• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

metric vs standard

metric vs standard

  • standard

    Votes: 9 30.0%

  • metric

    Votes: 20 66.7%

  • british standard

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • other

    Votes: 1 3.3%

  • I measure cow hooves to three shades of the wind

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    30
beerftw

beerftw

proud ammosexual
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
19,711
Reaction score
5,946
Location
kekistan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I did a thread a long time ago about the british returning to standard as they are currently mixed. This thread however is about standard vs metric, Myself I prefer standard, it is human oriented and even european countries in one way or another defy metric during construction.

Now my sig says it all, my car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, which I forget the conversion but it is absolutely horrible mpg, something like 3 mpg. keep in mind rod and a hogshead are legitimate imperial measurements.
[/URL]
 
I just want to know how many rods per butt my car gets. ;)
 
My only problem with the Standard system is that while a pound weighs a pound a hundredweight weighs 112 pounds because somewhere along the line they started measuring in stones.

I know that metric is supposed to be easier but I was raised on US Customary units and that's what I like, damn it.
 
Phys251 said:
I just want to know how many rods per butt my car gets. ;)
Click to expand...

Not sure but I googled 40 rods to the hogshead which equals 63 gallons to the mile.
 
Lutherf said:
My only problem with the Standard system is that while a pound weighs a pound a hundredweight weighs 112 pounds because somewhere along the line they started measuring in stones.

I know that metric is supposed to be easier but I was raised on US Customary units and that's what I like, damn it.
Click to expand...

English is wierd that every measurement has to be dividable by something other than ten, they even changed their currency to decible because the rest of europe was too uneducated to understand 12th's when dealing with money.
 
Lutherf said:
My only problem with the Standard system is that while a pound weighs a pound a hundredweight weighs 112 pounds because somewhere along the line they started measuring in stones.

I know that metric is supposed to be easier but I was raised on US Customary units and that's what I like, damn it.
Click to expand...

Metric is much better for scientific calculations but the the us customary is better for describing the actual everyday measurements
 
Metric is standard..
 
I like base 10 systems.

Give me metric, any day! :thumbs:
 
SI units are best units. Can any of you Imperial supporters tell me from the top of your head how many BTU's it takes to heat one gallon of water by 25 degrees farenheit?
 
I really don't care. I'm an engineer working for a German company so I use metric pretty much exclusively at work. And I use Imperial the rest of the time. I don't have any issues with either one.
 
The high today will be 10 deg C. I prefer hearing it will be 50.
 
spud_meister said:
SI units are best units. Can any of you Imperial supporters tell me from the top of your head how many BTU's it takes to heat one gallon of water by 25 degrees farenheit?
Click to expand...

No, but 300 Horsepower sounds better than 224 Kjoule
 
I spent a few years in the repair shop of automobiles. In the early days, (late 60’s thru 70’s), you could count on standard fasteners used to hold them together. 3/8”, 7/16 and so on. After a while your could tell the size wrench you needed from sight. Then in the 80’s someone decided that the auto industry ought to get in line with the rest of the world and took up the metric banner. The difficulty was that they only changed less that half of the fasteners, causing mechanic to buy many more tools. The US manufactures also used completely different sizes that the Germans and Japanese. On German cars you would find 10mm, 13mm,
17mm among others. The Asians used 10mm, 12mm, 14mm, and 17mm. The US introduced off size fasteners like 18mm and 16mm. It was costly for the guys in the shop to keep up. The auto industry as a whole regularly come up with newer style fasteners
(Tor-x, star and other fittings that require specialty tools to tighten and loosen.
 
Mankind didn't set foot on the moon as a result of using fractions.



That's all I gotta say about that.
 
I like metric. When building little wood projects around the house and outside, it is much easier to measure my lengths in CM or MM than fractions.
However, I need to bring a tape measure and a gauge with me when I go to the hardware store to get what I need.
I can estimate for the next few generations we will be using both. Change comes slow, but the more veterans we have the easier it will be.
Clicks and millimeters come easy to them.
 
Got to go with metric. Cutting stairs is much easier using metric. As it is, I have two roll away toolboxes; one for each system. In the US we certainly mix systems. We buy 2 liters of pop, a 1/4 lb hamburger, and Chinese made plumbing fixtures which are some thread system all their own.
 
KevinKohler said:
Mankind didn't set foot on the moon as a result of using fractions.



That's all I gotta say about that.
Click to expand...

Actually it did, the computers were programmed with metric, but relayed all infor and recieved it in standard, and nasa used standard for ever, infact they are still transitioning even though they decided to go metric not too long ago. So technically yes fractional did land people on the moon, it also created computers as most early computers were built using standard and a slide rule, and slide rules were also used for some very impressive structures today, and was a very effective measurement system.
 
i prefer metric for work, and standard for day to day stuff.
 
beerftw said:
I did a thread a long time ago about the british returning to standard as they are currently mixed. This thread however is about standard vs metric, Myself I prefer standard, it is human oriented and even european countries in one way or another defy metric during construction.

Now my sig says it all, my car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, which I forget the conversion but it is absolutely horrible mpg, something like 3 mpg. keep in mind rod and a hogshead are legitimate imperial measurements.
[/URL]
Click to expand...


What's 'standard' and 'british standard'? Is 'british standard' what I call Imperial? Metric is easier to work with but I never made the conversion completely when it's a tape measure involved. You can be really accurate with millimetres but I still can't visualize what 3.75 metres looks like laying on the ground. 12 ft. 3 I can spot easier.
 
spud_meister said:
SI units are best units. Can any of you Imperial supporters tell me from the top of your head how many BTU's it takes to heat one gallon of water by 25 degrees farenheit?
Click to expand...

Will anyone but a scientist ever need to?
 
Grand Mal said:
What's 'standard' and 'british standard'? Is 'british standard' what I call Imperial? Metric is easier to work with but I never made the conversion completely when it's a tape measure involved. You can be really accurate with millimetres but I still can't visualize what 3.75 metres looks like laying on the ground. 12 ft. 3 I can spot easier.
Click to expand...

Us standard is us customary which is 75% identical to british standard, british do things a little different though, A mile inch and pound are the same but a british gallon is more than an american one, as is a british pint.
 
To answer the question, personally, I don't care. I'm perfectly comfortable using either.

But on a day-to-day, everyday-life basis, it doesn't matter. Either works perfectly well.

There's never a time when you're going to need to know how many teaspoons are in a gallon.

In any case, if we want to do away with an archaic, inefficient system based solely on parts of the body, we should do away with base 10. We should be using base 12.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom