stevieboy308:
But you agree a 4m truck will fit under a 4.0386m bridge?
I do hope when you’re doing the conversion into old school so you can understand it, the rounding doesn’t knock off more than 387mm
The bit over the 4m is 38.6mm Not 386 mm This is why the metric system fails, too many people don’t understand it.
I had somebody a while ago that would not accept that 1.8 was greater than 1.56 (but 56 is bigger than 8 she kept arguing)
Imperial is universally understood, 13’ 11" is bigger than 13’ 9"
Bluey Circles:
The bit over the 4m is 38.6mm Not 386 mm This is why the metric system fails, too many people don’t understand it.
I had somebody a while ago that would not accept that 1.8 was greater than 1.56 (but 56 is bigger than 8 she kept arguing)
Imperial is universally understood, 13’ 11" is bigger than 13’ 9"
I don’t disbelieve you, but that’s a failure of her school. 1.80 is clearly more than 1.56; or 1.8 more than 1.5. Maybe she was winding you up - after all many women have been fooled into believing that 6" is 8".
Bluey Circles:
The bit over the 4m is 38.6mm Not 386 mm This is why the metric system fails, too many people don’t understand it.
I had somebody a while ago that would not accept that 1.8 was greater than 1.56 (but 56 is bigger than 8 she kept arguing)
Imperial is universally understood, 13’ 11" is bigger than 13’ 9"
I don’t disbelieve you, but that’s a failure of her school. 1.80 is clearly more than 1.56; or 1.8 more than 1.5. Maybe she was winding you up - after all many women have been fooled into believing that 6" is 8".
switchlogic:
As it happens I’ve used Whitworth plenty of times on stuff made in my lifetime, and just before, as an apprentice mechanic on old Leyland buses
What reg were the buses ?.
I was born at the end of the 1950’s and don’t think that much made since then generally used Whitworth fastenings.While if it did I wasn’t familiar with it.
Late 60s to late 70s, they used a real hotchpotch of weird sizes. Still got many of my strange spanners that are next to useless. Back then you could even get most weird sizes from Snap On, maybe you still can
In the late 60’s BMC/ BL were still turning out vehicles with BSF and Whitworth threads needing the approprate spanners, mostly on the chassis as they were 50’s designs. I’ve a load of old spanners , some with ‘War finish’ stamped on them and a few going back to pre WW1, plus all the ones I bought when I started repairing trucks in 1966! However they get used regularly as I restore vintage machinery and engines for a hobby.
I have never grasped the Metric system, I left school in 66 before it came into general use and still weigh stuff in lbs and ounces and measure in feet and inches. I weigh 15 1/2 stone, no idea what that is in the metric system, so I guess I’m like Carryfast, a Dinosaur from a forgotten time? All of which has now’t do do with hitting a bridge, if it wasn’t labelled in feet and inches I wouldn’t have a clue if the lorry would go through or not!
stevieboy308:
But you agree a 4m truck will fit under a 4.0386m bridge?
I do hope when you’re doing the conversion into old school so you can understand it, the rounding doesn’t knock off more than 387mm
The bit over the 4m is 38.6mm Not 386 mm This is why the metric system fails, too many people don’t understand it.
I had somebody a while ago that would not accept that 1.8 was greater than 1.56 (but 56 is bigger than 8 she kept arguing)
Imperial is universally understood, 13’ 11" is bigger than 13’ 9"
Doh!! What a time to ■■■■ up!!
Embarrassingly I went to college to do engineering, so have spent plenty of time working to microns nevermind mm. So I do understand it and my only excuse is I was rushing, should have picked up on it as when I first seen the number I said to myself just under 4cm
Captain Caveman 76:
Sorry, I should have explained that better. I meant a higher degree of accuracy during design and manufacturing processes.
In the real world that generally means that designers using imperial would go for the best size for the job not the minimum size.As anyone who’s had to use an extractor to retrieve a pathetically small predictably broken water pump bolt from an old BMW engine would know.
pedantic to the end…though if someone else replies,no doubt it wont be the end,
europe inc the uk is metric …the bridge ultimately says,4.1m…johnny flipflop knows he can get under a 4m bridge…why would he have any requirement to look further…but keep on flogging…time for a wee snooze now surely?
Bluey Circles:
And there was a mad time (80s ?) when you could have machines, vehicles, trailers with a mad mix of both imperial and metric fastenings. You had to be very careful on choosing sockets and spanners, put a 13mm on a 1/2 inch or a 19mm on a 3/4 and you would round it.
But getting back to heights, how do you all measure your height, do you hold a pole up to the corner closest to the drivers door and take that as accurate or do you measure all four corners of the trailer and use the highest. If you have measured it at full weight do you check again empty (could be significant differences when we were riding on steel, not so much now) And what do you use for measuring, a proper telescopic pole with angled top of just any leghth of wood then measure it with a spool measure ?
I’ve got an early 1980’s Jag which has a mixture of metric and AF on it.There were also from memory UK built Fords with AF then German made ones with Metric including those stupid and expensive metric TRX wheels and tyres on the Mk2 Granada.The issue of interchangeability of AF v Metric spanners sockets at the relevant sizes isn’t that much of a big deal and doesn’t really need a hammer.
As for vehicle heights they are usually already known by the operator in the form of load deck/fifth wheel height and load dimensions before loading a flat or from the original spec sheet in the case of a box/curtain sider etc.Which in this case just meant establishing the probably already known 4m height in imperial before leaving the yard.While there are obviously numerous methods available if you need to measure an unknown vehicle height.Usually on the same basis of establishing load deck/fifth wheel height then roof or load height to load deck/fifth wheel height and adding the two together.
dieseldog999:
pedantic to the end…though if someone else replies,no doubt it wont be the end,
europe inc the uk is metric …the bridge ultimately says,4.1m…johnny flipflop knows he can get under a 4m bridge…why would he have any requirement to look further…but keep on flogging…time for a wee snooze now surely?
If the UK is metric why is it law to have a cab height indicator displaying height in imperial here ?.
windrush:
In the late 60’s BMC/ BL were still turning out vehicles with BSF and Whitworth threads needing the approprate spanners, mostly on the chassis as they were 50’s designs. I’ve a load of old spanners , some with ‘War finish’ stamped on them and a few going back to pre WW1, plus all the ones I bought when I started repairing trucks in 1966! However they get used regularly as I restore vintage machinery and engines for a hobby.
I have never grasped the Metric system, I left school in 66 before it came into general use and still weigh stuff in lbs and ounces and measure in feet and inches. I weigh 15 1/2 stone, no idea what that is in the metric system, so I guess I’m like Carryfast, a Dinosaur from a forgotten time? All of which has now’t do do with hitting a bridge, if it wasn’t labelled in feet and inches I wouldn’t have a clue if the lorry would go through or not!
Pete.
In my case we had the best of all worlds education in both systems and could swap between the two without too much difficulty.As I’ve said to the point of sometimes being given measurements in metric but machines calibrated in imperial.The result being an open minded attitude to both but ironically a preference and respect for the imperial system.Simply because it provides the best all round system,in the form of it providing the right many different units of measurement for the job.Unlike the flawed one size fits all one unit based metric system.Which leaves the question of the arrogant ignorant nature of the metric proponents ( nazis ).Which in this case means drivers establishing vehicle heights in imperial when travelling here just as they should establish them in metric when going to the continent.
Although having said that even the most open minded attitude wouldn’t support the use of Whitworth and AF tool requirements v metric. The correct wholesale move to AF which I’m more familiar with being the key point in that regard.Luckily all the older type vehicles I was/am familiar with working with seeming to be in line with that change.
Captain Caveman 76:
Sorry, I should have explained that better. I meant a higher degree of accuracy during design and manufacturing processes.
In the real world that generally means that designers using imperial would go for the best size for the job not the minimum size.As anyone who’s had to use an extractor to retrieve a pathetically small predictably broken water pump bolt from an old BMW engine would know.
Ah there we go. Wouldn’t be a proper Carryfast thread hijack unless he got a different at BMW in.
Bluey Circles:
And there was a mad time (80s ?) when you could have machines, vehicles, trailers with a mad mix of both imperial and metric fastenings. You had to be very careful on choosing sockets and spanners, put a 13mm on a 1/2 inch or a 19mm on a 3/4 and you would round it.
But getting back to heights, how do you all measure your height, do you hold a pole up to the corner closest to the drivers door and take that as accurate or do you measure all four corners of the trailer and use the highest. If you have measured it at full weight do you check again empty (could be significant differences when we were riding on steel, not so much now) And what do you use for measuring, a proper telescopic pole with angled top of just any leghth of wood then measure it with a spool measure ?
