I'm referring to the post, "The Foot is 1,000th of a Second"

BWMA
"
500ml is not a pint, and 500g is not a pound
"

1lb = 454g
1pt = 568ml

Since the US floz is bigger than the UK one, but there are only 16 of them in a pint, as opposed to 20, a US pint is 473ml.
1UKpt = 568ml > 500ml > 1USpt = 473ml

So 500ml sits conveniently in between, and represent a very similar quantity.

So if 500ml or 500g can't be referred to colloquially as a pint or a pound, by your reasoning, people in metric countries (or here) shouldn't be allowed to refer to kilograms as kilos, or millilitres as mils colloquially. Because a kilogram is not a kilo. Erm, no. That reasoning doesn't work.
Have you ever heard of a shot? ..of say, vodka? A shot of vodka is 25ml. And there's no reason why a pint of beer can't be 500ml. You're asking for a size. Like ordering a medium or large Coke in BurgerKing.

A shot is sort of an unofficial unit if you like. It's not used outside of pubs, but it exists. Same could be true of a pint, eventually. And I'm not sure, but isn't a shot based on a rounded imperial unit? Like pints could be? And just because the name is retained doesn't make the unit any more official.

I don't mind there being imperial units alongside metric ones, but I wouldn't miss them if they were gone. I look at the metric measurements, you people look at the flozzes and lbs. I suspect they will be gone eventually. Except in the colloquial vocabulary, and that's where they can survive, and have every right to do so.

I'm for the completion of metrication. Obviously.

But those who promote metrication say that one of their reasons is to eliminate confusion that is caused by units with similar names. For example, US gallon vs UK gallon, short ton vs. long ton, etc. Then they are trying to introduce a new pound when we already have one. And then they say that imperial-supporters are hypocritical.

Re: Slang for a 500ml February 5 2004, 5:48 PM

But those who promote metrication say that one of their reasons is to eliminate confusion that is caused by units with similar names. For example, US gallon vs UK gallon, short ton vs. long ton, etc. Then they are trying to introduce a new pound when we already have one. And then they say that imperial-supporters are hypocritical.


You are trying to confuse the argument. We are not talking about a pound of 489g. The confusion as you rightly point out is if 2 measures are called gallon but differ in capacity. This argument is about colloquial names for metric units. Once the weight of a pound is recognized by people to mean 500g there won't be any confusion, as Germany and France shows.

So what difference would it make if one is colloquial and the other is official or if both are official? Confusion would result either way.

Re: Slang for a 500ml February 5 2004, 8:39 PM
Bud:
So what difference would it make if one is colloquial and the other is official or if both are official? Confusion would result either way.

metre:
You are bent on having it your way, right or wrong. Robespierre did a fantastic job to enlighten you. I hope he has succeeded. IF not, I recommend a visit to France, or any other country he mentions, to learn first hand about the real situation. In these countries a livre and a Pfund are always 500g and your receipt will tell you so. Is that so hard to understand? I really feel at times that people predisposed to imperial units (and that differs from habituation) have a different mindset to everybody else. It seems the more convoluted the better they like it.

<<
There is no confusion when everyone is using just metric. Is there confusion in france or Italy or Germany? In Japan and China, in Brasil and Argentina? and everywhere else inbetween?
>>

There is no confusion in the US either. Everyone is using imperial. Metric is there for specialized purposes. If there were problems, then metrication would be justified. But things are moving along just fine.

This 500g "pound" thing reminds me of the bloke who tuned my mini.

"Be with you next Thursday" he said - but *his* Thurday was actually 3 weeks on Wednesday.

It also reminds me of nations adopting the euro and certain products being sort of renamed the "new lira", "new deutchmark" etc.

All this talk of pints is making me thirsty! Stop it!

SteveH wrote

<<
This 500g "pound" thing reminds me of the bloke who tuned my mini.
>>

The livre, pfund and pond being 500g is a result of legislation having been passed in France, Germany and the Netherlands (and other countries) during the 19th century and applying to those countries.

Bud
"
But those who promote metrication say that one of their reasons is to eliminate confusion that is caused by units with similar names. For example, US gallon vs UK gallon, short ton vs. long ton, etc. Then they are trying to introduce a new pound when we already have one. And then they say that imperial-supporters are hypocritical.
"

No, not introducing a new pound or new pint. Letting people uncomfortable with metric "talk" units more familiar to them. Whether the shopkeeper measures out 454g, 500g or says "Wha?" is up to them, when the pound becomes unofficial. But obviously the shopkeeper will try and satisfy their customers' requests.

"New Euric" and John (ie just John)

Please use one post name?

The "canada" reference gave it away

John, let me ask you a question.
If the US were to metricate, would you encourage people to refer to 500 g as a "Pound" and 500 mL as a "pint"? If not, would you allow it, i.e., if a customer asked for a pound of something, would the shopkeeper 1) be required to give 500 g, 2) be required to clarify what the customer wants, 3) be required to ask for a value in grams, or 4) be allowed to give the customer any quantity he happens to consider a pound?

^ I know a number of METRIC SUPPORTER Canadians who say this is not so.

Most people do not care that much for weights and measures, Raspberry. That does not prove anything.

Re: Slang for a 500ml February 6 2004, 12:53 AM

<<
There is no confusion when everyone is using just metric. Is there confusion in france or Italy or Germany? In Japan and China, in Brasil and Argentina? and everywhere else inbetween?
>>

There is no confusion in the US either. Everyone is using imperial. Metric is there for specialized purposes. If there were problems, then metrication would be justified. But things are moving along just fine.

So why can you buy alcohol in metric quantities only, likewise some soft drinks. Well, I suppose according to your logic it depends what you call spezialised.

As I understand it, beer is in English but stuff like whiskey and wine are not.

Bryan Parry wrote

<<
As I understand it, beer is in English but stuff like whiskey and wine are not.
>>

I remember reading that in Roman times, the upper classes drank wine and the working classes beer. I do not remember the exact locality, but is certainly was not the remote province of Britannia.

?????

As pointed out, we in Canada have been officially metric for ... well longer than me. I was schooled solely on the metric system, but that has not stopped me from understanding and appreciating the imperial system too! To provide example of about what I'm talking, I'll chart some items to be measured, and my preference as to how I like it expressed. I consider myself typical, as most of my peers follow a very similar trend. We are demographically 25-35 years of age, and live in eastern Canada. Call it quirky, or adaptability.

Outside Temperature - Metric
Inside Temperature - Imperial
Recipes - Imperial
Automobile - Either works(I've got a VW and a Chev)
Carpentry - Imperial
Booze volume - Metric (expressed as imperial. 355ml = pint. it doesn't really, but that's what it's called)
Soda volume - strictly Metric (2 L is very typical)
My Weight - Imperial
My Height - Imperial
Distance to travel - Metric (actually time to travel is more apt to be expressed)
Land - Imperial (what the heck is a hectare anyway? Then again, what's a rod, or link?)
Bladder pressure of a volleyball - Metric
Height of a volleyball net - Metric
Height of a basketball net - Imperial
Weight of a Roast of Beef - Imperial
Linear Measurements on a page - Metric

You see, I don't really have a real preference. I can do conversion both ways fairly quickly in my head. If they ever come up with metric time, I might be in trouble. I still haven't figured out my Local Solar Time!

-sd

Scallop Dragger

A Canadian Point of View February 11 2004, 12:52 PM

As pointed out, we in Canada have been officially metric for ... well longer than me. I was schooled solely on the metric system, but that has not stopped me from understanding and appreciating the imperial system too! To provide example of about what I'm talking, I'll chart some items to be measured, and my preference as to how I like it expressed. I consider myself typical, as most of my peers follow a very similar trend. We are demographically 25-35 years of age, and live in eastern Canada. Call it quirky, or adaptability.

