100' Tape Marked in Inches instead of feet?

1. Aluminum
Join Date
Oct 2014
Country
UNITED STATES
State/Province
South Dakota
Posts
83
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
2
7

## 100' Tape Marked in Inches instead of feet?

Every 100' tape I've seen is marked out in feet and inches. Is there such a thing as a tape that gives inches like a standard 25' tape? (13,14,..121,122,etc)(instead of 1' 1", 10' 1", etc)
Preferably metal blade. Would make much easier when marking out evenly spaced items along a long length to simply add inches instead of feet/inch.
I did find a feet/inch calculator app with a repeat calculation that may solve the issue since I haven't found a tape as described. Hate to pull out my phone for this tho.
Situation: Round structure 48' 5" in circumference. Mark out 8 legs evenly spaced. =72.625" or 6' 5/8". that one is pretty easy but say it comes out to 6' 3.6654". I don't do calculation well in my head:

2. Hot Rolled
Join Date
Dec 2012
Location
ny usa
Posts
617
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
0
291
Edited, just cuz.....

Quote: "I don't do calculation well in my head:"

You may be in the wrong business.

Shit lady, I must me dumb.

How the fuck do we do anything, without a tape measure that, and I quote, : " gives inches like a standard 25' tape? (13,14,..121,122,etc)(instead of 1' 1", 10' 1", etc)"

3. Aluminum
Join Date
Oct 2014
Country
UNITED STATES
State/Province
South Dakota
Posts
83
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
2
7
So Maybe I could have explained more clearly.....
What method would you use to mark out something spaced like this?

Inches 72.625 145.25 217.875 290.5 363.125 435.75 508.375 581
Foot/Inch 6' 5/8" 12' 1 1/4" 18' 1 7/8" 24' 2 1/2" 30' 3 1/8" 36' 3 3/4" 42' 4 3/8" 48' 5"

4. Join Date
May 2010
Country
DENMARK
Posts
4,079
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
4126
12881
You don't get it do you? The USA is going metric. Inch by inch.

How many machines, and especially manual, work in fractions and not in decimals?

5. Diamond
Join Date
Jan 2002
Location
West Coast, USA
Posts
8,692
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
582
6180
Barring the metric option, surveyor's tapes are marked in decimal feet. I'll generally use a divider or beam compass, set to the chord, to rough out even increments along a circle if "close" is good enough. Easy to get within .02" or so.

6. Titanium
Join Date
Jan 2007
Location
Pinckney Mi.
Posts
3,020
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
6658
885
Oh man, Fabbers use ft. along with inchs, one more caculation, I have learned
(kinda) to live with it,cant help the OP.
Gw

7. Join Date
May 2010
Country
DENMARK
Posts
4,079
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
4126
12881
Originally Posted by BRHMFG
Every 100' tape I've seen is marked out in feet and inches. Is there such a thing as a tape that gives inches like a standard 25' tape? (13,14,..121,122,etc)(instead of 1' 1", 10' 1", etc)
Preferably metal blade. Would make much easier when marking out evenly spaced items along a long length to simply add inches instead of feet/inch.
I did find a feet/inch calculator app with a repeat calculation that may solve the issue since I haven't found a tape as described. Hate to pull out my phone for this tho.
Situation: Round structure 48' 5" in circumference. Mark out 8 legs evenly spaced. =72.625" or 6' 5/8". that one is pretty easy but say it comes out to 6' 3.6654". I don't do calculation well in my head:
On thinking about that what I'd do if it is a problem is buy a metric tape and, if you still want to know dimensions in inches, just divide by 25.4. 10 seconds tops?

In fact with a metric tape just forget inches and mm. All you'd be thinking about are numbers that are easy to divide.

Stanley Open Reel Long Tape Measure 30m/100' x 12mm | Screwfix.eu

8. Diamond
Join Date
Oct 2005
Country
UNITED STATES
State/Province
Pennsylvania
Posts
18,880
Post Thanks / Like
Originally Posted by BRHMFG
So Maybe I could have explained more clearly.....
What method would you use to mark out something spaced like this?

Inches 72.625 145.25 217.875 290.5 363.125 435.75 508.375 581
Foot/Inch 6' 5/8" 12' 1 1/4" 18' 1 7/8" 24' 2 1/2" 30' 3 1/8" 36' 3 3/4" 42' 4 3/8" 48' 5"
run your chart thru a spreadsheet, to create a new chart with feet and inches.

Look up next dim on chart, slide finger along tape until number on tape
matches number on sheet....

9. Cast Iron
Join Date
Dec 2008
Location
N.E. Illinois
Posts
448
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
116
226
Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke
You don't get it do you? The USA is going metric. Inch by inch.

How many machines, and especially manual, work in fractions and not in decimals?
Gordon, how many times do I have to tell you and my college age kids the metric system is a passing fad! It'll never catch on.

10. Join Date
May 2010
Country
DENMARK
Posts
4,079
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
4126
12881
Originally Posted by gmach10
Gordon, how many times do I have to tell you and my college age kids the metric system is a passing fad! It'll never catch on.
What I suggested wasn't the metric system, just a "system" where numbers were easy to work with. Not to worry though there are a couple of countries where your college age kids can get a job.

"At this time, only three countries — Burma, Liberia, and the US—have not adopted the International System of Units (SI, or metric system) as their official system of weights and measures."

11. Stainless
Join Date
Aug 2015
Country
UNITED STATES
State/Province
Illinois
Posts
1,526
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
1133
653
Except for carpentry, architecture, and maybe cabinet making I see little use of foot-inch-fraction dimensions. Surveying, land development, highways, etc. will have the primary measurements in decimal feet. Pipe diameters, pavement thicknesses, and small stuff are generally in inches. In the shop I work in inches, either fraction or decimal. Decimal is definitely easier.

12. Join Date
May 2010
Country
DENMARK
Posts
4,079
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
4126
12881
Originally Posted by Illinoyance
Except for carpentry, architecture, and maybe cabinet making I see little use of foot-inch-fraction dimensions. Surveying, land development, highways, etc. will have the primary measurements in decimal feet. Pipe diameters, pavement thicknesses, and small stuff are generally in inches. In the shop I work in inches, either fraction or decimal. Decimal is definitely easier.
In the metric countries fractions are normal - in conversations.

Pipe threads are almost always in inches but they, as good as always, refer to the pipe ID and not the OD.

13. Aluminum
Join Date
Apr 2008
Location
Michigan
Posts
52
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
0
39
Not everyone can... will... or want to understand the reason or purpose for your objective.

I have altered conventional steel tapes in the past for field work using a "Sharpie" permanent marker.
Depending on how often you use the tape, portions of it will get degraded and will require re-marking the tape.
You may discover that you only need to identify/label certain places along the tape as it pertains to your project.

Will it take some time to make a tape for your specific purpose? Of course.

Sometimes in this big ole world of saturated product choices; you still have to make your own, or go with out.

John

14. Join Date
May 2010
Country
DENMARK
Posts
4,079
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
4126
12881
Originally Posted by d'Arsonval
1. Will it take some time to make a tape for your specific purpose? Of course.

2. Sometimes in this big ole world of saturated product choices; you still have to make your own, or go with out.

John
ad 1. The "specific purpose" I believe the operator has is mostly dividing a circumference or length up into even spaces. This can be done easily by using a metric tape and dividing the number shown as either the circumference or length. Numbers in this case are just numbers.

ad 2. True but why make something if it isn't necessary?

Some of you seem to live by "Why do things easy if they can be done complicated?"

15. Stainless
Join Date
Feb 2007
Location
aurora ohio
Posts
1,128
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
81
197
Just to throw more crappola into the game, I've got an old Lufkin 50FT. tape; That's marked up to 600 inches.
But, marked "consecutive inches in tenths" . The graduations between the inch marks are in tenths of an inch.; dave [acme thread]

16. Hot Rolled
Join Date
Dec 2012
Location
ny usa
Posts
617
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
0
291
I was going to call someone who gives a fuck. And then I realized.....

I guess you'd really pop out your tampon if a horseman needed something for an animal that was 11.5 hands high, eh?

Not really sure why this thread began. I mean, are you confused about how many licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie pop?

17. I confess to being surprised - though I shouldn't be - at the number of replies that consist of, "the OP is dumb." Some of them are expressed in quite a nice way, but still amount to the same thing.

Would a metric tape be easier to use in this particular application? Possibly ... but possibly not. The circumference is 581", and needs to be divided into 8 segments, each 72-5/8" long. That works out to 14757.4mm in circumference; divided by 8 gives 1844.675mm per part. Which would you rather be adding up ... in your head ... as you are marking it out?

Meanwhile, I have no idea of the OP's context (and oddly, I'm guessing that no one else here does either). It sounds like this might be a one-off; we don't know if this is actually a paying job or just a favor, or even an assignment from the boss. Finding a 30,480mm tape might not be so easy in the US, and probably costs many times as much as an inch-based tape. Guess what? It turns out that even those of us who are perfectly comfortable thinking metric, if we happen to live in a non-metric country, don't actually have control over what the rest of the country does, what merchants offer for sale, or anything else. How odd ... but true. We could whine about it, but meanwhile the project is waiting, and here's a foot-inch tape right at hand.

And still, the whole metric/decimal/fractional debate is utterly beside the point. Regardless of what system you use, you can and will often find yourself dealing with fractions and remainders, or the equivalent thereof. What if you are working with a lathe or mill that has something like a 4mm pitch on the lead screw - or worse yet, a 3 or 6. Now you need to move 125mm. Let's see, how many times does the dial have to go around, and how much will be left over ... ? If you haven't yet dropped a revolution by accident, or forgot to carry the one, or so on, you must either be perfect and therefore should not be associating with the rest of us, OR you just haven't been working very long.

Of course, a DRO would solve the above problem neatly ... just as it would if you were measuring in inches. But it's awfully hard to wrap a DRO around a 581 inch circumference.

Again, it comes as an enormous surprise, but could it possibly be that no system is perfect? Could it be that in fact none is inherently better than another? Perhaps each is simply a language, each one better at saying some things than others, but both capable of conveying every bit of precision needed - ???

And yet, while a few have offered helpful alternatives, no one yet has offered a simple answer to the OP's question: is there a ready source for a 1200" tape marked in inches rather than in feet/inches? I'll offer my simple answer: I don't know.

You're welcome.

18. Diamond
Join Date
Oct 2005
Country
UNITED STATES
State/Province
Pennsylvania
Posts
18,880
Post Thanks / Like
Just to throw more crappola into the game, I've got an old Lufkin 50FT. tape; That's marked up to 600 inches.
But, marked "consecutive inches in tenths" . The graduations between the inch marks are in tenths of an inch.; dave [acme thread]
I have a 12' pocket version, they were handing them out to the burn table operators.

19. Join Date
May 2010
Country
DENMARK
Posts
4,079
Post Thanks / Like
Likes (Given)
4126
12881
Originally Posted by awake
Would a metric tape be easier to use in this particular application? Possibly ... but possibly not. The circumference is 581", and needs to be divided into 8 segments, each 72-5/8" long. That works out to 14757.4mm in circumference; divided by 8 gives 1844.675mm per part. Which would you rather be adding up ... in your head ... as you are marking it out?
The OP wrote in his OP that he didn't like doing calculations in his head. Dividing 581" into 8 parts isn't easy no matter if it's in inches or mm. Any pocket calculator can do it in seconds.

If a tape measure is used then it's bloody nonsense trying to get it more accurate than to the nearest mm and either rounding up or down depending on which is closer.

"1844.675mm"? Bloody hell, your taking that to 1/1000 of a mm and with a tape measure. 0.001mm is close to 0.00004". Not exactly tape measure accuracy - right?

20. Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke
The OP wrote in his OP that he didn't like doing calculations in his head. Dividing 581" into 8 parts isn't easy no matter if it's in inches or mm. Any pocket calculator can do it in seconds.

If a tape measure is used then it's bloody nonsense trying to get it more accurate than to the nearest mm and either rounding up or down depending on which is closer.

"1844.675mm"? Bloody hell, your taking that to 1/1000 of a mm and with a tape measure. 0.001mm is close to 0.00004". Not exactly tape measure accuracy - right?
Oh, certainly, no one would try to measure to .001mm with a tape measure! But you will have to do something with the .675 "left over" after the division. Do you round up once, and use 1845 every time? If so, you're building up to a total of > 2.5mm error. Maybe that's plenty close ... maybe not. Meanwhile, though, with a plain old inch tape, marked with 1/8" increments, there is no rounding error involved - just read to the 1/8" mark every single time. No guessing, no "should I round up or down this time," just the "exact" measurement - as exact as one can be with a measuring tape.

The point is, again, that one system is not inherently better than another; they each have different strengths. Yes, the metric system is based entirely on factors of 10 - very simple indeed. It can even be divided evenly by 2 and 5. Great! But an absolute pain in the butt when you have to divide by 3 or 6. Meanwhile, the terrible, awful, no-good inch-foot system has units that can be divided evenly by 2,3,4, and 6 - just not by 5. Which one is better? It depends entirely on which division you need at any given moment. Either one is going to leave you with awkward rounding errors sometimes, and work out brilliantly other times.

Is English better than Danish? Cantonese better than Greek? Spanish better than Swahili? Surely these are foolish questions! One language is not inherently better than another; they are simply different. Surely the best option is to be multilingual - speak metric when it is helpful and/or is the local lingua franca, and speak inches when it is helpful and/or is the local lingua franca. To insist that everyone should only speak one language, as though your language is inevitably superior to all others, is ... well, I'll not go down that road.