Replies

1. 
   Troy | Nov 02, 2006 07:29pm | #1

   I have this square and the 32nd and 64ths are very easy to mix up. In actual use I find the 64th scale hard to use. Just a thought take a look at the Starret catolog maybe they make a rule that has just 32nds on one side. Anyway have fun

   Troy

1. 
   philip | Nov 03, 2006 08:35am | #2

   Troy, "In actual use I find the 64th scale hard to use." If this is the case there are two problems to be fixed: one will cost some money to rectify and the other involves recognising that metric is better for most things..... Sorry, just had to .Philip Marcou

1. 
   Troy | Nov 03, 2006 07:25pm | #4

   I can't disagree with you although it is fun to stir up a hornets nest over the metric system.Thanks

2. 
   mufti | Nov 03, 2006 07:38pm | #5

              Sorry, Philip, but imperial units are light years ahead of the metric system, (5.880 x (10 to the power of12 ) Miles. I know you know, you know.

1. 
   philip | Nov 03, 2006 10:43pm | #6

   Mufti, I'm not biting this one . But look at that sum-what would it be if that magic 10 were not there? And those other messy numbers-they just clutter the thing up....Philip Marcou

1. 
   mufti | Nov 04, 2006 09:09am | #7

              But you have, Philip. To come back to earth, my dislike of metrics is that there is nothing to hang your hat on. A half a whatever may work, but recognizable subdivisions of practicability are not there. We can visualize an eighth, three quarters, a quarter, thirds even, and in these practical respects I find the Metric System clumpy.

   I am back on my rod, pole or perch.

2. 
   10saw | Nov 04, 2006 06:48pm | #8

   Hi,Metric rants! I love 'em!!Too bad the S.O.B.'s who designed it didn't bas eit more upon the inch or foot to be the basic unit of measure..What is a meter like 1/1,000,000 the circumfrance of the earth. there's a useful unit we can all imagine<G>Standard system can be used in 1/10000 inch for for fine work but metric doesn't divide up well in 3/4 espeacially.Frankly I use both. Another trade I'm in uses meteric for most formulas and it's not difficult. Works great for less than 6 inch dimentions IMO.But for building it's much easier to say 96" or 8 feet than 243.84 cm or 2.438 m etc...Oh yea..My Starrett has 1/32 and 1/64 scale AL

3. 
   mufti | Nov 04, 2006 08:24pm | #9

              I cannot imagine how bad the Gallic measuring system must have been prior to 1801 to give favour to the metric system, but it's introduction in a period of continual warfare must have contributed to Napoleon's downfall.

4. 
   philip | Nov 04, 2006 10:38pm | #10

   Okay Allen I'm still not biting, but I see the problem in your case-it is an inability to understand the function of zero.
   If y'all take this example ".What is a meter like 1/1,000,000 the circumfrance of the earth." Ah beleeleve that the circumference of Earth is a lil bitty more than 1000 km.
   But I also use both, but one more than the other.
   Philip Marcou

5. 
   10saw | Nov 04, 2006 11:47pm | #11

   "What is a meter like 1/1,000,000 the circumfrance of the earth." Ah beleeleve that the circumference of Earth is a lil bitty more than 1000 km."Well if you measure in the right place it is<G>Is'n the metric system based upon something like this was my point. I would have thought they should have taken an already standard and made that the base unit, be it inches, feet, yards, miles etc...But an abstract unit based upon some weird formula only ends up with folks like us "taking sides" as it were.How much easier just for wrenches if it was based upon the inch! I'm like you actaully and will use metric when need be. I used to be a serious jeweler and most of my influences were European trained so all the formulas were metric. It worked great for this mm's seemed to be the perfect "error" to not cause huge problems.See ya!Al

6. 
   philip | Nov 05, 2006 01:28am | #12

   Al, as a matter of general interest I see that the metric system is based on the metre-and the metre, apart from being equal to 39.4 inches (of no consequence to me), is defined as "the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum during 1/299792458 of a second".
   Well that fraction is as near as dammit to 1/3 which I prefer to see as .3 (recurring). See how neat the metric system is? (,)Philip Marcou

7. 
   10saw | Nov 05, 2006 06:31am | #13

   See how ridiculus is that!Now a foot being based on someones foot makes way more sense!!<G!>Al

8. 
   corners | Nov 05, 2006 06:47am | #14

   Back to the thread topic - for woodworking I wish my Starrett square had 16ths only - all four edges - it's all I need and I wouldn't have to turn the darn 64ths around every time I pick it up. I have an old Lee Valley hook rule that they don't carry anymore and it's all 16ths - every edge - my favourite measuring tool!

2. 
   nikkiwood | Nov 03, 2006 08:39am | #3

   If your eyes are still good enough for the 64ths, go for it.

   Mine aren't.

   ********************************************************
   "It is what we learn after we think we know it all, that counts."

   John Wooden 1910-