Metric or Imperial

[marcus]

I grew up with metric, but I use imperial most of the time 'cause the numbers seem more straightforward to me at the scale furniture. Except I switch to mm "on the fly" when dividing things into equal parts, and for some very small measurements 'cause I find I loose track of all those 32nds on a rule.....

 

[Inspector]

Imperial fractions in the shop and imperial decimal at work. Boeing still specifies in imperial even on the 787 that has the sub-assemblies made all over the world. :roll: I can work in metric if needed but I hate converting back and forth because it makes a mistake more likely.

 

[Vann]

What really gets me though, when people come in wanting steel plate cut, usually from the agricultural fraternity, 550mm x 13 1/4" :roll: :lol:

Hey thats me!!!!

I can work in either but I prefer metric for fine working - though I often ask for a length of 4x2 when I want nominal 100mm x 50mm.

One thing that puts me off imperial these days is the American practice of using inches and decimals instaed of inches and fractions.

Cheers, Vann :lol:

 

[Raggy]

I use both as in my engineering job most of the drawings are from the 60's so are still in imperial but I was educated using metric.

 

[dunbarhamlin]

Brought up with both, but always Imperial by choice. The units are closer to useful real world sizes, (inches, feet, cubits, fathoms, poles etc) and 1/16" or even 1/32" ruler graduations are clearer for me than mmmms because of the binary chops. 5 or 10 close together marks are harder to distinguish for my eyes - always have been, even before I needed specs (don't like 1/10" graduations for the same reason.)
Perversley below 1/32" I tend to switch to 1/1000" for fine measurement - easier than ~1/40mmmm
The numbers are too big for easy visualisation in the froggy system (and it's crap for teaching maths (learning to scale by a factor of ten isn't exactly stretching the little dears.))

 

[Benchwayze]

Mostly Imperial for me. Bought up on it.
I know the basic 'exchange rate' in mm's, but if I see 600 mm I have to stop and think. My tape measures have both of course, but I use them only for initial cutting stock and drawing a rod. (And for converting too!) After that, I work from the rod and by taking comparisons from the job.

I readily agree. Decimal monies are much easier to work with... Celsius to Fahrenheit? A demon's formula to me.

 

[MikeG.]

Hi
I do not say one system is any more accurate than another, after all America put a man on the moon and they use the imperial unit of measurement.
Cheers
Con

It was confusion between metric and imperial measurements that caused the multi-million dollar failure of a recent Nasa expedition to Mars. I'm not sure of the exact details, but apparently one of the sub-contracted components was made incorrectly due to a mis-conversion from Imperial to metric. The thing crashed!

When I was just a retired cricketer building my first house, I used imperial. As soon as I started on the road to becoming an architect, metric was inevitable. I am equally at ease it both, but now work virtually exclusively in metric even on my own furniture projects.

Miike

 

[Benchwayze]

What really gets me though, when people come in wanting steel plate cut, usually from the agricultural fraternity, 550mm x 13 1/4" :roll: :lol:

Hey thats me!!!!

I can work in either but I prefer metric for fine working - though I often ask for a length of 4x2 when I want nominal 100mm x 50mm.

One thing that puts me off imperial these days is the American practice of using inches and decimals instaed of inches and fractions.

Cheers, Vann :lol:

I think the 2.5 inches thing is because most people don't know how to make a PC keyboard express it as 2½". I have to copy and paste from Word to do it, but that only copes with a quarter, half and three-quarters..

 

[BradNaylor]

At school in the 1960's I belonged to one of the last generations educated exclusively in imperial measurements.

I still think in terms of feet and inches when estimating a measurement. For instance if I look at an alcove in a client's house which needs filling with a piece of furniture I might think 'That's about 4' wide and about 8' high'.

Likewise, when I am buying timber I am thinking 'I need about 12 planks 8' long x 1" thick x about 6" wide - that's 4 cubic feet.'

In the workshop however, I use the metric system exclusively. My favourite Starrett tape measures have only metric measurements on them. This is simply because it makes calculating componant sizes so much simpler. I often use spreadsheets to compile my cutting lists; enter the finished dimensions of a piece of furniture and my pre-prepared spreadsheet will immediately give me the size of every componant. This would be impossible using imperial measurements.

Likewise using a calculator. I have one glued to the wall by my bench, which I use every day for things like working out the length of door rails including the tenons once the stiles have been machined and cut. The thought of using imperial measurements for this is just crazy.

eg 14 3/4" - (2 x 2 3/8") + (2 x 9/16") = ?????:duno:


Metric is just so much easier!

Cheers
Dan

 

[filsgreen]

I chose the Imperial system because I was taught it, but I'm now slowly converting to Metric; I find it far easier.

 

[John. B]

I use whatever is convenient at the time,
however as far as height and weight is concerned I still think in Feet & inches and stones as apposed to kilo's.
(mind you, I am one of the old gits)

John. B

 

[Derek Willis.]

I always try to work in metric, although an imperial measurement creeps in now and again, I received my first metric drawing for estimating back in 1965 and so I have had time to get used to it.
Metric measurement is much easier when setting out large sites such as office blocks, school buildings etc. and with the advent of the first calculator in 1968 made it all that much easier. So Metric for me.
Derek.

 

[woodbloke]

At school in the 1960's I belonged to one of the last generations educated exclusively in imperial measurements.

I still think in terms of feet and inches when estimating a measurement. For instance if I look at an alcove in a client's house which needs filling with a piece of furniture I might think 'That's about 4' wide and about 8' high'.

Likewise, when I am buying timber I am thinking 'I need about 12 planks 8' long x 1" thick x about 6" wide - that's 4 cubic feet.'

In the workshop however, I use the metric system exclusively. My favourite Starrett tape measures have only metric measurements on them. This is simply because it makes calculating componant sizes so much simpler. I often use spreadsheets to compile my cutting lists; enter the finished dimensions of a piece of furniture and my pre-prepared spreadsheet will immediately give me the size of every componant. This would be impossible using imperial measurements.

Likewise using a calculator. I have one glued to the wall by my bench, which I use every day for things like working out the length of door rails including the tenons once the stiles have been machined and cut. The thought of using imperial measurements for this is just crazy.

eg 14 3/4" - (2 x 2 3/8") + (2 x 9/16") = ?????:duno:


Metric is just so much easier!

Cheers
Dan

I agree with Dan here...metric is just so much easier! Dan's sum is

375 - 2x60 + 2x14
375 - 120 + 28 (unless I've done the conversions wrong )

Which is easier to sort out?...no contest if you think about it - Rob

 

[bobscarle]

I use metric when measuring although I tend to think in Imperial. I just seems easier to visualise 2 inches instead of 50mm, not sure why. Another thing I do is when cutting a piece to use both, eg 70mm x 20mm x 4 feet :shock: .

No wonder nothing fits!

Bob

 

[ivan]

I was at school until the early 1960's. Imperial only in the juniors, and cgs system (cm, gramme, second) came in in chemistry and physics, so I'm "ambidextrous". MKS is now the scientific standard, I think. I have worked in metric since metric tools/tooling became available, as I find it easier. (Apart from small measure - my micrometers and dial gauge are pre metric, and so I still use thou) 101% metrication is difficult in woodworking, as a lot of standard dimensions were converted directly from imperial, to rather messy metric numbers. My children, 40 ish, were taught all metric and get confused by yards!

 

[Paul Chapman]

if you think about it

That, surely, is the issue - how you think about it. For those of us who think in imperial, it's very easy to make mistakes when trying to think in metric.

And what does it matter for the hobby woodworker - the piece of wood is still the same length, however you measure it :wink:

Cheers :wink:

Paul

PS Could always use a rod, I suppose :-k :lol:

 

[Benchwayze]

if you think about it

That, surely, is the issue - how you think about it. For those of us who think in imperial, it's very easy to make mistakes when trying to think in metric.

And what does it matter for the hobby woodworker - the piece of wood is still the same length, however you measure it :wink:

Cheers :wink:

Paul

PS Could always use a rod, I suppose :-k :lol:

Not impossible to be 'caught' out with a rod, if you are not thinking for the day!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[jpt]

I think in Imperial but use both Imperial and metric when measuring things out.

Mind you I still think 10 bob is a lot of money for a mars bar.

john

 

[Benchwayze]

Using a rod removes the margin for error?
Hmmm.
I made a hinged cupboard to fit into a door opening for a friend.
To save myself grief, I decided to take the measurements of the opening using a 7 foot piece of 3 x 1 (75mm x 25 mm)

That was fine, until I used the wrong 'short dimension' on the improvised rod, to draw up the actual rod. I didn't realise the mistake until I'd made the frames, and noticed they looked narrower than usual!

I still have the corresponding 'too-narrow' frames and panels in my shop. Mahogany too! Well they remind me to mark the rod propely in future.

So Metric or Imperial would've made no diffrence!

 

[pooka]

I grew up with imperial (in fact, our road signs were only changed to metric in 2005), but I try to use metric as much as possible due to it being easier. However, all of my measuring tapes have both so I sometimes end up switching between metric and imperial when reading measurements off the tape (I choose whichever figure is closest). Mind you, despite believing that metric is easier I occasionally have moments of complete stupidity where I put the decimal point in the wrong place in metric measurements - I think I get lazy when dealing in multiples of then and get careless as a result.

Despite trying though, I can't get myself to think in terms of kilometres. All of my estimates of what constitutes a reasonable distance for a training ride on my bicycle, a decent average speed on the bike, good fuel economy in my car, etc, are still based on miles. It doesn't help that my car speedometer shows mph primarily, petrol station pumps measure in litres, road signs use only kms, older maps show miles primarily, etc. I probably spend most of my time confused. :?