Why we must go metric - cold turkey - now. - Page 31
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 31 of 34 FirstFirst ... 212930313233 ... LastLast
Results 601 to 620 of 676
  1. #601
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,240
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3366
    Likes (Received)
    5320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill D View Post
    Maybe would should change railroad track gauge to some metric standard but wider then the current 4'8 1/2 inches. which is a hold over from Roman road builders. Who made their roads to match prexisting wagon ruts. Probably goes back to the ancient Egyptians first wheeled cart. Then Pontiac had to invent the "wide track"
    Bill D
    I suppose "standard" depends on which country decides what "standard" is.

    A history of track gauge | Trains Magazine

    The width of railroad tracks is based on history that extends back to Roman chariots-Fiction!

  2. Likes Spinit liked this post
  3. #602
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Country
    CHINA
    Posts
    1,706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    746

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    Would you buy 50 x 100 if it was given as 1.9685" x 3.937"?

    Notice how inches go to mm with less decimals?

    A thought. When's the last time anyone measured 2" x 4" to make sure it wasn't in fact 50 x 100mm?
    I hope you know they really are 2" by 4" ? When they are rough .... to create finished lumber they lose 1/4" off a side.

    I did notice that since a litre is smaller than a quart, the beverage industry jumped at the chance to re-size all the bottles ... at the same price, of course Like I said, give them a reason and industry is all over the metric system. In cases where it's stupid, not so much. Like measuring swimming pools in cc's.

  4. #603
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    3,080
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1321
    Likes (Received)
    1562

    Default

    Anybody who has trouble with 2x4's is really going to freak over "sixteen penny" nails. You mean I have to pay sixteen cents for each nail?



    Dennis

  5. Likes Scottl, digger doug, Spinit liked this post
  6. #604
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,240
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3366
    Likes (Received)
    5320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeaMoss View Post
    I hope you know they really are 2" by 4" ? When they are rough .... to create finished lumber they lose 1/4" off a side.
    I didn't know for the simple reason I don't buy my "lumber" in inches. I do know though that 50 x 100 is slightly smaller than those 2 dimensions. Probably sold as 45 x 95mm.

  7. #605
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,240
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3366
    Likes (Received)
    5320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modelman View Post
    Anybody who has trouble with 2x4's is really going to freak over "sixteen penny" nails. You mean I have to pay sixteen cents for each nail?



    Dennis
    I'd imagine most who are used to metric would have a problem with 2 x 4.

    I also have no idea what a "penny" nail is. BTW a "nail" here is a "søm".

  8. #606
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,841
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2272
    Likes (Received)
    2535

    Default

    I have seen and used 2x4s that were made 2x4.. Detroit was made much with walnut 2x4 that measured to the size because walnut was common in the early years and correct full size was common. Now with construction standards it has been figures that the new size is adequate. I have no problem with that..but still many of the old houses stand and are used…To repair the old house one may need a special 2x4 cut to full size…Old iron and last forever machines were built like a tank..today we often can get the same efficiency with less weight and cost…Good for that..in some cases, just like modern 2x4s..

    I know someone will say look at Detroit now and what a mess..but that has nothing to do with the OP.

    Going metric is much the same…We seem to be gradually doing that in many sectors..still I have no problem with standard copy paper being 8 ½ x 11”.. Calling it 215.6 x 279.4 mm would not make that paper any better and would waste ink just writing down the description... Making it 215 x 279mm would cost the world a huge wasted fortune..Go figure.

  9. Likes Scottl, Spinit liked this post
  10. #607
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    3,824
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3341
    Likes (Received)
    3116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    I have seen and used 2x4s that were made 2x4.. Detroit was made much with walnut 2x4 that measured to the size because walnut was common in the early years and correct full size was common. Now with construction standards it has been figures that the new size is adequate. I have no problem with that..but still many of the old houses stand and are used…To repair the old house one may need a special 2x4 cut to full size…Old iron and last forever machines were built like a tank..today we often can get the same efficiency with less weight and cost…Good for that..in some cases, just like modern 2x4s..

    I know someone will say look at Detroit now and what a mess..but that has nothing to do with the OP.

    Going metric is much the same…We seem to be gradually doing that in many sectors..still I have no problem with standard copy paper being 8 ½ x 11”.. Calling it 215.6 x 279.4 mm would not make that paper any better and would waste ink just writing down the description... Making it 215 x 279mm would cost the world a huge wasted fortune..Go figure.
    Around here carpenters dealing with the older rough sawn lumber in remodeling usually either rip down wider lumber or pad out the modern stuff with thin strips. The thickness of 1-1/2" versus 2" usually doesn't matter, only the spacing between sheet goods.

  11. #608
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,841
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2272
    Likes (Received)
    2535

    Default

    Around here carpenters dealing with the older rough sawn lumber in remodeling usually either rip down wider lumber or pad out the modern stuff with thin strips. The thickness of 1-1/2" versus 2" usually doesn't matter, only the spacing between sheet goods.

    Much the same..or if an Amish lumber works close just have the guys cut what you need…

  12. #609
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    3,824
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3341
    Likes (Received)
    3116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    Around here carpenters dealing with the older rough sawn lumber in remodeling usually either rip down wider lumber or pad out the modern stuff with thin strips. The thickness of 1-1/2" versus 2" usually doesn't matter, only the spacing between sheet goods.

    Much the same..or if an Amish lumber works close just have the guys cut what you need…
    Nearest sawmill that I know of is over an hour away. Most of the work on older framing involves blocking off old interior doorways and the like so ripping down 2x6s or padding out a few 2x4s is preferable to a long drive. Additions get framed just like new construction so no issues there.

    Interesting thing is that when using PEX or similar plastic tubing for plumbing it would seem to have been an opportunity to switch to metric sizing and yet they are still inch. Other than a few guys like Miguel and those overseas no one else seems to give a shit what we do internally for construction, facilities, and infrastructure.

    One thing if we ever go fully metric to "gain the simplicity" of everything divisible by ten is we'll have to do something about those pesky hours, minutes, and seconds. And then there's that terrible issue of 365 days in a year. It's a wonder people can keep appointments straight.

  13. #610
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,841
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2272
    Likes (Received)
    2535

    Default

    365 days x 24 hours = 8760 .. Wow this whole world is such a mess.. and then we need a leap year..Guess someona shoulda told God about Messtrickks

  14. #611
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Country
    FINLAND
    Posts
    833
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    198
    Likes (Received)
    386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    Huh? Did you understand what I wrote? As a matter of fact I build quite a few thing in my garden and know that there is no wood that has the denomination 50 x 100. Not sure what it is a 6th grader should know.
    Say what? 5x1 sahattu - Runkopuut - Tervetuloa Byggmaxiin!
    OK, I admit 48x98 is lot more common nowadays.

    50x100 is sawn
    48x98 is coarse planed to +-1mm (what they use most often in here, called "dimensioned timber")
    45x95 planed to for finish.

    Weirdly enough "american" 2x4 is 38x89. Goes with the pipe sizes

    Edit: the tolerance band for sawn 50x100 is -1..+3mm so that the four inches is actually pretty much exactly in the middle of the tolerances..

  15. #612
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    3,080
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1321
    Likes (Received)
    1562

    Default

    Just for information, the 1-1/2 x 3-1/2 inch dimensions for 2x4's are set by one of the lumber trade associations. Until WWII, they were bigger, 1-5/8 x 3-5/8, still "S4S", surfaced four sides. Used to run into that a lot remodling with Dad when I was a kid, strips of 1/8" masonite fixed the problem.

    Dennis
    Last edited by Modelman; 12-07-2017 at 11:50 AM. Reason: It's S4S, surfaced four sides.

  16. #613
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,240
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3366
    Likes (Received)
    5320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MattiJ View Post
    Weirdly enough "american" 2x4 is 38x89. Goes with the pipe sizes
    As with Whitworth pipe threads not really so weird. Based on internal pipe diameter not outside diameter.

