Metric vs Imperial units

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

now I remember ..the frogs made those TRX ...right ..

User avatar
mep
29
Joined: 11 Oct 2003, 15:48
Location: Germany

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

To sum strads post up.
It seems that its good to have a war from time to time to bring your country up to latest developments.
I think Napoleon spread many good things around Europe.
The demand of uniform gun sizes also helps to spread your units.

marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

no real explanation for the remaining inch sizes of the wheelsto be found ..I could imagine that it was Michelin/Goodyear s development of these safety and low profile tyres in that area
trying to have a clear means of separating the two concepts that avoided mm wheels to happen when everything in the world got Si`d?

aral
aral
26
Joined: 03 Apr 2010, 22:49

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

strad wrote:Let's go ALL the way off topic:
Try to be tolerant. Seven hundred years ago everybody used the English system, and if distressing numbers of us have proven fickle in the centuries since, that's no reason to dump on the Brits.

In the Middle Ages you kept to the left for the simple reason that you never knew who you'd meet on the road in those days. You wanted to make sure that a stranger passed on the right so you could go for your sword in case he proved unfriendly.

This custom was given official sanction in 1300 AD, when Pope Boniface VIII invented the modern science of traffic control by declaring that pilgrims headed to Rome should keep left.

The papal system prevailed until the late 1700s, when teamsters in the United States and France began hauling farm products in big wagons pulled by several pairs of horses. These wagons had no driver's seat. Instead the driver sat on the left rear horse, so he could keep his right arm free to lash the team. Since you were sitting on the left, naturally you wanted everybody to pass on the left so you could look down and make sure you kept clear of the other guy's wheels. Ergo, you kept to the right side of the road. The first known keep-right law in the U.S. was enacted in Pennsylvania in 1792, and in the ensuing years many states and Canadian provinces followed suit.

In France the keep-right custom was established in much the same way. An added impetus was that, this being the era of the French Revolution and all, people figured, hey, no pope gonna tell ME what to do. (See above.) Later Napoleon enforced the keep-right rule in all countries occupied by his armies. The custom endured even after the empire was destroyed.

In small-is-beautiful England, though, they didn't use monster wagons that required the driver to ride a horse. Instead the guy sat on a seat mounted on the wagon. What's more, he usually sat on the right side of the seat so the whip wouldn't hang up on the load behind him when he flogged the horses. (Then as now, most people did their flogging right-handed.) So the English continued to drive on the left, not realizing that the tide of history was running against them and they would wind up being ridiculed by folks like you with no appreciation of life's little ironies. Keeping left first entered English law in 1756, with the enactment of an ordinance governing traffic on the London Bridge, and ultimately became the rule throughout the British Empire.

The trend among nations over the years has been toward driving on the right, but Britain has done its best to stave off global homogenization. Its former colony India remains a hotbed of leftist sentiment, as does Indonesia, which was occupied by the British in the early 19th century. The English minister to Japan achieved the coup of his career in 1859 when he persuaded his hosts to make keep-left the law in the future home of Toyota and Mitsubishi.

Nonetheless, the power of the right has been growing steadily. When Germany annexed Austria in 1938, it brutally suppressed the latter's keep-left rights, and much the same happened in Czechoslovakia in 1939. The last holdouts in mainland Europe, the Swedes, finally switched to the right in 1967 because most of the countries they sold Saabs and Volvos to were righties and they got tired of having to make different versions for domestic use and export.

The current battleground is the island of Timor. The Indonesians, who own west Timor, have been whiling away the hours exterminating the native culture of the east Timorese. The issue? Some say it's religion, some say it's language, but I know the truth: in east Timor they drive on the right, in west Timor they drive on the left.
An interesting aside to all this info, is that, initially all French cars had the steering wheel on the RIGHT, despite driving on the right. I think that they changed over in the 20s?
Anyway, there are plans for Brits to change over to driving on the right. All cars with even numbers at the end of the registration, are to drive on the right on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. While all cars with odd numbers, will drive on the right on Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays. Any cars remaining from this experiment, will be allowed to drive on whichever side they want, on Sundays.

Jersey Tom
Jersey Tom
166
Joined: 29 May 2006, 20:49
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

Wheel sizes IMO are a matter of practicality.

Think of how many car wheels are out there. Changing them over to Metric dimensions.. outrageously expensive and not exactly environmentally friendly. No benefit. And the crossover period of having metric AND english wheel sizes would be a logistical disaster.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.

Richard
Richard
Moderator
Joined: 15 Apr 2009, 14:41
Location: UK

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

It is just a matter of using different units for the same physical object. An 18 inch wheel becomes 455mm. That's how we ended up with such odd numbers for width.

aral
aral
26
Joined: 03 Apr 2010, 22:49

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

Jersey Tom wrote:Wheel sizes IMO are a matter of practicality.

Think of how many car wheels are out there. Changing them over to Metric dimensions.. outrageously expensive and not exactly environmentally friendly. No benefit. And the crossover period of having metric AND english wheel sizes would be a logistical disaster.
But as far as I can recall, I read an article that maintained that a tyre made on the continent, and to a "inch" specification, would actually turn on a british rim, made precisely to the "inch" measurement.
Maybe the continentals manufacture to the metric equialent of "inch" but not accurately enough to be a precise "inch" measurement?

aral
aral
26
Joined: 03 Apr 2010, 22:49

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

richard_leeds wrote:It is just a matter of using different units for the same physical object. An 18 inch wheel becomes 455mm. That's how we ended up with such odd numbers for width.
There may lie the problem. 18 inches is actually 457.2mm

Pup
Pup
50
Joined: 08 May 2008, 17:45

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

mep wrote:To sum strads post up.
It seems that its good to have a war from time to time to bring your country up to latest developments.
I think Napoleon spread many good things around Europe.
The demand of uniform gun sizes also helps to spread your units.
Ja, the benefits of war are often overlooked by the losing side.
Last edited by Pup on 26 Aug 2010, 15:17, edited 1 time in total.

Pup
Pup
50
Joined: 08 May 2008, 17:45

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

richard_leeds wrote:It is just a matter of using different units for the same physical object. An 18 inch wheel becomes 455mm. That's how we ended up with such odd numbers for width.
Another example of British and American ingenuity. The fact that we let them pretend they're metric - well, that's just sneaky.

Pup
Pup
50
Joined: 08 May 2008, 17:45

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

Not to take issue with Strad's very informative post, but I believe the bit about Pope Boniface VIII is incorrect. His only known edicts on lane preference concerned the traffic along the bridge of St. Angelo, where he instructed pilgrims to keep to the right. Dante Alighieri, btw, was a lefty - so read into that what you will.

Also, I'm suspicious of the medieval horseback sword side tale, since regardless of which side one should pass, both riders are at an equal advantage/disadvantage, assuming they are same-handed. It would be more customary for approaching strangers to keep their weapons at a distance to avoid provocation.

Jersey Tom
Jersey Tom
166
Joined: 29 May 2006, 20:49
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

gilgen wrote:
Jersey Tom wrote:Wheel sizes IMO are a matter of practicality.

Think of how many car wheels are out there. Changing them over to Metric dimensions.. outrageously expensive and not exactly environmentally friendly. No benefit. And the crossover period of having metric AND english wheel sizes would be a logistical disaster.
But as far as I can recall, I read an article that maintained that a tyre made on the continent, and to a "inch" specification, would actually turn on a british rim, made precisely to the "inch" measurement.
Maybe the continentals manufacture to the metric equialent of "inch" but not accurately enough to be a precise "inch" measurement?
Nah.

ETRTO and T&RA establish very specific standards for rim sizes and tolerances. There's no challenge on metric equipment of building to English dimensions, and vice versa. A tire is designed to be interchangeable and used on a 15" wheel regardless of where it's made, so long as it meets the standard.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.

tok-tokkie
tok-tokkie
36
Joined: 08 Jun 2009, 16:21
Location: Cape Town

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

I worked in the tyre industry in the 60s. Citroen had a 300mm rim (could have been 305 or 310) for a short while. I can't find any Google confirmation.

Richard
Richard
Moderator
Joined: 15 Apr 2009, 14:41
Location: UK

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

gilgen wrote:
richard_leeds wrote:It is just a matter of using different units for the same physical object. An 18 inch wheel becomes 455mm. That's how we ended up with such odd numbers for width.
There may lie the problem. 18 inches is actually 457.2mm
Sorry, I was meaning serial size rounded to the nearest 5mm. I thought the tyre widths are neatly rounded conversions from inches, hence 195, 215, 255.

User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

Re: Metric vs Imperial units

Post

mep wrote:To sum strads post up.
It seems that its good to have a war from time to time to bring your country up to latest developments.
I think Napoleon spread many good things around Europe.
The demand of uniform gun sizes also helps to spread your units.
Hmmmmm Just how do you get that from my post????
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss