The metric thing is kind of intereting. My father told me that countries producing ball and roller bearings agreed that they would be metric. This was back in the '20's I think. And then we have spark plugs. American cars have been made to metric standards for years, mostly. I had a problem with the lug nuts on my Liberty, assuming they were metric. They weren't. Makes it fun when you are trying to find the proper wrench or replace a nut or bolt.
alfadriver wrote: Uh, can I point out that your example is flawed? Having a recipe that asks for a volume vs. one that asks for a mass? If the recipe asked for .5l of flour, it would be the same confusion. And if the recipe asked for .5 lb of flour, it would be good. One uses a scale, the other uses a volume- that's the big difference. None the less, I, too, wish we were metric. Eric
Well, it comes down to convention in recipes. Solids are typically given in mass instead of volume (so flour is given in grams). And while 227 g and 0.5 lb are roughly the same amount, I prefer the precision of the former.
MitchellC wrote:alfadriver wrote: Uh, can I point out that your example is flawed? Having a recipe that asks for a volume vs. one that asks for a mass? If the recipe asked for .5l of flour, it would be the same confusion. And if the recipe asked for .5 lb of flour, it would be good. One uses a scale, the other uses a volume- that's the big difference. None the less, I, too, wish we were metric. EricWell, it comes down to convention in recipes. Solids are typically given in mass instead of volume (so flour is given in grams). And while 227 g and 0.5 lb are roughly the same amount, I prefer the precision of the former.
How about 0.500 lb? same significant digits. Precision is a function of the digits, not the scale of which it's measured. My English scale that's good to +-0.0005 lb is better than your scale that +-1g.
None the less, the issue you solve is mass vs. volume in the base measurement and not english vs metric.
Eric
I have measuring cups but I don't have an accurate scale. I'm cool with volume.
I like recipies with specificity though.
I survived.
"Look right, keep left"
iceracer wrote: The metric thing is kind of intereting. My father told me that countries producing ball and roller bearings agreed that they would be metric. This was back in the '20's I think. And then we have spark plugs. American cars have been made to metric standards for years, mostly. I had a problem with the lug nuts on my Liberty, assuming they were metric. They weren't. Makes it fun when you are trying to find the proper wrench or replace a nut or bolt.
Tires are BOTH metric and English!
The 215 in "215/65R16" is the cross section in mm. The 16 is the wheel diameter in inches. For all I know wheel diameter is expressed universally in inches unless you are talking about PAX or TRX, thank you, Michelin...
But you guys already knew that, right?
I'd pretty much echo what Jay says. I've learned to drive in a LHD car, now live in England drive on the wrong side of the road in a RHD but still take both cars and motorbikes over to "the Continent", aka the rest of Europe.
Normally it's not a problem, overtaking on tight and winding mountain roads can occasionally be an issue but it's far less of an issue than most people think. Heck, they used to run RHD post buses in Switzerland until 20-odd years ago because that does make it easier to judge how close to the edge of the road you are.
The biggest pain in the behind are the toll roads in France if you don't have a passenger as you'd pretty much have to jump out of the car and walk around to the toll booth. Especially if you're strapped into a Miata with a bucket seat and harness because there's no way you're going to reach over that far.
You'll need to log in to post.
