Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Metric wrenches. SAE bolts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G #1840 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Vice-grips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Could be worse - could be Whitworth bolts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparky Nelson Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Vice-grips Gas axe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elk Creek LeMieux Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Gas axe. Blue wrench for the win! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elk Creek LeMieux Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 On that note though, I'll never understand why every bolt on my American pickup is metric... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparky Nelson Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 On that note though, I'll never understand why every bolt on my American pickup is metric... Probably so they can use the same hardware that they use on vehicles built for export. It's cheaper to buy 20 million metric screws than 12 million SAE and 8 million metric. For a while there I was finding both on the same car. I had one car that used metric hardware to mount the front brake calipers and SAE hardware under the hood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original Lumpy Gritz Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Could be worse - could be Whitworth bolts. Or British Standard. Both were on my Triumph, Spitfire II Mk4. Metric ain't bad and many fraction(SAE)will fit. 14mm=9/16', 19mm=3/4' etc. LG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bristol Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Actually the automotive industry went to metric when the higher ups of our country felt we should change to the metric system to be the same as the rest of the world. Many manufacturers did not change as it woulod have been too costly for them. But the auto industry did because the government talked em into it and helped finance some of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry T Harrison Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 The SAE system should have died years ago, It's long past time to join the rest of the world and go metric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bristol Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Well why can't they join us and change to SAE ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedalia Dave Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Bristol drive or one of my favorites JIS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shoer 27979 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Actually the automotive industry went to metric when the higher ups of our country felt we should change to the metric system to be the same as the rest of the world. Many manufacturers did not change as it woulod have been too costly for them. But the auto industry did because the government talked em into it and helped finance some of it. that would be good old Jimmy Carter who tried putting us on metric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted July 31, 2014 Author Share Posted July 31, 2014 Good Old Jimmie Carter Ha! Two outta three is all you get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shoer 27979 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Good Old Jimmie Carter Ha! Two outta three is all you get. well you know Badger I was trying to be nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry T Harrison Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Well why can't they join us and change to SAE ? Because the metric system makes sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliope Cupcake #13981 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 HERE BADGER---THIS WILL MAKE YOU FEEL BETTER: Palouse Falls, WA I just Found out they grow lentils in the nearby farmland http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Palouse+Falls&FORM=HDRSC2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 WRENCHS ? I thought ya said Wenches CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted August 1, 2014 Author Share Posted August 1, 2014 well you know Badger I was trying to be nice So was I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Mushman Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Whitworth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackwater 53393 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 The SAE system should have died years ago, It's long past time to join the rest of the world and go metric Because the metric system makes sense! The metric system was devised by Napoleon and actually makes neither more or less sense than any other system!! The USS/SAE system is just as good as any and, (if you understand fractions) is simple and easy to understand! All any of this does is make tool and fastener manufacturers richer!! The basis for the metric system is the meter. It was arbitrarily chosen by Napoleon as the distance from a point in Paris to the geographic north pole. It was not accurate at the time because no one had ever been to the north pole and the measurement was estimated by French scientists. The Anglo system was just as inaccurate being based originally on the length of the foot of the king of England and the inch being the distance from the first knuckle to the second knuckle of the king's right index finger. At some point the foot was standardized and an inch became one 12th of a foot. Noah's ark was built by the measure of the cubit. The cubit was the distance from the elbow to the fingertips of the builder. Not sure about the measurements of the pyramids.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rye Miles #13621 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 The metric system was devised by Napoleon and actually makes neither more or less sense than any other system!! The USS/SAE system is just as good as any and, (if you understand fractions) is simple and easy to understand! All any of this does is make tool and fastener manufacturers richer!! The basis for the metric system is the meter. It was arbitrarily chosen by Napoleon as the distance from a point in Paris to the geographic north pole. It was not accurate at the time because no one had ever been to the north pole and the measurement was estimated by French scientists. The Anglo system was just as inaccurate being based originally on the length of the foot of the king of England and the inch being the distance from the first knuckle to the second knuckle of the king's right index finger. At some point the foot was standardized and an inch became one 12th of a foot. Noah's ark was built by the measure of the cubit. The cubit was the distance from the elbow to the fingertips of the builder. Not sure about the measurements of the pyramids.... + 1 Ya'll said it for me. Different math is all it is and they both work! Rye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 In a black powder canon forum I post to from time to time one of the guys from Europe asked about the English and American fascination with 1/4s, 1/16s, 1/64s, etc. I posted that he should take a 1 meter bar and divide it into tenths or hundredths using dividers or a compass and a straight edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocWard Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 The metric system was devised by Napoleon and actually makes neither more or less sense than any other system!! The USS/SAE system is just as good as any and, (if you understand fractions) is simple and easy to understand! The basis for the metric system is the meter. It was arbitrarily chosen by Napoleon as the distance from a point in Paris to the geographic north pole. It was not accurate at the time because no one had ever been to the north pole and the measurement was estimated by French scientists. The system was devised before Napoleon came to power, and had been the subject of discussion well before his time. It was originally estimated to be a portion of the distance from the equator to the north pole, passing along the meridian through Paris. According to what I have read, the estimation, based on survey work, was surprisingly close to the modern standard, which is based upon the distance light travels through a vacuum in a given period of time. http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/meter.html In a black powder canon forum I post to from time to time one of the guys from Europe asked about the English and American fascination with 1/4s, 1/16s, 1/64s, etc. I posted that he should take a 1 meter bar and divide it into tenths or hundredths using dividers or a compass and a straight edge. mils anyone? Call me old-fashioned, or what have you, but despite the fact that I understand the rationale behind the metric system, I am far more comfortable with SAE, and find myself grumbling when I grab a 1/2 wrench and find out it is a metric size instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparky Nelson Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 The basis for the metric system is the meter. It was arbitrarily chosen by Napoleon as the distance from a point in Paris to the geographic north pole. It was not accurate at the time because no one had ever been to the north pole and the measurement was estimated by French scientists. At first, yes. Since then they've tried very hard to define metric (technically SI, abbreviated from Le Système international d'unités (bloody French can't spell)) units in terms of physical constants that can be reproduced by anyone willing to invest in the technical apparatus. For example, now the meter is defined as the distance light travels in 1/299,792,458th of a second through a vacuum. So now nobody has to measure some gouty king's foot to check the accuracy of their yardstick any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted August 1, 2014 Author Share Posted August 1, 2014 AHJeeeeeeeezzzzzz Guys, sorry I brought it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackwater 53393 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 At first, yes. Since then they've tried very hard to define metric (technically SI, abbreviated from Le Système international d'unités (bloody French can't spell)) units in terms of physical constants that can be reproduced by anyone willing to invest in the technical apparatus. For example, now the meter is defined as the distance light travels in 1/299,792,458th of a second through a vacuum. So now nobody has to measure some gouty king's foot to check the accuracy of their yardstick any more. Yeah! They did the same thing with the foot and yard about fifty years ago. Something about the wave length of an orange beam of light through argon gas or the like. seems like a lot of work just to eliminate a yardstick to me!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 At first, yes. Since then they've tried very hard to define metric (technically SI, abbreviated from Le Système international d'unités (bloody French can't spell)) units in terms of physical constants that can be reproduced by anyone willing to invest in the technical apparatus. For example, now the meter is defined as the distance light travels in 1/299,792,458th of a second through a vacuum. So now nobody has to measure some gouty king's foot to check the accuracy of their yardstick any more. Yeah...let me get my stopwatch and pica pole to measure that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted August 1, 2014 Author Share Posted August 1, 2014 At first, yes. Since then they've tried very hard to define metric (technically SI, abbreviated from Le Système international d'unités (bloody French can't spell)) units in terms of physical constants that can be reproduced by anyone willing to invest in the technical apparatus. For example, now the meter is defined as the distance light travels in 1/299,792,458th of a second through a vacuum. So now nobody has to measure some gouty king's foot to check the accuracy of their yardstick any more. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Now! How can I use this technical information to measure my cast, with my fly rod, while standing knee deep in fast moving water? The king can wash his own feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubborn Dutchman, SASS # 61363 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Laser range finder. Set to Metric or Inch, your choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Here ya go, Badger. Gave the Kid a set of these in his Easter basket. He's been plumb tickled with 'em. Fits SAE and Metric! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trailrider #896 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Confusion between the two systems can be VERY COSTLY. In the early 1990's NASA "went" to metric. But when one of the first Mars probes was built, the contractor built it to English units, and nobody had enough experience in writing the Contract Technical Requirements and Statement of Work to ask, "Hey, JPL, what are we working to? Metric or English?" Unfortunately, the contractor built to English, and JPL was figuring the guidance in meters per second, and so the spacecraft made a highspeed dive into the Martian soil! Why did this mistake happen? Because the contractor had laid off all the experienced Contract Technical Requirements people, including a certain dinosaur-riding Duelist shooter, about two years before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bristol Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 gotta admit....we can ake a debate about anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Confusion between the two systems can be VERY COSTLY. In the early 1990's NASA "went" to metric. But when one of the first Mars probes was built, the contractor built it to English units, and nobody had enough experience in writing the Contract Technical Requirements and Statement of Work to ask, "Hey, JPL, what are we working to? Metric or English?" Unfortunately, the contractor built to English, and JPL was figuring the guidance in meters per second, and so the spacecraft made a highspeed dive into the Martian soil! Why did this mistake happen? Because the contractor had laid off all the experienced Contract Technical Requirements people, including a certain dinosaur-riding Duelist shooter, about two years before. Heck, even units can cause problems. One of the early Shuttle flights was supposed to test...I think it was some sort of camera or telescope, drawing on long memory here.....anyhow, for the orientation the numbers were in inches in the plans (so many millions of inches from X), but entered into the programming as either feet or miles. Anyway, because of the different units, it didn't take the photo of what it was supposed to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 gotta admit....we can ake a debate about anything. That's a highly debatable statement, there, Billy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.