| General > General Technical Chat |
| why is the US not Metric |
| << < (282/291) > >> |
| xrunner:
--- Quote from: TimFox on February 29, 2020, 02:51:33 pm ---Noah to God: “Right! What’s a cubit?” --- End quote --- Priceless! :-DD |
| bsfeechannel:
--- Quote from: forrestc on February 27, 2020, 06:43:37 am ---There are *big* avantages of not obsoleting the old systems/parts. If you don't obsolete the old systems, then you maintain a manufacturing base so both SAE and metric parts are widely available and inexpensive. If instead you abolish the older units system then you find that the parts for the old systems are more and more expensive, as you've found. --- End quote --- That's exactly my point. The drill I was trying to restore is OBSOLETE. The system of measures on which it was designed is OBSOLETE. The only country insisting in its use is the US. And IN the US, the land of obsolete units and parts, it is expensive, compared to what you can find elsewhere in the world in metric. If what you said was true, I should have found an inexpensive imperial part IN the US. P.S.: Just for the record, since it was a restoration I said what the heck and bought the imperial one in the US, but I could have it made to order anywhere else, ending up with 1000 pieces, using just one (for 100 times cheaper) and selling the other imperial 999, our I could have fabricobbled one from a much cheaper metric equivalent. I almost tried that. |
| bsfeechannel:
--- Quote from: TimFox on February 29, 2020, 02:51:33 pm ---Noah to God: “Right! What’s a cubit?” --- End quote --- On second thoughts, the metric system makes too much sense to need the endorsement of a god. |
| CatalinaWOW:
--- Quote from: bsfeechannel on February 29, 2020, 06:12:10 pm --- --- Quote from: forrestc on February 27, 2020, 06:43:37 am ---There are *big* avantages of not obsoleting the old systems/parts. If you don't obsolete the old systems, then you maintain a manufacturing base so both SAE and metric parts are widely available and inexpensive. If instead you abolish the older units system then you find that the parts for the old systems are more and more expensive, as you've found. --- End quote --- That's exactly my point. The drill I was trying to restore is OBSOLETE. The system of measures on which it was designed is OBSOLETE. The only country insisting in its use is the US. And IN the US, the land of obsolete units and parts, it is expensive, compared to what you can find elsewhere in the world in metric. If what you said was true, I should have found an inexpensive imperial part IN the US. P.S.: Just for the record, since it was a restoration I said what the heck and bought the imperial one in the US, but I could have it made to order anywhere else, ending up with 1000 pieces, using just one (for 100 times cheaper) and selling the other imperial 999, our I could have fabricobbled one from a much cheaper metric equivalent. I almost tried that. --- End quote --- IF it was a standard part it would have been cheap. But for a variety of reasons ranging from marketing to performance optimization manufacturers use non-standard parts. This happens in both the imperial and metric world. And those non-standard parts cost more in both the metric and imperial world. If you were able to order a 1000 of your needed custom part for 1/100th of the unit cost of the part you needed it represents two things. First, you found a very cheap source of supply. While some fraction of that lower cost may be due to metric standardization, the vast majority is due to other factors. (It is really hard to understand how metric standardization lowers the cost of a non-standard, non-metric part, but I am willing to stipulate that there might be something. Lower overhead or something like that.) There are reasons that China dominates manufacturing worldwide, not just compared to the US. All of the other metric countries in the world find it difficult to compete with Chinese costs. The second reason is just as important. As you demonstrated the market is there for the convenience and speed of just ordering one part. The vendor of your part set his price accordingly. This is also not an imperial/metric thing, it comes back to the original choice of a non-standard part. This kind of comment is why so many people take issue with your rants. There are many advantages to the metric system. But you are willing to go far beyond the real advantages of metric in your arguments. Whether it is pure trolling for your entertainment, or religious zeal for metric it takes away from your argument and is distasteful to many. |
| KL27x:
This is like complaining I can't find a body panels or a swingarm wrench or a hydraulic clutch lever for a 1980 Honda VFR even in Japan. You think we are making modern drills with the same collection of parts out of your antique? We just figured out a better way to put them all together? ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; I vaguely recall bsfeechannel mentioned this was a ball bearing? This is actually something which makes sense to standardize. Ball bearings have insane tolerances and a very complex and sophisticated manufacturing method, and getting all the pieces of this process in harmony is a bear. And we don't really need otherwise identical ball bearings with OD in imperial and in metric. In US, we use metric ball bearings pretty much, like everyone else, unless there's a really really good reason. Your old drill is a victim of metrication. Or of standardization in general. A ball bearing manufacturer can stop his production line and tweak everything to churn out imperial sized bearings, but of course that costs a crapton. And why not crank out 1000 rather than just the one, after you've done all that and done all the tweaking and tuning and making dozens of pieces of scrap before they start coming out in spec (in the time they could have continued to churn out hundreds or thousands of the metric ones with a blindfold on; just another Wednesday). And then they have to tweak everything back after they make your stupid bearing. An American restoring your drill would have figure out how to use the next closest size, by reaming out the hole bigger, or by machining a bushing to make the smaller one fit. Or maybe both. Reaming it out so you can make a bushing that isn't wafer thin. OTOH, if the hole is just a tad too big, you might even be able to press fit it in with just some shim stock strategically shoved between? Maybe a trick you can try if you don't have fancy tools and skills. Ditto to the shaft that goes in it, of course. Might need a bushing or building up and/or turning down. You could probably buy bushings or shims for some of these problems. If you sat down and did some math to know how to find it. Rather than just trying to order the numbers on the part. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |