jaydee
Been here for a while
Posts: 92
|
Post by jaydee on Jan 12, 2021 6:56:25 GMT 10
It amazes me how the measurements of a Caravan is quoted in the old imperial scale of feet & inches.
Very rarely do I see the metric system being quoted in any caravan discussions.
To use a famous quote.
"Why is this so."
P.S. Our van is approx. 22 ft or 6.53 Metres.
Jay&Dee
|
|
|
Post by Old Techo on Jan 12, 2021 8:17:03 GMT 10
J&D,
Personally I prefer imperial as it makes for instant mental comparison with older vans.
Perhaps van makers/sellers are marketing mostly to older people stuck in the imperial era?
I know we are in the metric age and I use metric for many purposes. When necessary I do metric conversions in my head but I prefer to know that a person is a nice round figure of 6 foot tall and not 183 cms.
With imperial we use feet and inches for everyday objects and they have a ratio of 12:1. A trouble with the metric scale is the large 100:1 ratio between the metre and the centimetre. Often one is too big and the other too small. This could be solved if we used the in-between decimetre but that is not popular.
|
|
|
Post by GerryP on Jan 12, 2021 8:37:23 GMT 10
I grew up(my wife might dispute that) in the old imperial system and did part of my engineering studies during the change to metric.
I'm pretty comfortable with both and use metric most of the time. But there are still some things where imperial just seems to make more sense. One is tyre pressure in psi and the other is van and trailer size. So my trailer is 8' x 5', not 2438 x 1524.
|
|
|
Post by jr on Jan 12, 2021 10:14:31 GMT 10
Hi Jay& Dee, When it comes to van length nothing has change in the caravan industry since metric has come in, there has never been a hard rule on the issue. The other issue is caravan companies often quote the internal size or the overall length and itβs hard to know which length they are taking about. When booking into a caravan park I quote the full length in metres and that usually works. JR
|
|
|
Post by loub on Jan 12, 2021 15:16:16 GMT 10
I am with imperial comparison. For me my van is 21ft and my biggie is miles per gal,28 niles to the gal is good.10 l to 100k doesn't rate iam afraid
|
|
jock
Seasoned veteran
Posts: 350
|
Post by jock on Jan 12, 2021 18:20:49 GMT 10
Interesting subject this. It has been discussed quite a few times before, over the years, on various forums...Yes it is still amazing that even as more years pass after the metrics were introduced, imperial measurements are still being used ...not only by older individuals but by many industries..e.g. Some in the real estate industry still advertise properties in acres, 9 foot ceilings etc. are still mentioned. When referring to an individual's height it is not uncommon to see feet and inches quoted. In the Automotive industry wheels are still being referred to as 15" or 16" etc. etc. Many years ago the powers that be decided that it was against the law for industry to advertise imperial...That, together with the trade practices act seems to have gone out the window.
Jock
|
|
|
Post by Old Techo on Jan 12, 2021 19:08:12 GMT 10
Jock,
Wheel diameters are quoted in inches coz that's what they actually are.
I assume to convert wheels to genuine rounded metric sizes the whole world would have to agree as some nations are still imperial, like the Yanks.
This would be a problem for tyre makers as they would have to make every tyre in metric for the new and imperial for the existing users.
I hate the idea of using rounded approx metric sizes to describe imperial sizes. Here are the exact imperial conversions...
13 = 330.2 14 = 355.6 15 = 381.0 16 = 406.4 17 = 431.8 18 = 457.2
19 = 482.6
|
|
|
Post by GerryP on Jan 12, 2021 19:43:34 GMT 10
Yes, some industries 'appear' to have gone metric, but actually still use imperial size goods. The plumbing and refrigeration industries are such examples with their copper tube sizes. They might refer to 12.5mm, 20mm, 25mm tube and so on, but in actual fact are still 1/2" (12.7mm), 3/4" (19.05mm), 1" (25.4mm).
Like you say OT, it would create quite an expensive situation if we had a mix of both as all of the various fittings and other hardware would also need to be changed to suit. Not to mention adapters to join the old and new together for upgrades and repairs.
|
|
|
Post by nsgnomad on Jan 12, 2021 21:30:17 GMT 10
I think it is about time we gave the imperial system the bullet.
We only have to decide whether to use 0.303 " or 7.62mm.
Or .357 magnum or a 9mm. π€£π
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2021 6:58:12 GMT 10
I noticed this time we were looking at Vans that AVan quote Metric, but appeared to be one of very few. I'd wager that most Manufacturers are using the Metric system to build, but still quote the Van size in Imperial. Regards,
|
|
jock
Seasoned veteran
Posts: 350
|
Post by jock on Jan 13, 2021 7:18:58 GMT 10
Geez! OT...cant agree with your theory here...Tyre sizes are already quoted with a mix of Metric & Imperial..e.g. My Terracan tyres are 255 (metric) x 55 (aspect metric) x R16 (Imperial)...Allthough, probably due to my age, I, personally prefer the imperial sizes, I cant see why rims cant be quoted in metric...I dont think dropping the fraction of a mm would make any difference..e.g. a 16" would be called a 406mm... a bit more of a mouthfull but no worse than everything else that had to be converted.
Other significant industries, like the building industry, have conformed even though existing supplies have had to be made for both old re-works and new. What do the Yanks quote piston bore sizes compared to, say the Europeans?
Interesting discussion.
Jock
|
|
|
Post by Old Techo on Jan 13, 2021 7:55:44 GMT 10
Morning Jock,
Now you won't get away with calling aspect ratio metric
It is a ratio of 0.55:1 in your example but then expressed as a percentage.
'Per cent' or 'per centum' is a ratio where the second term is 100 thus so many parts of 100.
Re your Yank piston question, perhaps... www.rd.com/article/why-u-s-doesnt-use-metric-system/
|
|
|
Post by nsgnomad on Jan 13, 2021 8:10:48 GMT 10
The basic reason then is that the Americans want to do things their own way and far be it from them that common sense should have anything to do with it. π
|
|
|
Post by bazza44 on Jan 13, 2021 8:23:47 GMT 10
I retired from the building industry and we always used metres and millimetres. Never centimetres, that is where confusion is made.
For example 25mm is 2.5cm, but if the decimal point is not clear it becomes 25cm. Imagine the stuff ups.
A sheet of ply is 2400 x 1200, pronounced 24 hundred x 12 hundred, with no mention of mm because we all know that it is in mm, no mistakes.
As far as vans go mine is 21ft but 8.6 m overall from from tow coupling to spare wheel on back. Van size still imperial for me, but I have found some parks want overall in metric.
I can remember back before front boots were designed on vans, that the van size was - overall body length -. When front boots were added the length was, - body length without the front boot - which became know as -inside measurement - that is still used today by most manufacturers. Pretty useless size as far as I am concerned.
Barry
|
|
|
Post by nsgnomad on Jan 13, 2021 8:31:47 GMT 10
Bazza, your sheet of plywood, the so called 2400 x 1200 is still an imperial size because it actually measures 2440 x 1220, the metric equivalent of an 8 x 4 (feet). π¨
Now that might be the reason that caravans are still measured in feet. After all, they are all lined with plywood, are they not?
|
|