Off Roading Forums banner

Maddening Metric Measures

2.5K views 40 replies 11 participants last post by  AJMBLAZER  
G
#1 ·
I hate reading about tires in metric why do we allow it? This is America, not Japan. Buy a toyota and put metric tires on it but don't dishonor a chevy or GM with that metric crap. Sure schools try to convert you but you know that when ever your judging a distance you not going to say meters you going to use feet. Everyone has a foot that is pretty close to 12 inches, so why not use our God given measuring stick, instead of fumbling around with meter sticks or 31 centimeters. Anyone else know what I'm saying. you here 36 you know its height, you here 187/24/16 you have no Idea. So tire companys consider your custemers.

-Ryan

 
G
#4 ·
Something about Metric just seems to make sense. Oh yeah, it is that the system is set-up in multiples of ten, througout the entire measuring system. Every country in the world except the US uses it (Not even the english use the english measuring system). I think maybe our system of measure should be reevaluated. I almost refuse to design in British units anymore.

Agreed, the way the tire measuring is laid out on metric sizes is a little tough to get used to, but is plenty easy to convert and like said above, it is a compact way to include quite a bit of tire information

Nich Kenny
'89 K1500 350/700r4
 
G
#5 ·
Sorry, I'm hardwired in inches. Screw the metric system!

Oh I see, Skyjackers new 12 centimeter lift! I frame my house with 5x10's! I'm 2 meters tall! 4000 cc big block! Oh wait 7.4 liter POWER! I bought 120 liters of gas! Fuel is 56 cents a liter!? OUTRAGEOUS!

Some of the conversions are wrong, maybe all off them, but you know what, I don't care. HAHAHAHAHA ! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

Metric + IFS + Front Wheel Drive + A Bunch Of Other Crap = HELL! THE END OF REAL TRUCKS!

1978 K20 - 355ci, np208, 700R4, 7" Total Lift
Image
 
G
#6 ·
Exactly what I'm saying. America is a world power. We do what we want. We use the most gas oil and coal. And we probably have the most money and the longest life excpectancy. The U.S. doesn't compromise if we did we would all be talking spanish or some other language and using Francs or yen. Wheres your pride the american way of life is a great way of life and I am im to keep it. Along with the English system.

 
G
#7 ·
Did you hear what you said? You're going to keep your American pride and the British measuring system. Americans did not invent any measuring system.

What I am saying is that when working with numbers and units, British units are a pain compared to metric. Really, would you rather add 7/16" and 5 3/8" or 11mm and 136mm (13.6cm). When was the last time you divided fractions by the way?

Refusing the metric system is ignorance, not a matter of compromise or lack of pride. America will fall just like all other great empires of the past with an isolated view like stated.

You'll keep your views I suppose. Mine have changed.



Nich Kenny
'89 K1500 350/700r4
 
#8 ·
It's really better to use a few millimeters than 27/32nds of an inch. thats a pain in the a$$! This is a hot topic, but it depends on how you were brought up, I'm in grade 9 right now, and in Science I learned the metric system. The debate will eventually be won by those of you who use inches, because there are more of you, but as people my age start getting into the world things will change.
Also, it's all tens, anyone who can count to ten can use the metric system! you can't claim that its so hard to use...UNLESS you may not know how to count to ten...

 
G
#9 ·
i totally agree that the english system is way screwed up. sure, were all used to it, but metric is WAY easier to understand and much more convenient. anyways - the biggest thing that pisses me off about my truck is that no 2 bolts are the same size. half are metric, half standard. its ridiculous. when i was working on it last weekend i thought my power steering pump was messed up so i started to take it off and found out that the 3 bolts holding it on are 3 different sizes!?!?!?! how freaking retarded!! and they were all 3 only 1mm different so there really wasnt a reason for them to be different other than make me cuss way more than i should. anyways - thanks for the chance to vent about yet another topic. haha /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif

Mike ~
* Earnhardt Forever *
Image

89 Chevy K1500 - 350TBI/700R4/NP241 - 3" lift - 33's
 
G
#10 ·
I agree with the fact that it's quite difficult to tell the size of the tires when you go 285/70/16, i just learned what each part mens not even a year a go. i like the 35x10.5x15 much better and there is evertyhing i need to know in those numbers, 35 total hight - 15 rim size /2 = wall hight, 10.5 tire width, but than again the same can be done with metric numbers, just get rid of the percentile part. when it comes to the rest of the nonmetric system, whoa it doesn't suck, it reaks, i can't hadle 9/32s. because of the fractions and 12 iches being a foot i convert as little as possible. im 6 feet 2 inches tall or 6x12+2 inches tall, in metric, 1 meter 87 cm. or 187 cm. its that simple.
some of you also said that the US is a world power and it does what it wants to, that worries me, i like it here big time, but i can never ignore the fact that empires like rome have fallen in a blink of an eye.

Will work for mods
Current mods--> 31x10.5x15 ProComp MT, 15x8 AR767 rims, K&N, MSD Ignition Coil.
 