I’ve got an early 1980’s Jag which has a mixture of metric and AF on it.There were also from memory UK built Fords with AF then German made ones with Metric including those stupid and expensive metric TRX wheels and tyres on the Mk2 Granada.The issue of interchangeability of AF v Metric spanners sockets at the relevant sizes isn’t that much of a big deal and doesn’t really need a hammer.
As for vehicle heights they are usually already known by the operator in the form of load deck/fifth wheel height and load dimensions before loading a flat or from the original spec sheet in the case of a box/curtain sider etc.Which in this case just meant establishing the probably already known 4m height in imperial before leaving the yard.While there are obviously numerous methods available if you need to measure an unknown vehicle height.Usually on the same basis of establishing load deck/fifth wheel height then roof or load height to load deck/fifth wheel height and adding the two together.
BOOM! Carryfast bingo tonight! There’s the mention of ‘the Jag’
Bluey Circles:
And there was a mad time (80s ?) when you could have machines, vehicles, trailers with a mad mix of both imperial and metric fastenings. You had to be very careful on choosing sockets and spanners, put a 13mm on a 1/2 inch or a 19mm on a 3/4 and you would round it.
But getting back to heights, how do you all measure your height, do you hold a pole up to the corner closest to the drivers door and take that as accurate or do you measure all four corners of the trailer and use the highest. If you have measured it at full weight do you check again empty (could be significant differences when we were riding on steel, not so much now) And what do you use for measuring, a proper telescopic pole with angled top of just any leghth of wood then measure it with a spool measure ?
Ive only measured once but know a 4m marked tilt will be down to 3.9 m empty on my fifth wheel (set very low) and around 3.8m fully freighted. The air deflector on its lowest setting clears the trailers. if youre driving the same truck its always going to be the same.
I never said you should drive a 4m truck under a marked 13’ bridge, did i?
It’s ok cf, I’ll accept that you do know 4m is less than 4.0386m
Great then you’d obviously have no problem in stopping a 4m truck at a sign which says 13 foot bridge.Bearing in mind that 13 feet ain’t 4.0386 metres.
dieseldog999:
pedantic to the end…though if someone else replies,no doubt it wont be the end,
europe inc the uk is metric …the bridge ultimately says,4.1m…johnny flipflop knows he can get under a 4m bridge…why would he have any requirement to look further…but keep on flogging…time for a wee snooze now surely?
If the UK is metric why is it law to have a cab height indicator displaying height in imperial here ?.
Because we’re just full of contradictions.
plus being the british goverment that is totally incompetent in most aspects,then theres always the chance that some coffin dodger victor meldrew type cant or wont relate to metric for certain things.which is why we buy milk in litres,tyres, and mostly everything else in metric…apart from the fact ant anyone else in eirope will be familier with metric and see that displayed before anything else,hence the ■■■■ that measured the bridge clearance for the sign to be made was a fanny.
I never said you should drive a 4m truck under a marked 13’ bridge, did i?
It’s ok cf, I’ll accept that you do know 4m is less than 4.0386m
Great then you’d obviously have no problem in stopping a 4m truck at a sign which says 13 foot bridge.Bearing in mind that 13 feet ain’t 4.0386 metres.
Well done cf, 13’ isn’t 4.0386m
But once again for a bridge to be marked 13’ then minimum it can measure is 13’3" which is 4.0386m thank you please
dieseldog999:
pedantic to the end…though if someone else replies,no doubt it wont be the end,
europe inc the uk is metric …the bridge ultimately says,4.1m…johnny flipflop knows he can get under a 4m bridge…why would he have any requirement to look further…but keep on flogging…time for a wee snooze now surely?
If the UK is metric why is it law to have a cab height indicator displaying height in imperial here ?.
Because we’re just full of contradictions.
plus being the british goverment that is totally incompetent in most aspects,then theres always the chance that some coffin dodger victor meldrew type cant or wont relate to metric for certain things.which is why we buy milk in litres,tyres, and mostly everything else in metric…apart from the fact ant anyone else in eirope will be familier with metric and see that displayed before anything else,hence the [zb] that measured the bridge clearance for the sign to be made was a fanny.
All of which has now’t do do with hitting a bridge, if it wasn’t labelled in feet and inches I wouldn’t have a clue if the lorry would go through or not!
The correct wholesale move to AF which I’m more familiar with being the key point in that regard.Luckily all the older type vehicles I was/am familiar with working with seeming to be in line with that change.
