why is the US not Metric

[Tepe]

Spillover from the non-metric world.

LOL. So when bsfeechannel states the dozens of metricated countries still producing and buying and selling and using non-metric fasteners is the direct result of America's intentional evil to disrupt him from changing the screws in his washing machine, you believe that, too?

Now you are being deliberately obtuse. 

I have said nothing about any ill-will or intentional evil on the part of anybody. The use of especially inches in the non-anglosphere, as opposed to old homegrown units, is obviously due to the former and present significance in trade and industry of the countries using, or having used,  British/American units. A result of success in export! Nothing wrong in that at all.

Non-anglosphere by and large means never part of the British Empire and hence having little interest in Whitworth threads and similar standards apart from repairing imported equipment and for export to places that want and need it. Nothing wrong in that either.

My point was that our own traditional units in Europe are dead and buried with wooden stakes through their little hearts and we only encounter yours because they blow over the fence, so to speak 
Depending on outlook, having them blow over the fence is either a harmless curiosity--something peculiar from a strange and wondrous land--or downright absurd. But is is not a result of evil.

[MT]

At the end of the day there are a lot of reasons people can hate on America. And I suspect this is a part of the reason for the animosity towards America's continued use of the old imperial system.

If this is the reasoning, a US change to metric is only a symbolic gesture. If this is a good enough reason, then America could change. Is it?

Or would all of the America-haters complaining about imperial still hate America for the actual good reasons, of which there is no particular shortage?

Of course they would!

This whole thread started and continues as US bashing.  It has nothing to do with metric, that is just a tag.

But the good news is that we (I) don't give a sh**.  We're not going to change so keep on hating.  Me, I've been retired for 16 years and don't really concern myself with details.  Life is good!

But, if you really are hating the US, why not encourage your politicians to forgo our money and military?  Maybe rebalance the trade?  Cut the ties.  Believe me, you won't be missed.

There are exactly 3 countries the US can rely on:  Australia, New Zealand and Great Britain (maybe just England).  Everybody else is just slurping at the hog trough.  Taking the money, bitching about the banker.

Be honest about your hatred and quit relying on our support.  We really do have better things to do with our people and money.

i would think Poland would be very worried after Tusk's little stunt at the NATO meeting.  It might have been funny in the EU and, perhaps even London, but it didn't sell that well in the US.  Given a vote, the US would have been out of NATO 50 years ago.

You and your boomer reasoning style are utterly stuck in the cold war era like a car radio in a Trabant fixated on Moscow channel, ofcourse lifes good for you and a mess for other Americans due to your arrogance and pompousness
and the self me,me,me ness. Boomers are known for this and their parents cries in their graves everyday over it.

[SparkyFX]

You and your boomer reasoning style are utterly stuck in the cold war era like a car radio in a Trabant fixated on Moscow channel

1) (stock) Trabants had no radio
2) try to avoid ad hominem arguments

[KL27x]

Tepe:

Now you are being deliberately obtuse. 

I have said nothing about any ill-will or intentional evil on the part of anybody. The use of especially inches in the non-anglosphere, as opposed to old homegrown units, is obviously due to the former and present significance in trade and industry of the countries using, or having used,  British/American units.

Thanks for that necessary clarification and try to be more careful in the future.

When you said these fasteners still exist "because of non-metric countries," there is only one "non-metric country" left in the world, aside from Liberanistan and Jimbobabwe. And these countries certainly aren't the reason that India and UK and Australia still have weird screws.

It's hard enough to keep this thread relevant with bsfeechannel and rstopher both in the area.

These fasteners still exist because they are still useful. People still need them, because of history. The fastener isn't "metric or imperial." It's made on a different machine, with a different lead screw pitch, a different lathe to carriage gearing, and a different cutter. If you want to you can describe that Whitworth screw in metric. You can call it a M3.4829 with 1.325284671 pitch, with 55 angle and rounded inside radii? Then add a machine drawing to clarify and quantify the myriad of other subtle differences. Or you can recognize that the Whitworth screw is a standard and call it a Whitworth screw of w/e specs Whitworth uses so that you don't need a machine drawing to communicate what you mean between buyer and seller.

I suppose Whitworth screws will be gone, someday. But in our lifetimes, it's easier just to learn to deal with them if and when you have to. If you have to read the datasheet at that time, because you have to cut these threads onto a custom part, then you will probably read the datasheet. To get the ID and OD and 55 degree angle of the threads, the thread pitch, and then ignore all the rest for now and see if it fits, yet. If you don't have a CNC lathe, this also means doing some math and buying or making some gears and making some mods to the the gear box. All in a days work for a machinist, wherever this is the best way to do it. No matter whether that's because it is better, faster, or cheaper than completely re-making, say, a very expensive piece of technology which might have decades or even centuries of life left in it and which you still want to use, now. In some cases, it could be something which if it broke today, you might not even replace it. In other cases, it's still printing money for you, and you will buy a new one, no matter what kind of screws are in it.

[bsfeechannel]

It's hard enough to keep this thread relevant with bsfeechannel and rstopher both in the area.

1) (stock) Trabants had no radio
2) try to avoid ad hominem arguments

Courtesy: SparkyFX

[KL27x]

v6kgzo:

It is a shame that the USA didn't manage to export their rationalised ton & gallon to the world, prior to Metric appearing.
Imagine how easy it would be to convert if there were 2 lbs to a kg, & 2000lbs to a ton/tonne, but, alas, that was not to be, & that part of  Metric grew from the already established traditional ton, gallons, etc.

If we had the internet back then, it would have been so much easier!

Hmm... so... I just figured something. A stone is 14 lb. 14 lb x 160 = 2240 lb.  So... what's the Brit obsession with the stone?   

OTOH, could Frenchy have made metric to fit better with imperial? There's not much good reason I can fathom why the meter has to be based on the circumference of the earth. Maybe it had to be completely different and appropriately sciencey in order to be accepted, but if Frenchy had wanted to, could he have made things more compatible?

But as it is, the only extra number I really seem to need in order to live with two systems is 2.54. So I think things worked out pretty good.                   

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
bsfeechannel:

No sir, a good engineer would also analyze why and how all others switched to a different solution than what is already in place and would study how to repeat the same successful experience.

