Imperial System

[Cronk]

If America is the most technological country and the third biggest (by population), why is it that America is one of three countries who adopt the imperial system? The other 2 are Myanmar and Liberia.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Because it seemed like a good idea at the time.

But I remember in my lifetime that Congress actually considered adopting the Metric system and it was determined that it would disrupt too many things to which folks had become accustomed. Of course you have to realize that Congress won't vote FOR anything that is a good idea. It's not in their blood as far as I can tell.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Retooling everything would have been a monumental task. Of course, it gets worse as time goes on but now we have computers so it is easier to convert on the fly and also to keep both measurements.

 

[CJ_London]

Many sawmills still have machinery calibrated to the imperial system and in the uk many will still refer to ‘2 by 4’ rather than ‘50 by 100’ (and in fact since structural timber has to be graded it is actually 45 x 95)

 

[Minty]

We still have both in the UK, but in theory are metric.

However, I still get a pint when I go the pub, and I still want to know the MPG for my car despite buying the petrol/diesel priced in litres.
I'm of a certain age though, so I understand both. Youngsters are much more metric centric

 

[NauticalGent]

it was determined that it would disrupt too many things to which folks had become accustomed.

But not before they made my life at school (6th grade at the time) a living HELL trying to shove it down our throats. I don't know how many years this full-court press endured, but I was glad when it was over!

 

[JonXL]

I don't know if America "is the most technological country", but I see no reason why being so should preclude our use of one system of measures over another.

Besides that, most "technological" settings use the metric system anyway.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I still want to know the MPG for my car despite buying the petrol/diesel priced in litres.

Some years ago my husband and three friends took the golf trip of their dreams in the UK and Scotland. My husband shot the best round of his life at the old course at Saint Andrews. The one little glitch in the trip was that they thought they were getting distances in kilometers but they were in miles. That left they with a lot of white knuckle driving.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

But not before they made my life at school (6th grade at the time) a living HELL trying to shove it down our throats. I don't know how many years this full-court press endured, but I was glad when it was over!

In college I had to learn both. When dealing with chemistry, you do things in metric units anyway. I can't begin to tell you how many 100 ml and 1 liter flasks I had, though I guarantee you I had a lot of them.

I was always fascinated by the somewhat arbitrary definition of a meter (or metre if you were French): The "metre" was defined as one ten-millionth of the surface distance from the north pole to the equator, on a line through Paris. Why not through London? (Answer: Because they were still on Imperial measure at the time.) Could have been worse, I suppose. What we have is 1/4th of the circumference of the Earth on a line theoretically passing through both poles.

 

[Minty]

Some years ago my husband and three friends took the golf trip of their dreams in the UK and Scotland. My husband shot the best round of his life at the old course at Saint Andrews. The one little glitch in the trip was that they thought they were getting distances in kilometers but they were in miles. That left they with a lot of white knuckle driving.

Many years ago, a boss of mine had a Porsche 911 Turbo. It was French special edition 2 of 10 made. Fearsomely quick. (Left hand drive which is not the right side for us in the UK obviously, but he was used to that), oddly enough he did under his breath complain about the fuel consumption, even though it was a weekend car.

We came back from lunch one day when he had brought it into work, and I casually asked him what Mpg he was getting, and he said, "not sure not great" but he had just filled it up, and he had done about 275 miles on the tank. Some quick sums and he was getting roughly 18mpg! as he said - not great.

It was only a few days later when he came in that rather embarrassedly had to mention that he forgot the speedo was in kilometers.
His 275 miles was more like 170! His recent MPG was an astonishingly bad 11 !

He sold it not long after.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Speaking of Imperial measure and confusion about which one to use: If you look up the "Gimli Glider" incident, you would read about an air near-disaster in which an airliner ran out of fuel because someone did the math in pounds but should have used kilograms (or vice-versa). The jet ran out of fuel in mid-air and became a big metal glider. The jet pilot was also a glider pilot and somehow managed to bring the plane in on an abandoned runway in Canada. A few bumps and bruises but everyone walked away from it.

 

[NauticalGent]

During a port visit in Souda Bay, Greece, we were on a bus taking us from fleet landing into town. Behind me sat a young man who had never been out of the US before.

While passing a Q8 petrol station, he noticed the prices which were , if I recollect accurately, .76 - at the time 1 US gallon was about $1. He made a remark:
"Wow, gas is CHEAP over here!" Before I could reply, somebody else said "That is per liter, not gallon..."

There was a slight delay while he took this in and then he said "Oh yeah, they DO that over here don't they?" Still cracks me up to this day...

 

[Isaac]

If America is the most technological country and the third biggest (by population), why is it that America is one of three countries who adopt the imperial system? The other 2 are Myanmar and Liberia.

Because being "technological" doesn't necessarily mean you adopt every single thing that comes along down the pipeline.

Just like being in the tech world (you and me) doesn't mean we'll adopt everything little gadget that comes along, many of which are nonsense and totally unneeded (to my opinion). In fact the people with the most tech gadgets seem to be the least tech sophisticated - they require a machine that does everything for them because they know nothing. The more you know, the less you need the machine to decide FOR you.

 

[Isaac]

Having said that, I do prefer the metric system. It would take me an annoying while to get used to, after which it would be fine - and makes much more sense.

I love symmetry.

 

[Isaac]

During a port visit in Souda Bay, Greece, we were on a bus taking us from fleet landing into town. Behind me sat a young man who had never been out of the US before.

While passing a Q8 petrol station, he noticed the prices which were , if I recollect accurately, .76 - at the time 1 US gallon was about $1. He made a remark:
"Wow, gas is CHEAP over here!" Before I could reply, somebody else said "That is per liter, not gallon..."

There was a slight delay while he took this in and then he said "Oh yeah, they DO that over here don't they?" Still cracks me up to this day...

Gas used to be much more expensive in Mexico, but we exceeded their prices during the worst of Bidenomics about a year ago.
Still takes me a minute or two to do the calculation when we are in Mexico and I wonder who's worse

 

[DickyP]

Just spotted this thread whilst browsing - three points to make.

1. In the UK although younger people are more metric inclined as that's all that is taught in schools, as often as not talk about their height in ft/ins and weight in stones/lbs.

2. The USA does NOT use the Imperial system of measurements: The US system is the same for lengths, even if usage differs. Weight and Volumes differ even though the names are the same. The anomalies are numerous.

The US as far as I can tell, does not use stones, hundredweights or furlongs? On this I'm sure somebody will put me right if I am misinformed.

3. Just remember the metric system was not invented to make calculations easier and more consistent but explicitly to make the collection of taxes easier.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

There's always been a debate on whether the Imperial system or the Metric system is better.

Here's my two pennies worth! From a practical point of view, the Imperial system is just superior, especially when you're working with wood or steel in the garage.

A foot divides nicely into thirds, quarters, sixths, twelfths, and eighths. Likewise, an inch splits into quarters, eighths, sixteenths, and thirty-seconds, very handy when you are measuring and cutting.

Try holding a metric measurement in your head, Imagine something is 32 and a half inches long. Simple, right? Now, what would that be in metric? About 825.5 millimeters, or eighty and a half centimeters. Metric numbers quickly get big and unwieldy.

I was in school in 1965, when the UK switched from Imperial to Metric. I got a solid grounding in the Imperial system, and while I understand Metric, I always gravitate back to Imperial when I can. It's just easier for practical work.

We still hold onto our pints and miles, especially for day-to-day use.

From the point of view of introducing it as stated above to make it easier to collect taxes, I noted that every single measurement, "equivalent" meant you got less. For example the equivalent to a pint was half a litre which is less than a pint.

Mind you, if you compare a metric ton and an imperial ton, you actually get slightly more in the metric ton than the imperial.

From a practical point of view, the Imperial system wins hands down. It's flexible, easy to remember, and the best for anyone doing hands-on work. Now, where’s my pint?

 

[DickyP]

It's just easier for practical work.

No only do I agree with you but so did Napoleon, after it was introduced into revolutionary France (as a result of a project started by Louis XVI contrary to the urban myth that it was a revolutionary government initiative). He pointed out that the metric system was OK for scientists and engineers but useless in everyday life.

The bit about introduced for taxes was that in the 1780s there were literally hundred of different local variations of the French weights and measures which were used for taxes.

Three other things 'imperial' that survive in our metric world are ship displacements (Imperial tons), flight levels (feet), and standard gauge railways at 4' 8½".

Another anomaly of 'metrication' changes is that it usually includes changing to the Celsius system, which is nothing to do with metric.

 

[GaP42]

Like you I also began with imperial measures and coinage and experienced the change to metric, and from my perspective, it wins hands down.
Just take your chery picked measurement - 32.5 inches - how many feet is that? what fraction of a yard? in metric 825.5mm is simply converted to cm, m etc by moving the decimal place. Sooo much simpler. Practicalities - just remember the mistakes made when measurements and not converted accurately. In the metric system the accuracy of a measurement is preserved with the use of the same digits, and while in the imperial system an inch is 1/36 of a yard, converting your 32.5 inches to a yard is .... 0.902777777..... even with accurate conversion there will be a rounding error.

Drink a pint if you like

 

[DickyP]

GaP42 - I would agree with you if I actually though that is how people worked. On a drawing board or engineering workshop perhaps but we are talking everyday life. And the conversion errors argument is just so much sophistry - it works both ways: just try fractionalising metric values.
What is a third of a metre? 333.333333333333333 .... cm! And the metric equivalent of a pint is 568.26125 ml

It is, of course, simply a matter of personal of preferences, and legal ukase.

The one real argument for metrication and the start of this thread asking why the US still uses its non-metric system, is what it was when Louis XVI started it - commonality - and the reason for this to be metric is its widespread use.