Outside Temperature - Metric
Inside Temperature - Imperial
Recipes - Imperial
Automobile - Either works(I've got a VW and a Chev)
Carpentry - Imperial
Booze volume - Metric (expressed as imperial. 355ml = pint. it doesn't really, but that's what it's called)
Soda volume - strictly Metric (2 L is very typical)
My Weight - Imperial
My Height - Imperial
Distance to travel - Metric (actually time to travel is more apt to be expressed)
Land - Imperial (what the heck is a hectare anyway? Then again, what's a rod, or link?)
Bladder pressure of a volleyball - Metric
Height of a volleyball net - Metric
Height of a basketball net - Imperial
Weight of a Roast of Beef - Imperial
Linear Measurements on a page - Metric

You see, I don't really have a real preference. I can do conversion both ways fairly quickly in my head. If they ever come up with metric time, I might be in trouble. I still haven't figured out my Local Solar Time!

-sd

Thanks for your contribution. Just wondering, what's the advantage in perpetuating such a needless mixture?

I've never heard the "inside temps in F, outside temps in C" position.

My position on temps is that I tend to use C when it's cold and F when it's hot, this tends to be a British thing.

Even holiday (vacation) brochures follow this, with ski type holidays predominantly in C and hot destinations in 'F'.

Eric, could you please not re-post the entire post before you, before responding yourself? Simply posting a-new beneath it is enough to carry the flow of conversation.

Still, nice to see that you are harsh to that particular poster, even though he seems - on balance - to be "more metric than imperial".

It's such a shame that you have to see anyone that even slightly disagrees with you as "the enemy"!

Hi. Robispere...I cannot disagree with the facts you've presented regarding metric conversion dates on vehicles, but I can tell you that I had a 1984 Cadillac DeVille and a 1986 Chevy Chevette, and I guarantee you they both called on the imperial side of my tool chest. I guess I just presented such a list of items as to present that regardless of the "official" way to measure things within my neck-of-the-woods, I still feel free to use whatever form I like. To carry it a step further, I can in almost all forms of common trade and commerce use either metric or imperial values when requesting items of a vendor or outlet. I like metric for doing math. I like imperial for practical everyday applications (generally speaking). I like both. Then again, I think it was a Canadian (Dan Ackroyd) who offered us the metric alphabet. Maybe it's cultural.

My lotus, mini and cosworth used imperial nuts and bolts. (I didn't have those cars all at once you understand!!)

My current vehicle (Jag XKR) I will not go within a mile of, with a socket set.

It's completely non-user servicable!

It doesn't matter anyhow - I've got a socket set called "metrinch" by Richmond tools which cunningly fits both, as it uses convexed bends rather than corners in order to grip the nut - clever eh?

Hey!! I like the idea of those tools. Do you know if they are available in Canada? Thanks.
-sd

search search

rummage rummage

http://www.mitools.com/

Looks like Richmond tools have sold the patent or something.....

Thanks for the tips on the bolts. I was never quite sure how they got the sizes, but now I understand. Thanks again. SteveH...thanks for the URL.

-sd

Robespierre:
Many people make the mistake of assuming a bolt is imperial (or metric) because an inch (millimetre) wrench will fit over the head. Some fit loose, others fit a little tight.


Trust Americans to throw an inch, or rather ABC, spanner into metric order. After the WWII Yankee expertise helped rebuilding some Japanse industries. Car manufacture was one. For reason only known to Yanks they persuaded Japanese auto producers to use an idea of theirs called ABC bolts, hybrids of metric and USC. Of course neither metric nor inch spanners fitted these useless contraptions. Luckily the Japanese soon stopped using them. I still wonder whether that desperate attempt had anything to do with avoiding inevitable metrication.

<<What year were these vehicles produced? >>

Lotus - 94 (M-reg)
Mini - 93 (L-reg)
Cozzy - G-reg

<<If these vehicles are still produced, what system are they using now?>>

Alas - cozzy's and Lotus Esprits are no longer made - which is a massive shame.

The "mini" is now bigger than an audi A3 (call it a "biggy") and is made by BMW - thus one would expect metric.

I once had a problem getting the battery terminal tight on my cozzy due to trying to use a metric spanner. I bought the metrinch system shortly after.

I now *never* have to worry whether a nut is imperial, foriengn or, to that matter, "martian" !