You are not doing this. The "why" other countries did this is not nearly the same situation that modern America is in. Because of modern education and the internet. Also because of the size of our road system. Also, because of the manufacturing and machining history of America, upon which we relied on our own standard (we did not accept Brit standards made in 1825, because we had already gained our independence). We needed tools to build tools to make stuff. And we made them to our own internal standard, requiring and utilizing ever increasing degrees of precision and standardization. We did it in inches. We didn't care if they were compatible with the rest of the world, cuz we were on the other side of an ocean, and we were making stuff that didn't exist, yet. You just got your stuff from Britain and other EU countries. We were not part of that club.

Many of the former british colonies did not have much cost to changing, other than road signs and measuring cups. They were only changing a method of measuring the mud to build their homes and to measure the cuts to make their horse drawn carriages. Their economies were based on export of raw materials and import of things that were made with fancy tooling. More advanced nations sold tractors and logging equipment and mining equipment to these countries, so they could produce even more raw materials for export. And when they were asked to measure their raw materials in kg's, what the hell, why not? What the hell else would they do, since their measuring equipment was imported, too? All they wanted was continued mutually beneficial relationships and fair pay for their output. And then there are the politics, which I'm sure had some part in nearly every single metrication story.

Just when I get to think you are fairly rational, you post abject "duck poo" like the above.
Mud huts, my backside!

Even the least developed Commonwealth countries had far more complex economies than you suggest.
Australia has been an independent nation since 1901, &  had its own manufacturing sector of the economy.
Yes, some stuff was imported, but much of our needs, including measuring equipment was locally made.

Looks like my Keynesian world economics classes from 20 years ago are still pretty relevant to current day Australia.
https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/australia-is-rich-dumb-and-getting-dumber-20191007-p52y8i
99% of Australia's exports are raw materials, still, today.

Once again, this is not an insult. Australians are intelligent and educated and relatively wealthy. But you can say the same thing about Kuwait or Saudi Arabia.

My point is that even if US company like John Deere has been using metric only since the 80's, the equipment that they use to make these metric tractors is not necessarily all metric, itself.

The car plant that GM and Australia built was just an assembly plant. The pieces parts of the factory and the car parts that were sent there for the Australians to build were made in many countries, and some of that on machinery built around inches.

America has tech. Physical tech. Physical manufacturing/machining things. That are made in inches. Were desiged and made in inches since before this tech even existed. Stuff that was made at great expense during WWII and is still in service. It was made in times of need, and now we still have it. Think ToT's basement machine shop, but 50x bigger, to make giant cannons and imperial threaded parts that are 4 foot in diameter to go in earth moving equipment and battelships. This stuff is not going to be remade in metric. Some of this stuff, when it's finally clapped out, it going a graveyard and not going to be replaced... until there is more dire need of it to exist again. America has some real reasons to continue using inches that Australians did not to the same degree. Period. Australia had a very successful metrication compared to many other countries. And there are multiple reasons for that which are not so obvious maybe, when you just say "metric is obviously superior because..." Well, you have to look at the real world, too.

[bsfeechannel]

America has tech. Physical tech. Physical manufacturing/machining things. That are made in inches. Were desiged and made in inches since before this tech even existed. Stuff that was made at great expense during WWII and is still in service. It was made in times of need, and now we still have it. Think ToT's basement machine shop, but 50x bigger, to make giant cannons and imperial threaded parts that are 4 foot in diameter to go in earth moving equipment and battelships. This stuff is not going to be remade in metric. Some of this stuff, when it's finally clapped out, it going a graveyard and not going to be replaced... until there is more dire need of it to exist again.

This argument can be easily refuted by the fact that European countries, Japan, China and other industrialized economies adopted the metric system successfully, but not the US.

So now we have to answer the following question: Why is the US not metric, when all the other equally industrialized nations are?

It is certainly not because I can't provide a study with figures on the change of road signs to metric. (I can, but that'll cost you).

[vk6zgo]

v6kgzo:

It is a shame that the USA didn't manage to export their rationalised ton & gallon to the world, prior to Metric appearing.
Imagine how easy it would be to convert if there were 2 lbs to a kg, & 2000lbs to a ton/tonne, but, alas, that was not to be, & that part of  Metric grew from the already established traditional ton, gallons, etc.

If we had the internet back then, it would have been so much easier!

Hmm... so... I just figured something. A stone is 14 lb. 14 lb x 160 = 2240 lb.  So... what's the Brit obsession with the stone?   

OTOH, could Frenchy have made metric to fit better with imperial? There's not much good reason I can fathom why the meter has to be based on the circumference of the earth. Maybe it had to be completely different and appropriately sciencey in order to be accepted, but if Frenchy had wanted to, could he have made things more compatible?

But as it is, the only extra number I really seem to need in order to live with two systems is 2.54. So I think things worked out pretty good.                   

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
bsfeechannel:

No sir, a good engineer would also analyze why and how all others switched to a different solution than what is already in place and would study how to repeat the same successful experience.

You are not doing this. The "why" other countries did this is not nearly the same situation that modern America is in. Because of modern education and the internet. Also because of the size of our road system. Also, because of the manufacturing and machining history of America, upon which we relied on our own standard (we did not accept Brit standards made in 1825, because we had already gained our independence). We needed tools to build tools to make stuff. And we made them to our own internal standard, requiring and utilizing ever increasing degrees of precision and standardization. We did it in inches. We didn't care if they were compatible with the rest of the world, cuz we were on the other side of an ocean, and we were making stuff that didn't exist, yet. You just got your stuff from Britain and other EU countries. We were not part of that club.

Many of the former british colonies did not have much cost to changing, other than road signs and measuring cups. They were only changing a method of measuring the mud to build their homes and to measure the cuts to make their horse drawn carriages. Their economies were based on export of raw materials and import of things that were made with fancy tooling. More advanced nations sold tractors and logging equipment and mining equipment to these countries, so they could produce even more raw materials for export. And when they were asked to measure their raw materials in kg's, what the hell, why not? What the hell else would they do, since their measuring equipment was imported, too? All they wanted was continued mutually beneficial relationships and fair pay for their output. And then there are the politics, which I'm sure had some part in nearly every single metrication story.

Just when I get to think you are fairly rational, you post abject "duck poo" like the above.
Mud huts, my backside!

Even the least developed Commonwealth countries had far more complex economies than you suggest.
Australia has been an independent nation since 1901, &  had its own manufacturing sector of the economy.
Yes, some stuff was imported, but much of our needs, including measuring equipment was locally made.

Looks like my Keynesian world economics classes from 20 years ago are still pretty relevant to current day Australia.
https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/australia-is-rich-dumb-and-getting-dumber-20191007-p52y8i
99% of Australia's exports are raw materials, still, today.

Once again, this is not an insult. Australians are intelligent and educated and relatively wealthy. But you can say the same thing about Kuwait or Saudi Arabia.

My point is that even if US company like John Deere has been using metric only since the 80's, the equipment that they use to make these metric tractors is not necessarily all metric, itself.

The car plant that GM and Australia built was just an assembly plant. The pieces parts of the factory and the car parts that were sent there for the Australians to build were made in many countries,

You have a habit of making assumptions.

No, the bodies of the cars built at the GMH plant were made from steel mined in Australia, refined in Australia, rolled into sheet metal in Australia, pressed into body parts in Australia.
The engine blocks were from cast iron, & later aluminium, mined in Australia, cast in Australia, machined in Australia, & had the pistons , crankshafts, conrods, camshafts also sourced in Australia in the same way.
The gearboxes, rear ends, suspensions, steering, glass, internal trim, dash instruments, electrical system, etc were also made in Australia.

Obviously, there were a few minor items sourced from elsewhere, but they were, when GMH was at its peak, minimal.

In later years, meddling from Detroit led to an increase in overseas sourced parts.
Significantly, the reliability of Holdens fell off from that time on.

GMH were importers of overseas vehicles as well, both complete, & CKD, which fitted into particular market niches.
They were sold alongside the homegrown ones.
By the way, we used to export Holdens to the Persian Gulf, but this stopped (more Detroit meddling?)

 and some of that on machinery built around inches.

Indeed, in Australia, by Australians, prior to Metrication ( Obviously, things didn't change overnight, but if you have a car factory, you can pretty much control the rate at which a new standard is introduced)

America has tech. Physical tech. Physical manufacturing/machining things. That are made in inches. Were desiged and made in inches since before this tech even existed. Stuff that was made at great expense during WWII and is still in service. And which current America might not even justify expense to replace,

A lot of the stuff made by all that equipment was repaired, & even replicated in Australia during WW2 after battle damage, because a damaged warship was a "sitting duck" trying to get back to the USA through enemy controlled waters.

Every "made in the USA" or " Made in Great Britain" component had to run the same gauntlet, so the catchcry was import replacement".
Australia industrialised on an previously unparalled rate, to both manufacture war material & to repair the equipment of ourselves & our Allies.

The motive behind the Govt/GM project, was to keep at least some of this industrial capability when peace was achieved.

at all, even. It was made in times of need, and now we still have it

But do you, or has it all been turned into scrapmetal?

Think ToT's basement machine shop, but 50x bigger, to make giant cannons and imperial threaded parts that are 4 foot in diameter to go in earth moving equipment.

Before someone in a suit thought it was "cheaper" to buy everything from Korea or China, we could do stuff like that, too
We used to build our own ships, which required parts of the size you quoted & crew them with Australians, but now we don't do either of those things.
How many ships docking at US ports are made in the USA?

 America has some real reasons to continue using inches that Australians did not to the same degree. Period. Australia had a very successful metrication compared to many other countries. And there are multiple reasons for that which are not so obvious maybe, when you just say "metric is obviously superior because...

I didn't say that, so you are answering someone else.
I only pointed out that some of the obstacles you believed to be insurmountable were not, & had been easily overcome in other countries.

" Well, you have to look at the real world, too.

Most of this is "off topic", but your answer to people questioning the lack of metrication in the USA is to immediately go on the offensive,
making ill informed comments about other countries, bringing in "red herrings" like the Swedish change to driving on the right, when it is obvious that such a change was far more radical than changing speed signs.

The kindest thing I can say is "You are not as bad as rstofer

[KL27x]

^vk6zgo, lots of interesting stuff there. I am not going to reply to that, yet. You take it too personally and are sensitive, and your post isn't completely wrong. Let's just say making steel and welders don't care cm or inches, and America was among the first of the former Commonwealth to start teaching and learning the metric system, before Australia.

Great you mine ore. Look at the machines you use to mine it. Look at the machines you use for agriculture. Tell me they are all made in Australia? I dunno. You guys trade more with EU and China. Maybe the are buying your Australian tractors and tunnel digging machines. We just get your metric glass bottles filled with wine. So are you exporting mining and agricultural technology? Or are you exporting the raw materials and simple products obtained by using pre-existing technology which you imported? Cuz the latter would be much smarter for your country.

bsfeechannel:

This argument can be easily refuted by the fact that European countries, Japan, China and other industrialized economies adopted the metric system successfully, but not the US.

Dear genius of geniuses.  Germany adopted the metric system in the late 1800's, relatively early in this ascension in tech. Around the same time most of Europe also adopted metric. It might have had something to do with a short French guy consolidating the continent; but he didn't make it to America (apparently, horses don't swim that well). What was high tech in the late 1800's? Britain still ruled the seas with steam engines (that and the sewing machine were two of Britains most important technological achievements). Combustion engines were invented 1876... 4 years after Germany adopted metric. They essentially build their tech in mm. And other countries like Japan, where to you think they traded and bought and copied these tools from? They didn't reinvent wheels in shinto units; they advanced the already metric wheels. (Japan has a lot to do with the advancement in manufacturing of combustion engines esp in the mid-late 1900's... which we know they did this in metric. Back then. They didn't switch after the fact.) Even in America we buy German and Japanese heavy industrial tools and tech. But we also developed these things and have always made these things in America.

A lot of things happened between 1870 and 1960. In Australia a lot of this change was imported; I don't know history that great, maybe you can tell me when Australia was the tip of the technology spear? Was metrication your shining moment of technological progress, is changing their road signs? Of course Australia has little use for imperial anymore. Esp Britain's version. Not just Australia, but the entire rest of the world has not been buying British steam engines and sewing machines for a long time. Australia is buying from metric EU.

In America, this century of change happened in inches. They continue to use them, yet America embraced metric before Australia did. They just kept it practical, not symbolic. Americans can buy a pound of butter and still use metric.

Even in UK, people still use a lot of imperial. Australia was kinda unique in how they could completely forget imperial and have no significant effect in their industries/workplaces. They were already buying metric commodities.

If America started changing to 40mm drain pipes and 1 meter wide doors, we be paying cost of  market inefficiencies in America for the next 100 years, before it might save a few cents a year. Changing road signs is dead cost, only.

;;;;;;;;;;;;
Our existing technology is important. If we destroyed all of it, today, all the oil wells, all the machinery. All the nuclear power plants. But we kept metric? We would be in the dark ages for centuries. All the easily accessible fossil fuels are gone. We need highly advanced technology to even reach what is left or to re-create nuclear power.

[bsfeechannel]

The kindest thing I can say is "You are not as bad as rstofer

I was about to compare KL27x's statements with rstofer's. I prefer the latter, because they're less verbose and to the point. In short, "The US is not metric because we think we're special and the (sensible) logic that led all the other countries to full metrication doesn't apply to us".

Obviously, parts of the country that can't afford to adhere to that ideology have already gone metric.

After this thread, however, I'd rather see the US embrace metric piecemeal as they're doing. My fear is that, if they haste their adoption, they bring to metrication old imperial habits that metrication itself came to abolish.

The US people are in need of further pedagogical efforts so that they can understand that, since the metric system is based on the fundamental constants of nature, and not some piece of rod in a museum in Paris, going fully metric won't make them have to speak French (as the Canadians do), they'll not give up their sovereignty to a foreign country, they will not advance some "progressive" agenda, they'll not be part of EU, they're not going to stop being special.

But this is a subject for another thread, I guess.

[KL27x]

the (sensible) logic that led all the other countries to full metrication doesn't apply to us".

Sensible logic of being conquered by Napolean. 
"Full metrication" like Canada and UK.   

since the metric system is based on the fundamental constants of nature

 

If you understand the fundamental constants of nature, you would know they are independent of a measuring system. This kind of statement you keep making is why people wonder if you are actually retarded. You present yourself to believe that roads work better when they are metric. And now you proclaim your belief that gravity and magnetism and the speed of light are metric. Man created metric; you think man also created the constants of the universe, rather than discover and describe them? Napolean invented the speed of light! Can you ask Napolean to change pi to be an integer factor of 10?

The US people are in need of further pedagogical efforts

Americans are early adopters of metric in education (and conversion to metric in pharmacy/chemistry). 

But this is a subject for another thread, I guess.

What's wrong with this thread? Bring on your plan. All ears. Maybe you will find America has already converted to metric, piecemeal, where it matters. Ahead of your schedule. And we're pretty much done, now.

You guys obviously prefer rstopher. He gives you opinion and personal bias and ammo to use against the flag he waves. I use facts to make you look stupid. And you kinda deserve it. Considering you can't concede when you've said something so obviously incorrect; revealed the emptiness of your beliefs. Instead you just shift directions and come back to "everyone else did it; why can't you?"

[GeorgeOfTheJungle]

since the metric system is based on the fundamental constants of nature

Is the metre any less arbitrary than the inch? (No)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_unit_(measurement)

[bsfeechannel]

If America started changing to 40mm drain pipes and 1 meter wide doors, we be paying cost of  market inefficiencies in America for the next 100 years, before it might save a few cents a year.

Then start by using 38 mm pipes and 90cm wide doors. That's a start.

Sensible logic of being conquered by Napolean. 
"Full metrication" like Canada and UK.

You mean Napoleon? What are you talking about? Yet another straw man argument? Gimme a break.

Napoleon revoked the law that made the metric system exclusive and reinstated the customary French units, albeit redefined to the metric standard. Much like what that Brit dude (that really looks like a straw man) wants to do with the UK. (I guess he didn't study history and that's why he is repeating it.) Much like the state in which the US is now.

It took a couple of decades after M. Napo went on permanent vacation for metric to be exclusive in France again. After that, its adoption has been always voluntary.

What's wrong with this thread?

Nothing. But, since it is so difficult for you to understand that maintaining two redundant systems of measure (one clearly a pain in the ass, the other designed for the modern times) is the offspring of a sick mind, I'm afraid, trying to devise a way to convince the public in the US to go fully metric will be too much for you.

Maybe you will find America has already converted to metric, piecemeal, where it matters. Ahead of your schedule. And we're pretty much done, now.

Nope. You need to make it exclusive, and deprecate the old cumbersome system for the general public. You're not even in the middle, much less done.

You guys obviously prefer rstopher. He gives you opinion and personal bias and ammo to use against the flag he waves. I use facts to make you look stupid.

rstofer used the moon landings (a fact) to make us look stupid. Since you confessed you do the same, we'll start to like you, too.

[bsfeechannel]

since the metric system is based on the fundamental constants of nature

Is the metre any less arbitrary than the inch? (No)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_unit_(measurement)

That's precisely why we have standards. We wouldn't need standards if units were not arbitrary. But the world chose the meter as the standard and decided to kill the inch.

[KL27x]

But the world chose the meter as the standard and decided to kill the inch.

Well that settles it. The world made a decision and the inch is dead. No more problem. Surely the world doesn't care if Americans buy gallons of gas in their own country while the world celebrates the death of the inch over a pint

Then start by using 38 mm pipes and 90cm wide doors. That's a start.

Well, that's the start of making imperial a thought crime? We can also call the Whitworth screw the M3.4192 1.42347 pitch, right? And also need a complete mechanical drawing to fully describe it? Progress so good I can taste it.

rstofer used the moon landings (a fact) to make us look stupid.

Well, it's apparently so easy even rstopher can make you look stupid. It's like you're asking for it.

Since you confessed you do the same, we'll start to like you, too.

Thanks. You liking me is so good. I feel the metric love now entering my heart. And my head. It makes all logic and sense fall out.

wikipedia: "At the outbreak of the French Revolution, much of modern-day Germany and Austria were part of the Holy Roman Empire which had become a loose federation of kingdoms, principalities, free cities, bishoprics and other fiefdoms, each with its own system of measurement, though in most cases such system were loosely derived from the Carolingian system instituted by Charlemagne a thousand years earlier."

Without Napoleon, metric does not spread at that time. Napoleon united the continent. This is what facilitated a common STANDARD to be chosen, in the Napoleonic era, which was important for trade and economic growth. Prior to this, Germany was a mess of tiny sovereign states. America, roughly the size and currently almost equal GNP of all of Europe, was already consolidated in rule and measure. You also continually ignore the fact that many metric countries are not "fully metric." What's the difference between UK and USA in this metrication thing? America isn't the country with laws to make pints the only legal way to sell beer in a bar. We are allowed to sell beer in metric.

You also continue to ignore the meat of my post. To nitpick one thing you can argue is wrong in some sort of context. You also forget all the rest of the idiotic things you have stated and still, apparently, stand by?

Are you doubling down on the constants of nature being metric? You double down that roads are more efficient when they are metric? Are you going to admit when you are don't know what you are talking about?

BTW, yes, I spelled Napolian wrong. Thanks for noticing.

After that, its adoption has been always voluntary.

And Swedes changed to right had side of the road by majority vote, right?
And anyhow, the world decided already. Inch is dead, dude. So why you still trying to kill it? Go bother the German machinist who still knows and uses inches. And the Brit who can only legally buy pints.

system is based on the fundamental constants of nature, and not some piece of rod in a museum in Paris,

Also, this rod is important. This IS the standard. It is shared internationally by 17 countries by a contract. Or do you think your country measures thing with light and a stopwatch? If that were easy, we might have converted earlier. Yes we already converted in any way that matters, after America was able to join in and gain access to (and help define)  the prototypes.

[vk6zgo]

^vk6zgo, lots of interesting stuff there. I am not going to reply to that, yet. You take it too personally and are sensitive, and your post isn't completely wrong. Let's just say making steel and welders don't care cm or inches, and America was among the first of the former Commonwealth to start teaching and learning the metric system, before Australia.

Great you mine ore. Look at the machines you use to mine it. Look at the machines you use for agriculture. Tell me they are all made in Australia?

Fewer & fewer are made in the USA.
If you think you are still the "workshop of the world", have a look at all the "American" cars made in Mexico, or the Toyota "assembly plant" in the USA, you were so proud of some posts back.

 I dunno. You guys trade more with EU and China. Maybe the are buying your Australian tractors and tunnel digging machines. We just get your metric glass bottles filled with wine. So are you exporting mining and agricultural technology? Or are you exporting the raw materials and simple products obtained by using pre-existing technology which you imported? Cuz the latter would be much smarter for your country.

My point was that you were completely wrong in your assertion that the GMH plant in Australia was "just an assembly plant".
I pointed out that it made cars "from scratch".
I also pointed out,that during WW2, Australia was largely "left to its own devices", & had to industrialise fast to keep up with the need for war materials.
The fact that this was done, in the majority by people ineligible for military service, many of them being ex soldiers from WW!, with various injuries resulting from that conflict.(My father was one such person, who did double & triple shifts, under the "manpower" legislation of the time, which didn't do his injured leg a lot of good) is quite astounding.

We built ships, planes, Electronics (some of which was supplied to the USA under "Reverse Lend Lease"), guns, munitions, as well as providing our military & your own with food & other services.

Up until the 1980s, Australia produced the vast majority of its everyday products, such as ships, cars, refrigerators, airconditioners & so on, but following the push for 'free trade", local manufacturing was rolled back, until, now, we don't make much at all.
The pioneers of Australian manufacturing would be turning over in their graves!

It's happening to you, too, even if you don't want to recognise the fact.

bsfeechannel:

This argument can be easily refuted by the fact that European countries, Japan, China and other industrialized economies adopted the metric system successfully, but not the US.

Dear genius of geniuses.  Germany adopted the metric system in the late 1800's, relatively early in this ascension in tech. Around the same time most of Europe also adopted metric. It might have had something to do with a short French guy consolidating the continent; but he didn't make it to America (apparently, horses don't swim that well). What was high tech in the late 1800's? Britain still ruled the seas with steam engines (that and the sewing machine were two of Britains most important technological achievements). Combustion engines were invented 1876... 4 years after Germany adopted metric. They essentially build their tech in mm. And other countries like Japan, where to you think they traded and bought and copied these tools from? They didn't reinvent wheels in shinto units; they advanced the already metric wheels. (Japan has a lot to do with the advancement in manufacturing of combustion engines esp in the mid-late 1900's... which we know they did this in metric. Back then. They didn't switch after the fact.) Even in America we buy German and Japanese heavy industrial tools and tech. But we also developed these things and have always made these things in America.

A lot of things happened between 1870 and 1960. In Australia a lot of this change was imported; I don't know history that great, maybe you can tell me when Australia was the tip of the technology spear?

We have had our few moments:-
Howard Florey, along with Sir Alexander Fleming, & Ernst Boris Chain jointly received the Nobel Prize in 1945 for the discovery of Penicillin.
Florey was an Australian, but it probably doesn't count as the work was done in another of rstofer's "low rent " countries.

A trifle more recent was the 2005 Nobel prize for medicine which  was received by J Robin Warren & Barry J Marshall for the discovery that peptic ulcers are caused by a bacteria, Heliobacter pylori
Their research was carried out in my home city of Perth, Western Australia.

In 2011 the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) developed the Equivac vaccine to protect horses against the deadly Hendra virus.(note that Commonwealth" here refers to the "Commonwealth of Australia"--- not the "British Commonwealth")

CSIRO also holds vital patents  for the WIFI  technology.

Just a few of the top of my head,----- no "moonshots", but very useful research at top levels.

In characteristic fashion, the Government's reaction was to cut funding to CSIRO.

Was metrication your shining moment of technological progress, is changing their road signs? Of course Australia has little use for imperial anymore. Esp Britain's version. Not just Australia, but the entire rest of the world has not been buying British steam engines and sewing machines for a long time.

Most of the Singer sewing machines I saw growing up were made in the USA---in fact, Isaac Merritt Singer built the first practical & efficient sewing machine in New York, patenting it in 1851.
Singers are probably made in Taiwan, now!

Once the Brits sold a few steam engines, "the genie was out of the bottle", & client countries started making their own.

 Australia is buying from metric EU.

Probably much more from "Metric China!"

In America, this century of change happened in inches. They continue to use them, yet America embraced metric before Australia did. They just kept it practical, not symbolic. Americans can buy a pound of butter and still use metric.

Even in UK, people still use a lot of imperial. Australia was kinda unique in how they could completely forget imperial and have no significant effect in their industries/workplaces. They were already buying metric commodities.

If America started changing to 40mm drain pipes and 1 meter wide doors, we be paying cost of  market inefficiencies in America for the next 100 years, before it might save a few cents a year. Changing road signs is dead cost, only.


;;;;;;;;;;;;
Our existing technology is important. If we destroyed all of it, today, all the oil wells, all the machinery. All the nuclear power plants. But we kept metric? We would be in the dark ages for centuries. All the easily accessible fossil fuels are gone. We need highly advanced technology to even reach what is left or to re-create nuclear power.

Why would you have to do that?
Metric isn't this "dark god" which is going to, in one fell swoop take away all your equipment made with your "customary measures", but, slowly, over time, new stuff will be made using  Metric units.

[bsfeechannel]

Surely the world doesn't care if Americans buy gallons of gas in their own country while the world celebrates the death of the inch.

That's the essence of establishing a standard: favor some units and deprecate all the others. By the way, since 1878 the US is a full member of the General Conference on Weights and Measures, the supreme authority of the inter-governmental organization established under the terms of the Meter Convention. So the US is an active player in the promotion of the meter and the demise of the inch.

If you don't like that, do like the Brits, elect politicians willing to promote an Amexit.

Well, that's the start of making imperial a thought crime?

Not a bad idea. However, that's not how it is done in metricated countries. You can express things in other units as long as you show the equivalent in metric. The idea of course is to eventually do away with the old system.

Well, it's apparently so easy even rstopher can make you look stupid. It's like you're asking for it.

Yeah. Ad hominem fallacies are democratic. Anyone can make free use of them without discrimination. The downside is that it makes your arguments automatically invalid.

Also, this rod is important. This IS the standard. It is shared internationally by 17 countries by a contract. Or do you think your country measures thing with light and a stopwatch?

Nope. As of 2018, no metric unit is defined by any human artifact. Heck, even aliens can use the metric system. It shows how advanced it is, yet it makes life easier for mechanics, carpenters, bricklayers, cooks, bakers, plumbers, shopkeepers, housewives the world over every single day.

Of course you can fabricate standard rods using this definition. But the rod doesn't define the unit, and it is not in the possession of any particular nation. So the argument that, by adopting metric, the US is being somehow Gallicized is sheer bullshit. The US can replicate the standard at any time anywhere even if said aliens decide to abduct the whole France.

[SparkyFX]

Germany adopted the metric system in the late 1800's, relatively early in this ascension in tech.

70 years after mediatization of the many princedoms and coming from ~300 different definitions for units of area alone. Because they all used different definitions more or less for hidden tax raises, sometimes using the same name for a unit, sometimes different names, depending on the local government. That is a very good reason to switch to such a system, far from what this discussion is about.

[KL27x]

Bsfeechannel:

Of course you can fabricate standard rods using this definition. But the rod doesn't define the unit, and it is not in the possession of any particular nation. So the argument that, by adopting metric, the US is being somehow Gallicized is sheer bullshit. The US can replicate the standard at any time anywhere even if said aliens decide to abduct the whole France.

I am the one that has continually pointed out to YOU that America is part of this pact with 17 other nations. That we are all calibrated to the same standard. By these prototypes. This is arguably ("obviously," in my opinion; but you can agree "arguably?") more important than Americans using only metric in their daily life.

So the argument that, by adopting metric, the US is being somehow Gallicized is sheer bullshit.

That wasn't my argument. I have nothing against France or Germany. I don't care if metric is French. I am trying to show you why metric spread when it did, and as fast as it did, in Europe. So think about that before you say "but everyone else did it!" The conditions and historical context are not the same between 1870 Germany and modern US. The entire world is also different.

The US can replicate the standard at any time anywhere even if said aliens decide to abduct the whole France.

If the prototype were lost or damaged, these 17 nations would convene and bring their pieces of metal and other calibration stuff to the party, and one set of new prototypes would be passed around and certified by scientists/metricists from all 17 nations. These 17 nations might convene periodically to make sure all varieties of meters (not metres) are in agreement. Scales and thermometers, etc. to make sure they get calibrated to the same prototypes in the same place at the same time under the same conditions. Not just to pass around their pieces of metal. How do you know your DMM is calibrated? Because you send it somewhere, and they put a sticker on it. But ultimately it goes all the way up to this contract of 17 nations and this calibration party.

But that's cute you think France just passed out a leaflet that said "a meter is how far light goes in a jazillinth of a second" (or some fraction of the circumference of the earth back then) and a nation on the other side of the pond would say "ok, got it. I'm outlawing the old measuring system as we speak."

BTW, you don't seem to understand what a strawman argument means. And the various ways you use it makes the term meaningless.

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
On another note, I discovered that Russia ATC changed in 2017 from meters to feet for flight levels above 29000 feet. Not only this is because their neighbors do it and it makes air travel easier across Russia, but due to Russia's previous standards causing pilots to have to change altitude slightly as they cross into this airspace, plus this allows almost 50% more flight lanes per air space. Something about Russia previously rounding their flight lanes to whole numbers in meters, whereas China makes their flight levels in meters to match more or less exactly with the rest of the worlds fight levels in feet, but I could be wrong. 

Also, it would appear that knots and nautical miles are used by all nations. So the argument of "different vertical vs horizontal units" applies to even China and North Korea and Russia. (Even if they used km/hr, the ascend/descend rate is stated/measured in meters per minute, so the time base is different by a factor of 60. No shifting decimal points, here, lol. As if you would control a plane better in metric, like you are in the metric "matrix" seeing 10's and 1000's in your mind). Gravity works in one direction, so there is a fundamental difference between horizontal and vertical where planes are concerned.

[KL27x]

vk6zgo:

Fewer & fewer are made in the USA.
If you think you are still the "workshop of the world", have a look at all the "American" cars made in Mexico, or the Toyota "assembly plant" in the USA, you were so proud of some posts back.

Indeed, America and Australia both qualify as "post-industrialized" nations. Just remember that technology spreads quickly once it has been invented. America was doing a lot of the advancement in the last century. When a "x" factory/company arises in another country, it is often someone with with capital and some knowledge that will license and/or hire the engineers who have done this, already, to start this company in a new country. Or to at least reverse engineer the existing products. IOW, development in the first place might have used more physical tech/tooling/capital and quite likely more sweat and tears (some of which may have been in fluid ozs).

In terms of earth moving equipment and heavy machinery, America is still spending and advancing that tech. It takes some tech to build floating oil wells in the oceans off the coasts of Alaska. These are very inhospitable and dangerous conditions. This has nothing to do with an average American. I'm as clueless as anyone how to do that. I think I'd have a better chance to get a rocket to Mars. And for all I know it was 99% French, German, Indian, Chinese, and Australian engineers and scientists who made this tech all in metric. But American companies are the ones that hired them and are active leaders in some areas such as this, still. No matter if some backwards American management decided these engineers would make the pieces in inches, measure depth by foot, and output by barrels, I don't think these engineers thought "Well, drilling a hole and putting a pipe in the middle of the ocean floor is easy, enough, but those barrels and feet? That sounds complicated."

It is the technology why other countries license or employ these companies to help build this kind of things. Each piece is part of a whole, and they are made out of steel, not numbers; not the metric. I think the customer can convert this wee bit of imperial to metric in order to grasp/understand these numbers to their own internal calibration in a fraction of the time and cost of redesigning and re-creating this technology.

US still has large global marketshare for such kinds of equipment for agriculture and infrastructure and mining, too.

I am surprised to learn that Australia had produced GM cars "entirely from scratch," domestically, as you say. Including everything from trim to engines. It has been a very long time since cars were build that way and I just think that would not necessarily be efficient when we can trade things fairly easily. But I apologize if I made incorrect and possibly offensive assumptions; no insult was intended.

[bsfeechannel]

I am the one that has continually pointed out to YOU that America is part of this pact with 17 other nations. That we are all calibrated to the same standard. By these prototypes. This is arguably (much) more important than Americans using only metric in their daily life.

We are exactly discussing why people don't use metric in their daily lives in the US when all other countries do. I am pointing out to you that your very government is working actively to change that, sooner or later.

That wasn't my argument. I have nothing against France or Germany. I don't care if metric is French.

That was rstofer's argument. But I decided to comment on that on my reply to you, anyway.

I am trying to show you why metric spread when it did, and as fast as it did, in Europe. So think about that before you say "but everyone else did it!"

The first committee to create the metric system had Legendre, Laplace, Lagrange, Lavoisier and other La-people as members. You might have heard of them.

In 1796, Laplace wrote:

The prodigious number of measures in use, not only among different people, but in the same nation; their whimsical divisions, inconvenient for calculation, and the difficulty of knowing and comparing them; finally, the embarrassments and frauds which they produce in commerce, cannot be observed without acknowledging that the adoption of a system of measures, of which the uniform divisions are easily subjected to calculation, and which are derived in a manner the least arbitrary, from a fundamental measure, indicated by nature itself, would be one of the most important services which any government could confer on society. A nation which would originate such a system of measures, would combine the advantage of gathering the first fruits of it with that of seeing its example followed by other nations, of which it would thus become the benefactor; for the slow but irresistible empire of reason predominates at length over all national jealousies, and surmounts all the obstacles which oppose themselves to an advantage, which would be universally felt.

So, the metric system was invented not because of the "prodigious number of measures in use, not only among different people, but in the same nation", not because of "their whimsical divisions, inconvenient for calculation, and the difficulty of knowing and comparing them", and not because of "the embarrassments and frauds which they produce in commerce".

It was invented because "the adoption of a system of measures, of which the uniform divisions are easily subjected to calculation, and which are derived in a manner the least arbitrary, from a fundamental measure, indicated by nature itself, would be one of the most important services which any government could confer on society."

The prodigious number of measures, the inconvenient calculations and the frauds were just a consequence of not having a consistent, streamlined and universal system of measures. This problem continues today in the US. Just for measuring length, the imperial system offers: the thou, the inch, the foot, the survey foot, the mile, the yard, the chain, the furlong, the league, the fathom, the nautical mile, the link and the rod. They are all arbitrarily related, inconvenient for a lot of modern measurements and absolutely not universal.

The metric system offers just the meter, which you can use for subatomic or astronomical measurements, as well as for screws, doors, houses, cars, motors, roads, bridge clearances, furniture, whatever. And people actually do use it for those applications.

Metric was created and further developed by the brightest minds in the recent centuries, and it continues to evolve as science and technology advances and becomes ingrained in the every day life of the common citizen.  Imperial on the other hand is frozen in time and has its origins in a bunch of ancient Roman rednecks. I can't believe someone would prefer it to metric.

Since you are surrounded by imperial in the US, you might think that it is going strong in the world  and has a future. I'm trying to show you a different perspective. It is moribund, if not DEAD. The US system of measures looks like a sinking imperial island in a sea of metric.

As Laplace puts it very well, the empire of reason may be slow but it is irresistible. And that's the main compelling force behind metric.

[KL27x]

^Well said. And quite wordy, yourself.

I can't believe someone would prefer it to metric.

It's not about preference. Its about practicality of changing standards; the reason Russia changed it's upper airspace to feet. The reason we have JIS and phillips. The reason if you created a complex program with complex algorithms that are calculated in feet, you wouldn't rewrite the entire thing to turn it into meters. You would just add a couple lines of code to convert the end result. Kinda like how the surveying foot is preserved in order to save a boatload of paperwork. To save time and money; not spend it. (Lot of countries have a version of this, like still using acres for deeds, etc, but surveying foot is unique because Americans "metricized" their old system to save trouble in the general usage of customary).

We are exactly discussing why people don't use metric in their daily lives in the US

Because they don't understand all this money that they will save. This USMA hasn't explained it very well. Neither has anyone else in this thread.

Since you are surrounded by imperial in the US, you might think that it is going strong in the world  and has a future. I'm trying to show you a different perspective. It is moribund, if not DEAD. The US system of measures looks like a sinking imperial island in a see of metric.

You don't understand that we know it's dead in countries that were never imperial. And it is apparently dead in Australia, due to how they implemented it. We know it's completely, utterly dead (other than for the majority of the population in much of their daily usage  ) in UK and Canada. We know this, but we don't CARE. The swedes knew they were driving their cars on the wrong side of the road, and the majority did not care. 

If I moved to another country where everything I own and see and use is marked in metric, I'm sure I would calibrate to metric in a couple of months and not even think in imperial. And I would not care what Americans are using. If I moved back to the US and everything I own and see and use is mostly imperial, I'm sure I would get used to imperial again in a couple months and not give a care that imperial is "dead." I can't say for sure, but I bet the majority of people under 50 who were to move to and live in America for a few months would also be quite indifferent to changing back to metric. 

the thou, the inch, the foot, the survey foot, the mile, the yard, the chain, the furlong, the league, the fathom, the nautical mile, the link and the rod.

I read that school kids chanted stuff about rods and furlongs and chains in Australian shools in the 60's. I don't know if and when that was ever the case in America. I can assure you Americans learn metric and only use metric beyond middle school. An average American would use inches, feet, or miles to express these distances and not even know that they are looking at a furlong or a chain. Average Americans don't need these units, because they can express anything in any one unit, just like in metric. ATC flight levels are basically hectofeet, for instance. This is, FYI, what a strawman argument is. Take a note, please, so you can use it correctly, in the future. 

And if a US civil engineer uses some of these weird units to lay out a street grid, it's because of experience of how far apart the streets should be. I suppose it might be convenient for them to talk and think in those units, in this specific context. Like selecting a good sized grid in PCB CAD, but for buildings and roads and parking lots. Same way two scientists might be casually discussing some phenomenon in petameters or whatnot in a very specific context (or how machinists might often find thous useful). I mean, when it comes to planning out a city, I think experience counts for something. You don't have to build entire new cities very often, and you might use previous city layouts as a template of what you have in mind. And furlongs or chains (and decimal inches, which are exactly sensible here in combo with furlongs which are whole multiples of feet) might happen to be good sizes for this specific work. Like blue lines on butter work great when they are 25 grams each... not a factor of 10. US civil engineers are basically using blue lines of feet, feet, and tenths or feet. Essentially a single unit with a specific grid size in feet. I hope anyone competent enough to get work as a civil engineer will be able to adapt and use any measuring system and will hopefully not be designing a city structure alone, in a vacuum, fresh out of school, without any prior experience.

[vk6zgo]

I am surprised to learn that Australia had produced GM cars "entirely from scratch," domestically, as you say. Including everything from trim to engines. It has been a very long time since cars were build that way and I just think that would not necessarily be efficient when we can trade things fairly easily. But I apologize if I made incorrect and possibly offensive assumptions; no insult was intended.

I am probably much older than you, so my image of "a very long time" is considerably longer than yours.
The USA, Japan, & Germany, amongst others, during that time period, also built from scratch, apart from, in many cases, importing the raw materials.

If you build the whole thing, you are not subject to the vagaries of travel times for parts from "the other side of the world".
To a large extent, standardisation of such things as electrical equipment over models, & even between manufacturers, makes local sourcing more attractive.

GMH were not the only company producing cars in Australia--following the success of GMH, Ford started complete local production in 1960, Chrysler in the mid 1960s (bought out by Mitsubishi in 1980), Toyota, from 1987, Leyland, from 1969 to 1975, VW for a short time from 1967 to 1968, till reverting to assembling CKD only.

Many other car firms only assembled cars here, but in many cases, made extensive use of Australian sourced parts, made by the companies which had grown up to supply the large manufacturers.
For instance, my 1972 Renault R12 had Bosch electricals made in Australia.
This was convenient, as the distributor points were identical to those of a 6 cylinder Holden.

Once GMH decided to stop making cars here, the "writing was pretty much on the wall" for all the makers of auto equipment, as well as the other car makers, so when they all closed, so did the their suppliers.

By the way, on the subject of obtaining assemblies from overseas, the 4 cylinder SOHC "Camtech" engines for all of GM's small "world cars" of the mid to late 1980s were made in Australia.

[vk6zgo]

I read that school kids chanted stuff about rods and furlongs and chains in Australian shools in the 60's. I don't know if and when that was ever the case in America.

I wasn't at school in the 1960s, but they certainly didn't do so in the 1950s, when I was!
Feet, inches, yards, miles were what you learnt about.

Chains were occasionally mentioned in Maths problems, but conversions weren't commonly required.
Rods, Poles, or Perches (all names for the same thing), were not part of the curriculum, neither were Furlongs.

Such things were on the back cover of the "Exercise books" we did our work in, & the "Table Books" we had in Primary school, along with the Metric system, Troy weight, & such doggerel as "A Pint of clear water weighs a Pound & a Quarter" ("Real red-blooded Imperial Pints").

[vk6zgo]

The US can replicate the standard at any time anywhere even if said aliens decide to abduct the whole France.

If the prototype were lost or damaged, these 17 nations would convene and bring their pieces of metal and other calibration stuff to the party, and one set of new prototypes would be passed around and certified by scientists/metricists from all 17 nations. These 17 nations might convene periodically to make sure all varieties of meters (not metres) are in agreement.

And that is how it used to be done, but there are problems:-
Metal shrinks & contracts with temperature, & even, ever so slightly corrodes, changing its absolute length.
All those pieces of metal will have to be kept in exactly the same temperature & atmospheric conditions while the "comparison" is taking place.

Scales and thermometers, etc. to make sure they get calibrated to the same prototypes in the same place at the same time under the same conditions. Not just to pass around their pieces of metal.

They don't do that at all!

How do you know your DMM is calibrated? Because you send it somewhere, and they put a sticker on it. But ultimately it goes all the way up to this contract of 17 nations and this calibration party.
But that's cute you think France just passed out a leaflet that said "a meter is how far light goes in a jazillinth of a second"

But that is pretty much how it is determined!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre

(or some fraction of the circumference of the earth back then) and a nation on the other side of the pond would say "ok, got it. I'm outlawing the old measuring system as we speak.

You can't have your "conclave of Nations all crosschecking", & your "france just passed out a leaflet" at the same time.
In reality, there was no just "ok, got it" amongst the countries involved in the early days of Metrics.

Could you really imagine Germany saying "That's cool, the French are smart cookies, they must be right?"

BTW, you don't seem to understand what a strawman argument means. And the various ways you use it makes the term meaningless.

It was really nice of you to provide a perfect example in your posting above.