  17. #614
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Country
    FINLAND
    Posts
    833
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    198
    Likes (Received)
    386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    As with Whitworth pipe threads not really so weird. Based on internal pipe diameter not outside diameter.
    yeah, "based on" = loosely related to id with pipe wall thickness 150 years ago.

  18. Likes digger doug liked this post
  19. #615
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,240
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3366
    Likes (Received)
    5320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MattiJ View Post
    yeah, "based on" = loosely related to id with pipe wall thickness 150 years ago.
    Don't know. Before my time

    http://www.iceweb.com.au/Tubings/Gla...ad_History.pdf

    "The size number was originally based on the inner diameter (measured in inches) of a steel tube for which the thread was intended, but contemporary pipes tend to use thinner walls to save material, and thus have an inner diameter larger than this nominal size."

    From:
    British Standard Pipe - Wikipedia

    http://www.masterpiece.dk/UploadetFi...e_UK(1)(1).pdf

    http://www.hahnreiter.de/docs/seite_14-15_en.pdf

  20. #616
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    3,080
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1321
    Likes (Received)
    1562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    Don't know. Before my time

    http://www.iceweb.com.au/Tubings/Gla...ad_History.pdf

    "The size number was originally based on the inner diameter (measured in inches) of a steel tube for which the thread was intended, but contemporary pipes tend to use thinner walls to save material, and thus have an inner diameter larger than this nominal size."
    Pretty much the same in the US. the size was the ID of Wrought Iron Pipe, when the material changed to steel the OD remained the same so the same cast iron fittings could be used, so the wall got thinner and the ID bigger. Then as the need arose for higher pressures, there came into being "double strength" and "extra heavy", all with the same OD but progressively smaller ID's. Now these designations have been formalized as Schedule 40, Schedule 80, and Schedule 160. All will thread into the same fittings, of course, you are supposed to use the proper schedule fittings for the working pressure.

    Dennis

  21. #617
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Country
    CHINA
    Posts
    1,706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    746

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modelman View Post
    Anybody who has trouble with 2x4's is really going to freak over "sixteen penny" nails. You mean I have to pay sixteen cents for each nail?

    Christmas is coming
    the goose is getting fat.
    Please to put a penny in this old man's hat !

    If you haven't got a penny
    a ha'penny will do.
    If you haven't got a ha'penny
    the kleptocrats got you too !



  22. Likes Modelman liked this post
  23. #618
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    21
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeaMoss View Post
    Oh damn why didn't I think of that ! If we only went metric then it would be easy to get core boards for a 2560 control ! Or a PDP-8 !

    If we were only metric then Orchard Supply would be stocked full of tool changer arms for an OM-1 !!

    I'm so stupid
    Im not against using inch standards if they are in common use, I just don't want to use proprietary standards that are no longer supported. I have worked with some great machines from the 40's and 50's that were well worth keeping. But under the same token I don't see people still using analog computers to control cnc machines.

    Basically all I am saying is being too resistant to change can cause problems as well. For example I inherited as partial set of metric work holding blocks that had most of the holes bored out and tapped for English threads. So now I have several blocks with metric hole patterns and English threads that are incompatible with everything of the shelf.

  24. Likes Gordon B. Clarke liked this post
  25. #619
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,240
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3366
    Likes (Received)
    5320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeaMoss View Post

    Christmas is coming
    the goose is getting fat.
    Please to put a penny in this old man's hat !

    If you haven't got a penny
    a ha'penny will do.
    If you haven't got a ha'penny
    the kleptocrats got you too !


    I'm getting the impression "you are losing it".

  26. #620
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    8,459
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4496
    Likes (Received)
    3792

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mud View Post
    Now tell them about the metric Jaguar wheels that you can't get tires for.
    Never heard of such. Ancient Ford wannabees once mounted French TRX / "Tension Repartee" weirdos if that was the memory.

    My X-350 series Jaguar (2005 XJ8-L) runs 18" X 8 1/2" wheels. Tire size is common enough. Tirerack.com lists 82 choices in the OEM 235/50R18 size.

    "Can't get" is largely about yer budget. Good tires are not cheap. Jaguar or pickup truck.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •