Metric Signs

[SEWIGuy]

Since it is actually easier to do conversions than it was in the late 70s, my guess is that we are further away than we ever have been from converting to metric.  You are going to see it more in items like packaging (liter soda bottles for example), but you will never see it on the roadways or in temperatures and the like.

[english si]

The UK has almost dropped Farenheit from conversation entirely - it was quite common 10 years ago. I think when the weather only gave "that's about 80" occasionally during the summer, or "we're going to see 100 degrees for the first time in the UK today", the rest of the culture followed.

Before that it was much more of a centigrade in winter and Fahrenheit in summer - probably to make our maritime climate seem like it went to bigger extremes and the weather tended to give dual units more often.

However because the US is totally Fahrenheit for weather, it's unlikely to change there.

[Duke87]

The centigrade scale is the one part of metric units that I see no real advantage to. Yeah, the freezing and boiling points of water at standard pressure are nice round numbers, but so what? That doesn't really make the scale any more intuitive or convenient to use.

Other units are definitely more convenient in metric simply because the conversion factors between units of the same type are all multiples of 10. 100 centimeters in a meter and 1000 meters in a kilometer is easier to work with than 12 inches in a foot and 5280 feet in a mile, no question. But degrees are degrees. No multiple or fraction of them is ever used as a unit. So, where's the benefit to just changing the datum and the size of the increment? Surely remembering that water freezes at 32 degrees and boils at 212 isn't that difficult.

Now, on the other hand, if you'd get average people to be familiar and comfortable with an absolute scale (Kelvin or Rankine, your choice), then you'd have achieved something.

[mgk920]

Yield in Europe has the unique upside down triangle. Actually pay some attention to European signage before going "it's all crap".

There's only so many shapes you can make signs - Europe went with circles for legal stuff (red-ringed prohibitions, white on blue mandatory requirements), triangles for warning stuff (so even if you can't discern one of the many very distinct symbols on that, you know you have been told to look out) and rectangles for information signage. STOP and Yield/Give Way have special shapes and most countries have one for pedestrian crossings (the UK tends to use either traffic lights or big yellow balls on stripy poles to mark official, peds have right-of-way at some point, crossings so don't have a special symbol).

Most importantly for this discussion, we also have an X-type shape for level crossings, going beneath the warning triangle with a picture of a train, with a gate, or without a gate, dependant on the crossing (none of this RR rubbish, that even people who have English as a first language might only get because they've seen films). We also put wig-wag flashing orange balls warning of a hazard, which go on when a train is coming and turn off only after it's gone (unless another one comes).

I think, what with the flashing lights, gates (if the road is in anyway busy) with bells, whistles and lights on and the special X-shaped sign under the warning sign with a picture of a train on it, European crossings are pretty obvious - at least as much so as their American counterparts, if not more so.

The down-pointing red triangle YIELD sign now used in Europe was developed in the USA, the European version simply omits the word 'YIELD'.

The red-octagon STOP sign was also developed in the USA.

Railroad crossing signals in Canada and the USA are unmistakable, only different from those used in Europe.  The only notable difference between those of Canada and those of the USA is the 'crossbuck' part of the assembly.  The Canadian version is a white 'X' with a red outline while the USA version omits the red outline but includes the crossed words 'RAILROAD' and 'CROSSING'.

Mike

[Tom]

I think it just boils down to whether or not you have learned to convert to metric and back or not.  The only ones I can convert are the temperatures and speed limits.  The first I learned taking a weather course in the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary, and the other only because the speedometer shows both m.p.h. and k.p.h.  Other than that, there's maybe a few I learned from memorizing, such as there's about 39 inches in 1 meter.

[english si]

The down-pointing red triangle YIELD sign now used in Europe was developed in the USA, the European version simply omits the word 'YIELD'.

In the UK they put it in British English - "Give Way", and bilingually on other things. Fairly certain that at least some other countries do likewise.

The red-octagon STOP sign was also developed in the USA.

Yes, but it doesn't matter who made it. What matters is that we actually do have unique shapes over here for important signs.

The centigrade scale is the one part of metric units that I see no real advantage to. Yeah, the freezing and boiling points of water at standard pressure are nice round numbers, but so what? That doesn't really make the scale any more intuitive or convenient to use.

Indeed, I'm just saying that we don't really use it any more. I'd argue that given the finer scale, and that UK weather would easily fit in the 0-100 range with few exceptions Farenheit it's probably a better system for weather in the UK, but we've ditched it. Of course it, like Centigrade, it was 0 and 100 set at two points - neither are any more metric.

I have several speculative reasons for the change of unit in the UK over the last 40 years:
1)deg C is more European, less American than deg F - the media and the elite likes that
2)deg F is 'old', whereas deg C is 'new' (of course, they are both about the same age, but our forebears used Farenheit, so clearly we can't as we chase whatever seems new)
3)Ovens don't have deg F on them, and deg C is probably better for that, so we use that temp scale for that thing, might as well use it for weather
4)Science/Geography at school is exclusively deg C - the government brainwashing program to certain units 'dead' without banning them is working.
5)Probably the biggest reason - the weather started giving dual units, changed the primary unit and stopped giving deg F and everyone else followed.

[vdeane]

4)Science/Geography at school is exclusively deg C - the government brainwashing program to certain units 'dead' without banning them is working.

In that case, expect the US to go metric eventually.  All our science/math in school is metric.  Conversion factors between different English units aren't even taught any more.

[deathtopumpkins]

4)Science/Geography at school is exclusively deg C - the government brainwashing program to certain units 'dead' without banning them is working.

In that case, expect the US to go metric eventually.  All our science/math in school is metric.  Conversion factors between different English units aren't even taught any more.

Maybe in New York, but here in Virginia everything is still taught in good ol' miles, feet, pounds, etc.

[corco]

I'm not sure whether we actually want to go metric or not, but I'm 90% sure the only way for this country to pull it off is to do it cold-turkey. The slow phasein we had in the 70s and 80s that was supposed to lead to metrication failed miserably.

An overnight change is obviously infeasible, but I'd say within 1 year of announcing a metrication policy we'd need to be fully converted- that means new signs, cars retrofitted with primarily km/h speedometers, no english packaging or recipes, very limited production of english unit-based items like rulers. Banning the system altogether would be hugely unAmerican, and I'm not sure exactly how but I'd bet it would be unconstitutional as well, so you'd have to incentivize the conversion massively.

No matter how you feel about it, I'm not quite sure we can afford to do all that right now. I think the conversion would be beneficial long term and I really hope to see it in my lifetime, but I firmly believe the only way to do it is to go cold-turkey and switch within a year (similar to how Canada did it except maybe even more compressed- but now how the Brits are doing it). That will cost an exorbitant amount of money to pull off.

[Duke87]

I was taught about both metric and US customary units here in Connecticut, at least in grade school. In science class in high school we did everything in metric because, as we were taught, science is supposed to be done in metric.
Then I went to college and found that engineering classes were mostly still being taught in US customary units... and went to work and found that the same was true for actual engineering and construction. Still, there is motion towards metric slowly occurring. As of last year, the FE exam features problems using both sets of units. Previously it was all US units.

[Stephane Dumas]

I spotted on Youtube, a vintage tv australian ad from 1974 when Australia switched to the metric system in 1974.

[realjd]

As an engineer, metric makes a lot of sense. The units just plain work out better. I can see us continuing to increase metric usage in consumer products as well as most other occasions. Anything past middle school science, metric (or rather, SI) was taught because it's what everyone uses. Even the US military uses metric.

As for roads, I don't really see the benefit, and I don't see it happening any time soon. Why bother to change? Most Americans can estimate distance in miles better than kilometers. Most cars are marked in miles, and the km scale is hard to read (if present at all). I have no problem traveling to other countries because the speedometers are marked appropriately for the limits (well, usually - I've had cars marked ONLY in km in Caribbean islands with speed limits in mph). Foreigners may not understand intuitively how fast 40 mph is, but the speedo on their rental cars shows them that clearly. Moving to metric speeds/distances just seems like a costly, unnecessary move to me.

You all know the quick, dirty conversion for temperature, right? Take the Celsius, double it, and add 30. It's not exact, but it gets you close enough.

[Duke87]

I've definitely heard that method before, but I personally find it easier to just know C = 5/9(F-32) and work from there. I'm more inclined to remember the full formula than an approximation derived from it.

As for other conversion factors, I can memorize numbers pretty easily so I have no problem with them.
1 mi = 5280 ft = 1760 yd = 1.609 km
1 km = 0.621 mi
1 in = 2.54 cm
1 ft = 0.3048 m
1 m = 3.28 ft
1 gal(US) = 231 in³ = 128 fl oz = 3.785 L
1 gal(imp) = 1.2 gal(US)
1 lb = 4.448 N ≈ 2.2 kg
1 atm = 14.7 psi = 101.3 kPa = 760 mmHg ≈ 34 ftH₂0

This is what happens to you when you spend too much time staring at those "useful information" tables in the back of marble notebooks as a kid.

[bogdown]

You know, why does ARZ worry about immigration when they gotta figure out "Metric or Customary"

[Bickendan]

1 mi = 5280 ft = 1760 yd = 1.609 km
1 km = 0.621 mi

I realize that the mile/km conversion isn't a perfect 5/8 ratio, but I've always found the 1.6/.625 to work far, far better than conversion factors I've found elsewhere.

[Sykotyk]

Agreed. Even Ontario when crossing from the I-190 has a sign saying 100km is 60mph (I think, been quite a few years since using that crossing).

Sykotyk

[Bickendan]

That is an inaccurate sign. 100 km is 62.5 miles (or 62.1, as Duke and a few textbooks I've seen note...).

[vdeane]

Close enough though, especially since Americans think in multiples of 5 (to be fair, the rest of the world thinks in multiples of 10).

[Kniwt]

The Canadian "Thinkmetric" signs were notorious for doing approximate, rounded conversions. 70 km/h was supposedly equal to 45 mph as well.

Indeed, here's another particularly notorious one:

[Max B. (FreewayTitan)]

I don't really see the changing exit numbers as that big of a deal-it's not unlike the states that changed numbers when they switched from sequential numbering to mile-based numbering. Personally, I think it seems a little ridiculous to like them just because of their unique nature. If I had my choice, I'd switch them to miles. But if there's a lot of local opposition to changing them, then it probably isn't worth the controversy.

And that should be the case, I see no reason in changing them. Thanks for sharing!

[corco]

That is an inaccurate sign. 100 km is 62.5 miles (or 62.1, as Duke and a few textbooks I've seen note...).

I'd rather see that than this

[mgk920]

That is an inaccurate sign. 100 km is 62.5 miles (or 62.1, as Duke and a few textbooks I've seen note...).

I'd rather see that than this

Under current rules, that bottom sign would say '90' (convert and round up to the next multiple of 5)

Mike

[corco]

Under current rules, that bottom sign would say '90' (convert and round up to the next multiple of 5)

Right, and that's the way it should be, even though it may be slightly inaccurate.

[Bickendan]

Whereas 88 is spot on.

Just for kicks, though: The sign reads 55/90.
You're doing 90, cop pulls you over.
"You know how fast you were going, son?"
"Um, 90 kmh. Why?"
"Exactly. Speed limit's 55, not 56 and a quarter. We go by the lower number in these here parts. Gonna need to see yer license, insurance and registration and I'm gonna need you step outside your ve-hic-le."

[hm insulators]

 

What's wrong with the metric system?  Eventually, we'll switch over...

I've been hearing that since the late 70s when I was in school and we had some woman come in especially to teach us about the metric system because as we were told at the time, we were going to be completely converting to it soon. I don't see that we're any closer to doing it now than we were 30 years ago. And that's fine with me.

I remember in the early '70s that we were going to be on the metric system starting in 1976 or thereabouts and the teachers all wanted us to teach our parents and grandparents about the metric system. But 1976 came along and by then, with double-digit inflation, high unemployment, plus Watergate and Vietnam still echoing through the nation's consciousness, the country had far more pressing issues than whether or not we measured the distance from L.A. to San Francisco in miles or kilometers. So that half-hearted effort to switch came to an end.

Every half-decade or so, some politico or high-falutin' educational bigwig will step up and say, "You know, America really needs to switch to the metric system and be like everybody else..." and blah, blah, blah. And we the people say exactly the same thing: "Shut up, Crackerbox!" And that's just fine with me, too!