we have now when it comes to tools

With the crew I've been working with the last few days "Ticks" seems to
work best. ;-)

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

On Oct 11, 7:47 pm, "Lee" wrote:
Your missing my point. I am talking about using metric in the current time
for measuring...not replacing what we have now when it comes to tools
"Nova" wrote in I will as soon as I can buy a
11.90625 millimeter and 5.159375

millimeter socket (respectively).



I don't understand your point. How are you going to work in metric
without replacing measuring tools, at the very least? You also can't
work in metric when you're drilling inch measured holes, cutting inch
measured dadoes, and so on. Those two things alone mean tool
replacement, because every dado set I've ever seen is calibrated in
fractions of an inch. Drilling a 3/4" hole in a 30 cm x 40 cm board
works fine, until...how close is the nearest edge to the edge of the
hole and how close does it need to be? I got hold of the Craftsman
version of the currently touted Triton/Grizzly planer/moulder a couple
of years ago, and almost went nuts trying to work to metric
measurements for the base board, while using standard plywood. I don't
have metric measuring tools; rather, I don't have them where they are
accessible for instant (or within the week) use.

I expect to die the same way.

It just gets overly complicated to swing both ways (unless you're a
politician). And just think what it would do to male porn stars...no,
wait, they'd probably love it.

on 10/11/2007 6:12 PM Lee said the following:
I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of the crap
measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the world
uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G

I'm with you. My math is a lot better with 10s, 100s, and 1000s, than
cups, pints, ounces, quarts, gallons, inches, feet, yards, etc.
My kids were learning metric in school 40 years ago in anticipation of a
change that never happened.
Like Professional Soccer, which never gained a hold, despite stars like
Pele.
What makes it worse is that some here in the US are using metric, like
in the scientific world.
I think the main reason not to change is to maintain a link with the UK.
I know that a meter is about 39 inches, but that's about it.
I'm tired of having to possess both SAE and metric tools to work on my
cars. Even foreign cars built here in the US have metric bolts, nuts,
and screws.
Keep the Fahrenheit scale tho.
I'm 70, but I can change.

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

We use metric measurement in the business of plywood/film faced
plywood/blockboard/MDF/Hardboard and so on .All our plywood businesses were
finished by using metric measurement, even if we do business with US, UK or
Ca customers . All our customers from Europe, Africa, Middle East, other
Asian countries use metric measurement .

--
Mason Pan
Blog: http://www.plywood.cc/

"Lee" wrote in message
et...
I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of the
crap measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the
world uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G

Mason Pan wrote:
: We use metric measurement in the business of plywood/film faced
: plywood/blockboard/MDF/Hardboard and so on .All our plywood businesses were
: finished by using metric measurement, even if we do business with US, UK or
: Ca customers .

Aren't "metric" plywood sheets something like 1200 x 2400 millimeters,
which is oddly very close to four by eight feet?


And aren't bords in Europe sold in 2.4 meter lengths? Not a natural
unit in metric.


-- Andy Barss

In plywood business ,four by eight feet is 1220X2440 mm in metric system .
We sell 1220x2440 or 1250x2500 mm plywood / film faced plywood to Europe ,
USA and other countries .

--
Mason Pan
Blog: http://www.plywood.cc/

"Andrew Barss" wrote in message
...
Mason Pan wrote:
: We use metric measurement in the business of plywood/film faced
: plywood/blockboard/MDF/Hardboard and so on .All our plywood businesses
were
: finished by using metric measurement, even if we do business with US, UK
or
: Ca customers .

Aren't "metric" plywood sheets something like 1200 x 2400 millimeters,
which is oddly very close to four by eight feet?


And aren't bords in Europe sold in 2.4 meter lengths? Not a natural
unit in metric.


-- Andy Barss

On Oct 12, 8:28 am, "Mason Pan" wrote:
In plywood business ,four by eight feet is 1220X2440 mm in metric system .
We sell 1220x2440 or 1250x2500 mm plywood / film faced plywood to Europe ,
USA and other countries .

--
Mason Pan

Isn't that wonderful. You have to manufacture and stock two different
sizes, different by only a couple of inches. Not very efficient, is
it?

When one or the other wins out - as will inevitably happen - which
will it be? Pick one.

Will it be the 1220x2440? I'll be happy, because it will fit right on
over my 12", 16" or 24" OC studs, joists or rafters. But it won't
quite span the gaps of building done to metric standards. And working
in metric units with odd numbers like 1220 and 2440 and their
multiples and divisibles isn't much easier than working with inches,
feet and fractions.

Will it be the 1250x2500? Easier to work with the numbers, and it
will fit metric-built existing structures. But I'll have to trim
every piece to get it to fit, won't I?

Wonderful.

John Martin

Q1 Isn't that wonderful. You have to manufacture and stock two different
sizes, different by only a couple of inches. Not very efficient, is it?

Reply: In plywood business ,"four by eight feet" means "1220X2440 mm only"
in metric system . But some customers from Europe and other areas prefer
1250X2500 mm .

I think metric system is more efficient .

Q2 When one or the other wins out - as will inevitably happen - which will
it be? Pick one.
Reply: As to me, I prefer metric system . Because it's easy to do
calculation in metric system .

I agree with you that one will inevitably win out . But it may takes a very
long time in the future .


--
Mason Pan
Blog: http://www.plywood.cc/

"John Martin" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 12, 8:28 am, "Mason Pan" wrote:
In plywood business ,four by eight feet is 1220X2440 mm in metric system
.
We sell 1220x2440 or 1250x2500 mm plywood / film faced plywood to Europe
,
USA and other countries .

--
Mason Pan

Isn't that wonderful. You have to manufacture and stock two different
sizes, different by only a couple of inches. Not very efficient, is
it?

When one or the other wins out - as will inevitably happen - which
will it be? Pick one.

Will it be the 1220x2440? I'll be happy, because it will fit right on
over my 12", 16" or 24" OC studs, joists or rafters. But it won't
quite span the gaps of building done to metric standards. And working
in metric units with odd numbers like 1220 and 2440 and their
multiples and divisibles isn't much easier than working with inches,
feet and fractions.

Will it be the 1250x2500? Easier to work with the numbers, and it
will fit metric-built existing structures. But I'll have to trim
every piece to get it to fit, won't I?

Wonderful.

John Martin

John Martin wrote:


Will it be the 1250x2500? Easier to work with the numbers, and it
will fit metric-built existing structures. But I'll have to trim
every piece to get it to fit, won't I?

Wonderful.

John Martin


How are you going to handle changing out a passage door? ;-)

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

Lee wrote:
: I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of the crap
: measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the world
: uses? Metric. Please no political BS.


:Seems like using 10's is a lot easier.


A common thought about metric, and a fallacy as far as I'm concerned.
It's easier to divide and multiply by multiples of 10 in metric, but so what?
"Jeez, I think the overhang on that tabletop looks a bit scanty, so I
think I'll try ten times more"? "Heck, that shelf is too long. Better
try a tenth that length and see how it looks"?

If you think about it, imperial measurements (in 16ths and 12ths) have more
integral divisors (2, 3, 4, 6, 8) than metric ones do (2 and 5).


Plus, the imperial units correspond better to humanscale proportions (as
le Corbusier and othr designers discovered when they switched ou of metric).

It's inches, feet, yards, furlongs, cubits, and barleycorns for me.


A pint's a pound, the world round.

-- Andy Barss

Andrew Barss :
A common thought about metric, and a fallacy as far as I'm concerned.
It's easier to divide and multiply by multiples of 10 in metric, but so what?
"Jeez, I think the overhang on that tabletop looks a bit scanty, so I
think I'll try ten times more"? "Heck, that shelf is too long. Better
try a tenth that length and see how it looks"?

"Hmm, two feet is a wee bit too long, I'll try two inches..."

If you think about it, imperial measurements (in 16ths and 12ths) have more
integral divisors (2, 3, 4, 6, 8) than metric ones do (2 and 5).

But with metric it is easy to "upgrade" your precision. If m is to
coarse, try cm, if that still too coarse try mm, or even micrometers if
you are truly finicky ("1 meter, no make that 102 cm, 1023 mm to be
precise"). How do you sanely add precision to 3 feet and 14/64 inch?

The power of metric is that you can easilly add 14 mm to 17.3 cm, and
then place that on top of 1.05 m. Worst case with imperial you end up
with 16ths, 12ths, inches feet and yards. All at once.