#12 ·
I would like metric tires a whole lot better if they came right out and said the heights like english measured ones do... Ex... 500mm (or 50 cm) x 300mm x whatever the rim height is (english works fine here)... /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif But it's not that horrible...

When I do any CAD drawings where I need to measure anything before punching it into the computer, I set it up to work off the metric system, because it's easier to manipulate the units in one's head... /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif

The US seems to be the world's only remaining super power. The USSR is gone, China could easily be a super power if they ditched their socialist government and switched to something they can use their resources the most efficiently. They have plenty of resources and could easily be a potent super power, but for all intents and purposes they are not... /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif

Tim "Sandman"

ORC Land Use columnist:
My May Column
 
#14 ·
We would fall.

Many empires and huge world powers that were at the height of world power in their day are now long gone. The Romans and the Soviets, the British Empire is now a tiny shadow of it's former self, etc etc etc etc etc. If the empire doesn't change, the world eats it. Alive.

1992 Blazer Sport, 350 TBI, 4L60, 3" Flowmaster, K&N, Rancho 2.5" lift, 285/75R16 AT's/wwwthreads_images/icons/laugh.gif
 
G
#15 ·
As a Christian I have to go with the inch. It is far more accurate than the man made metric system. Read on if you want Preachy but hey thats were we got the inch.The pyramid is the finest example of the Accuracy of the inch. Excerpts below. please, if this offends, then dont read it. Thanks.
THE EARTH'S POLAR DIAMETER
After these somewhat extended introductory remarks our appreciation of the modern science of the Great Pyramid should be quite keen. According to the International Spheroid of Reference adopted in 1524, the polar diameter of the earth is 7,900 miles. This is the finding of modern seience and represents an achievement not possible until recent years. The Pyramid inch, measuring just .0011 more than the English inch - 10,011 equalling 10,000 Pyramid inches - and indicated by the "Boss" on the Granite Leaf in the Ante Chamber, is very definitely stated in the "Book of the Dead" to be exactly 1/500,000,000 (one five hundred millionth) of this diameter. A simple calculation will show that 500,000,000 such inches represent, Within 100 feet, the accepted diameter of 7,900 miles. The Pyramid or English inch is, therefore, both a divine and scientific unit of measure.

THE METRIC INCH NOT SCIENTIFIC
In this connection it will be of interest to examine the metric inch. This unit of measure is of atheistic origin, having been introduced by the French sceptics during the Reign of Terror in 1790. Rejecting everything which savoured of the divine, they estimated the length of a quadrant of the earth's circumference along the meridian passing through Paris. This they divided by 10,000,000 and so obtained the unit of measure known as the metre or 89.371 English inches. NOW concerning this product of atheistic scientists, we need not be surprised to learn that it harmonizes quite well with their frightful and tragic administration of French affairs. As a unit of measure it represents an error of 100,000 inches in its estimate of the polar diameter, and memorializes a scientific blunder in ordinary mathematics of one metre in every 5,300. It therefore has really no scientific value whatsoever. Sir John Herschel pronounced it the "newest and worst measure in the world," while another man of science regarded it as "inconvenient, inaccurate and unstridable." For tone thing is it to be commended - it symbolizes the falsity, confusion and spiritual destructiveness of atheism.

STILL HERE ? Another article.
In an appendix to Peter Tompkin's popular book, The Secrets of the Great Pyramid, is an appendix about ancient Egyptian measures. People can marvel at how "advanced" this system of measures is. But the very concept of "advancement" implies that the roots of the Egyptian science were gleaned from former "lower" civilizations which were before the Egyptian. But that is simply not the case. The Bible makes it abundantly plain that Noah's son Ham was the father of Egypt.1 Noah was the recipient of the advanced knowledge that had come into the world through revelation to the patriarchs before him, especially through Enoch and Adam. Noah used much of this advanced knowledge in construction of the ark, which he built according to the divinely ordained cubit, the basis of the ark's design.2 The cubit is mentioned also in the book of Revelation:

(Rev 21:17) And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.

It is mentioned as the unit used by angels. The cubit is a measurement standard from out of this world, used by angels in Heaven. How interesting that the cubit shows itself to be a more rational and scientifically accurate standard than the metric system! When the French savants who invented the metric system chose a standard for that system, they took the one ten millionth part of a meridian from the North Pole to the equator through--where else?--Paris. Ta da! The meter is born...

The problem with this is not only that the meridian through Paris3 is different than all other meridians, but is also subject to change as the topography changes. On the other hand, the sacred cubit is the one ten millionth part of the earth's semi-polar axis, a radius from the center of the earth to the North Pole. This semi-axis does not vary as would a meridian, whether through Greenwich or Paris. If the ancient Egyptians designed the cubit based on the earth's semi-polar axis, and the French scientists--cream of the crop of the Age of Enlightenment, the flower of modernity--did so based on a Parisienne meridian, one has to wonder if evolution is running in reverse. Of course it is more likely that the Creator is the One who designed the cubit to be in direct relation to the planet for which it was meant to be a standard.

The Bible says in eight different places that the Ten Commandments --God's moral standard, just as the cubit (and its corresponding inch) is a linear standard-- were written with "the finger of God," not the genius of Moses. It is a distinctly modern idea that humans can make their own standards, whether moral or linear. This is certainly the prevailing ethic in the schoolroom today. Students take it as an a priori, unquestionable law of the universe that truth is what each individual perceives it to be. Alan Bloom tells us that almost every one of his college students believes this.4 This would have been unthinkable in ancient Egypt.


 

Attachments

#16 ·
I'm not offended or anything Frank, and anyone who is really is missing the overall "feeling and mood" of this site. However, I can't find much help in your post that doesn't explain to me why the British system is easier than the Metric system.

10 milimeter = 1 centimeter
100 centimeter = 1 meter
1000 meters = 1 kilometer

12 inches = 1 foot
3 feet = 1 yard
5280 feet = 1 mile
Dunno how many yards are in a mile off the top of my head.

Metric system is just easier for me.

1992 Blazer Sport, 350 TBI, 4L60, 3" Flowmaster, K&N, Rancho 2.5" lift, 285/75R16 AT's/wwwthreads_images/icons/laugh.gif
 
G
#17 ·
Well I guess two systems are ok until we try to land on mars or something, Oh wait, OOP's. Got to say the metric system is used at work and of course in all research, And if it weren't for the metric system how we ever get those rounded off bolts off our trucks?

 
#21 ·
I think the metric system is probably better/wwwthreads_images/icons/frown.gif.

BUT like most of you guys the "old school" system is "hard wired" into my head. It's just what I am used to /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif
I can look at any nut or bolt from 10 feet away and tell if its a 7/16, 1/2, 9/16, or 5/8 (but don't ask me to add 1/2 to 9/16)
I am getting a little better at guessing metric nuts and bolts, but right now it's still a guess /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif

Metric tire sizes don't bother me anymore, BUT in my head when I hear 315's I think 35", when I hear 285's I think little shorter and skinnier than 33x12.5"s.

By the way, to the guy that is still in school, they are telling you that the metric system will take over as soon as all us dinosaurs are dead, they were telling me that when I was in school /wwwthreads_images/icons/laugh.gif and I graduated in 1981 /wwwthreads_images/icons/blush.gif

This is way off topic but, everyone doesn't understand why companies say there tires are 35" when actually the don't even measure a full 34".
Have you measured a 2X4 or a 2X6 lately/wwwthreads_images/icons/mad.gif

Scooby Dooby Doo !!!
 
#23 ·
I am still in high school and I like the standard measuring system better than metric only because I have been using it for my entire life. Dont get me wrong there is nothing wrong with metric, but tire sizes can be a little more difficult. As for the sizes of bolts and nuts I can tell just by touch or sight the size in standard but then have to convert over to metric. Still fractions are not that hard.

If it aint broke, keep fixing it till it is.
 
#24 ·
Great post FrankP!
Your post did not disprove anything just simply pointed out the inaccuracy of the metric system.

Kind of funny, I was just taking a break from performing 1st article inspections on our CMM (Coordinate Measuring Machine). This particular one measures down to the millionths of an inch accurately thats .000000"

Just goes to show you never know what subject will be discussed on this board.

25.4mm = 1"

Image

1995 K1500 3"Suspension 3" Body Lifts 35x12.5x15's pro comp MT's on 15x8 Rockcrawlers 5.7L
 
#25 ·
Being a metric guy myself I find it to be ALOT easier than inches. Metric is way more logical with everything being divided by 10. Not just metres and millimetres but litres and millilitres/wwwthreads_images/icons/smile.gif. And the names has some latin in them, hows that for divine? Gods own language. Mille = One thousand. Cent = One hundred. One centimetre = One hundred of an metre. The fact that inch is the smallest measurement (to my knowledge) of distance makes some numbers ridiculous with all their decimals. F.ex my new pistons has 0.00025 skirt size tolerance. Ok, 0.6 micrometers sounds better, easier on the eyes and easier to understand exactly how small/little it is/wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif.

Andreas

Member of the secret sbc400 club
 
#26 ·
I must say that the metric system and the standard (english) system are each only as accurate as the tools you get to measure them with. If you get a $0.50 ruler it will never be as accurate as a Browne and Sharpe, Mituoyo, etc... measuring instrument. You can not say that the metric system is inaccurate, because if they have one standard unit that they must base all the metric measuring devices on, you have an accurate system. If I were to make my own units, as long as I had a standard unit, measured at a standard temperature, it will be just as accurate as the english and/or the metric system. /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif The metric system can actually be more accurate than the inch system because we needn't worry at all about counting out the 16th's, 32nd's, 64th's on the rulers. Seems to me it's way easier to not have to worry about all the fractions, and as a result you're really less likely to screw up a reading... /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif The only time you get inaccuracies with the systems is when you convert most units between eachother (except the constantly equal 1"=2.54cm and 25.4mm, etc...). /wwwthreads_images/icons/crazy.gif

Tim "Sandman"

ORC Land Use columnist:
My May Column