/Par

--
Par
It would be relevant at events if people were making a reasonable attempt
to be medieval people instead of attendees at a costume party, but that is
only occasionally the case, unfortunately. -- David/Cariadoc

If you think about it, imperial measurements (in 16ths and 12ths) have more
integral divisors (2, 3, 4, 6, 8) than metric ones do (2 and 5).


this is the real strength of the old system, and why it's better for
design.




Plus, the imperial units correspond better to humanscale proportions (as
le Corbusier and othr designers discovered when they switched ou of metric).

indeed, many systems of measurement historically were based on human
measure.

On Oct 11, 6:12 pm, "Lee" wrote:
I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of the crap
measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the world
uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G

Metric is to blame for 15/32" plywood -- it's the nearest
Imperial approximation of whatever some overseas plywood
factory is producing in metric, specifically 12 mm.

Imperial units math is really quite easy. To divide a
fraction by 2, simply multiply the denominator by 2.

A stairbuilder I used to work with had a laminated piece of paper with
a conversion table that he used. He could switch back and forth
between metric and inches as he needed. I think it went to 32nds. It
seemed silly to me at the time, but now I can see that it might be
useful.

"Lee" wrote in message
et...
I am getting a bit fed-up with the 15/32...13/64... and the rest of the
crap measurements we use here. Why shouldn't I go to what the rest of the
world uses? Metric. Please no political BS. Seems like using 10's is a lot
easier.No I'm not too old to change (62).G


There are absolutely no valid reasons NOT to use metric. There are plenty of
people afraid of change. Use it steady for a few days and you'll wonder why
we did not change decades ago. We use it for our money, we use it for some
beverages.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

| There are absolutely no valid reasons NOT to use metric. There are
| plenty of people afraid of change. Use it steady for a few days
| and you'll wonder why we did not change decades ago. We use it for
| our money, we use it for some beverages.

I'd like to agree, but can't. I came up with a gizmo (photos at link
below) that allows ShopBot users to zero all three axes to a jig or
workpiece in less than a minute and a bunch of guys wanted 'em for
their shops. The first customer was in Sweden so I figured it'd be
cool to go metric...

Ok - I needed aluminum bar stock at _least_ 3/8" thick (1/2" would be
better) and went to the catalog. No metric stock available - so
ordered 1/2" x 6" x 72". Shrug.

Now I needed smaller stock thicker than 1/16" and wider than 1/2".
Back to the catalog for 1/8" x 3/4" x 72". Shrug again. Told myself it
wasn't a big deal, that no one would care what the actual measurements
of these parts was, so system wasn't important.

Then I needed button head cap screws to attach the thin pieces to the
edges of the thick one. Hmm - M5 x .8 x 12 (3mm key) are $14.27/C and
#10-32 x 1/2 (1/8 key) are $7.76/C. At this point my enthusiasm for
metric was beginning to fade a bit.

So I flipped to Allen wrenches. 3 mm hex keys were listed at $11.95/C
and 1/8" hex keys were listed at $5.85/C. (I wrote 'em down)

On to spiral-flute bottoming taps - a #10-32 was listed at $8.20 and
an M5 x .8 was $13.45 - I only needed two (I've learned never to order
just one of a given tap size because that's /inviting/ Murphy to the
party.)

I already have a set of fractional, numbered, and letter size drills
(#10-32 needs a #21 drill for the tapped hole and a #9 for clearance
hole) from Harbor Fright. I turned to look up the price on a but for
an M5 tapped hole and realized that my handy char didn't provide any
info as to what size bit I needed for /any/ metric tapped hole.

Added up the costs I /did/ know at that point, shrugged a last time,
and picked up the phone to order everything in inches.

Would you have done differently?

(The software that goes with the gizmo has been written to
automatically set itself up wo work in either inches or mm at
runtime - I figured that I owed my metric friend at least that much
consideration.)

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/SuperZero.html

"Morris Dovey" wrote:

The first customer was in Sweden so I figured it'd be
cool to go metric...

snip a list of US v metric price comparisons

Added up the costs I /did/ know at that point, shrugged a last time,
and picked up the phone to order everything in inches.

Would you have done differently?

I would have given the customer a choice along with the respective
prices.

It becomes his choice.

He may have some very good reasons for needing metric.

Lew