# Why kms?



## Cerdic (2 Jan 2021)

I've noticed a lot of cyclists in Britain talking about distances in kilometres.

Why? 

Our roads and cars and stuff is all in miles. I know how far apart places are in miles. So why not use miles on your bike?

Couldn't be because kms give you bigger, more impressive numbers could it? Nah, cyclists ain't that shallow...

But seriously, why?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (2 Jan 2021)

Sounds faster


----------



## Drago (2 Jan 2021)

Because they're not tough enough to handle miles.


----------



## Glow worm (2 Jan 2021)

Not guilty here. Miles all the way for me.


----------



## Phaeton (2 Jan 2021)

Because all the pros ride in Kms & they think they are in the same league


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Jan 2021)

Could cyclists use imperial feet because it sounds more impressive? Are they being shallow using feet?

I wouldn't think anyone chooses units based on what others think. It’s just what works for them.


----------



## Dayvo (2 Jan 2021)

It’ll soon revert back to mph, feet and inches, stones and pounds, pints and gallons, pre 1970! 😉


----------



## Mo1959 (2 Jan 2021)

Dayvo said:


> It’ll soon revert back to mph, feet and inches, stones and pounds, pints and gallons, pre 1970! 😉


Suits me...I can still count in pounds, shillings and pennies!


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (2 Jan 2021)

It's because most pro sporting events are in km. Think of atletics: 100, 200, 400 etc. are all in kms. Most pro cycling is done on the continent where French measurements rule. 
Amateurs have followed suit so that they have some comparison.


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jan 2021)

Because stupid imperial units are well past their _Use By Date_ and the quicker we get rid of them, the better!


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Jan 2021)

For me it’s because audax distances are in km. So I just leave the GPS on km. Before I did audax I had the GPS set to miles.


----------



## MartinQ (2 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> Suits me...I can still count in pounds, shillings and pennies!


240 pennies to the pound, 12 to a shilling, ...?


----------



## Mo1959 (2 Jan 2021)

MartinQ said:


> 240 pennies to the pound, 12 to a shilling, ...?


I got a half crown for pocket money


----------



## classic33 (2 Jan 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> It's because most pro sporting events are in km. Think of atletics*: 100, 200, 400 etc. are all in kms. Most pro cycling is done on the continent where French measurements rule.
> Amateurs have followed suit so that they have some comparison.


The marathon is 26 miles 385 yards.


----------



## MartinQ (2 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I got a half crown for pocket money



You're posh :-).
Sixpences and farthings for me.


----------



## DCBassman (2 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> Suits me...I can still count in pounds, shillings and pennies!





MartinQ said:


> 240 pennies to the pound, 12 to a shilling, ...?


24 to a florin, 30 to half a crown...


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> The marathon is 26 miles 385 yards.



That’s not a cycling event distance, but even in running you have 1500m, 3k, 5k, 10k all in metric units etc.


----------



## snorri (2 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> Our roads and cars and stuff is all in miles.
> But seriously, why?


Perhaps we should be asking why our "roads and cars and stuff" are still not metricated some fifty five years since the UK decided to adopt metrication, rather than why some cyclists have decided not to wait for other road users.
By now I feel quite happy using miles or km whilst cycling and just adapt to my surroundings, miles in the UK and km elsewhere.


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (2 Jan 2021)

I've still got some thrupenny bits. 
The ones with thrift on. 
Anyone know what I'm on about?


----------



## Slick (2 Jan 2021)

It is simply because as others have already said, we have been metric since the 60's and it is right and proper. The truth is for me though, I'm very much miles feet and inches and only went metric for my 50k a month challenge.


----------



## classic33 (2 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> Because stupid imperial units are well past their _Use By Date_ and the quicker we get rid of them, the better!


Your Annual Lunacy Challenge's are in trouble then.
_"1. Choose a target distance, for example 100 miles, but it can be any imperial or metric distance which will be challenging for you to complete thirteen times in a calendar year."_
&
_"Devise a public road route which accumulates 1,000+ metres of ascent. If you prefer imperial units, you could choose 3,000', 3,250', 3,500' or a more accurate equivalent - 3,281' *your target is 3,300 ft*. So far, so simple."_


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Jan 2021)

Slick said:


> It is simply because as others have already said, we have been metric since the 60's and it is right and proper. The truth is for me though, I'm very much miles feet and inches and only went metric for my 50k a month challenge.



50,000 km a month is a lot 😀


----------



## Milzy (2 Jan 2021)

It absolutely boils my piss. The mamil brigade who are all about performance like to pretend the kmh is mph so it looks like they are riding at pro level speeds


----------



## Slick (2 Jan 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> 50,000 km a month is a lot 😀


Everyone needs a goal.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Jan 2021)

Slick said:


> Everyone needs a goal.



An achievable goal 😂


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jan 2021)

MartinQ said:


> You're posh :-).
> Sixpences and farthings for me.


I remember my dad giving me a 10 bob note to spend at a fair in the Abbey Fields in Kenilworth in the early 1960s. That was a lot of money to me at that age. I think the rides were 6d so that was enough for 20! (Different times then... I would have been less than 10 years old at the time but my parents were happy for me to clear off unsupervised for a few hours to spend the cash.)


----------



## Cerdic (2 Jan 2021)

This is not meant to be a 'which is better' type thread. I'm just curious.

For me, it just seems easier to think in miles. If a road sign tells me that Little Mulching is ten miles away, I've got a good idea in my head how easy it will be to bet there and back. I'm far too lazy to do the maths to convert it into kilometres...


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Your Annual Lunacy Challenge's are in trouble then.
> _"1. Choose a target distance, for example 100 miles, but it can be any imperial or metric distance which will be challenging for you to complete thirteen times in a calendar year."_
> &
> _"Devise a public road route which accumulates 1,000+ metres of ascent. If you prefer imperial units, you could choose 3,000', 3,250', 3,500' or a more accurate equivalent - 3,281' *your target is 3,300 ft*. So far, so simple."_


Because Imperialists complain when I only mention metric units! You will observe that I indicated my preference in the finished version... 



ColinJ said:


> The target is to do 13+ '_qualifying loops_' between January 1st and December 31st.
> 
> 
> A qualifying loop is any ride on public roads which accumulates 1,000+ *metres* of ascent. (_If you prefer imperial units, your target is 3,300+ ft)._
> ...


----------



## classic33 (2 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> This is not meant to be a 'which is better' type thread. I'm just curious.
> 
> For me, it just seems easier to think in miles. If a road sign tells me that Little Mulching is ten miles away, I've got a good idea in my head how easy it will be to bet there and back. I'm far too lazy to do the maths to convert it into kilometres...


10 kilometres is just under 61/4 miles.


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> This is not meant to be a 'which is better' type thread. I'm just curious.
> 
> For me, it just seems easier to think in miles. If a road sign tells me that Little Mulching is ten miles away, I've got a good idea in my head how easy it will be to bet there and back. I'm far too lazy to do the maths to convert it into kilometres...


I don't rely on road signs... I plan my routes on digital OS maps which use kms and I have my GPS set to kms which matches the units that I worked in when planning the ride. I know that I can average about 16 km/hr when doing very hilly rides, 20 km/hr when doing lumpy rides, and nearer 30 km/hr if making an effort on flatter rides (as long as it isn't windy) so it easy to work out how I am doing.

I find it much easier to work out gradients in metric units. For example - Otley East Chevin Rd gains near enough 150 m in 1.5 km, so it is 10%. It is about 500 ft in 0.94 miles, which is, er, not as easy to work out in one's head!


----------



## Slick (2 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> This is not meant to be a 'which is better' type thread. I'm just curious.
> 
> For me, it just seems easier to think in miles. If a road sign tells me that Little Mulching is ten miles away, I've got a good idea in my head how easy it will be to bet there and back. I'm far too lazy to do the maths to convert it into kilometres...


That obviously says more about you than the unit of measure. Others would find it easier to work it out in metric, simples. 

Although to be fair, I am with you on the whole miles thing, and when did it become an LGV?


----------



## Dayvo (2 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> I'm far too lazy to do the maths to convert it into kilometres...



Halve the km (80 for example) = 40.
A quarter of 40 = 10.
Add 40 and 10 and voila = 50 (almost exactly)!


----------



## Drago (2 Jan 2021)

I measure my rides in leagues and rods. Keeps it simple.


----------



## I like Skol (2 Jan 2021)

It's simple. Uk born, bred and resident cyclists use km to try and make it sound special or pretend to be some kind of pro who works the circuit. There simply is no need or reason to work in units that are not used in this country.
Should we ever convert the UK to metric speed and distance units then we should start to use them for cycling too.


----------



## Bianchi boy (2 Jan 2021)

Km`s for me set my strava up using km`s and like to aim for 1000km per month.


----------



## Smokin Joe (2 Jan 2021)

I like Skol said:


> It's simple. Uk born, bred and resident cyclists use km to try and make it sound special or pretend to be some kind of pro who works the circuit. There simply is no need or reason to work in units that are not used in this country.
> *Should we ever convert the UK to metric speed and distance units then we should start to use them for cycling too.*


We should have done it decades ago instead of using our own illogical system. Back in the seventies I worked at a firm who use the metric system for weights and measures and it is so much easier to think in that system after the short time it takes to get used to it.


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jan 2021)

I like Skol said:


> It's simple. Uk born, bred and resident cyclists use km to try and make it sound special or pretend to be some kind of pro who works the circuit. There simply is no need or reason to work in units that are not used in this country.


Alternatively...

A UK born, bred and resident cyclist who was forced to use ridiculous imperial units until the age of 11 was then switched over*** exclusively to metric units after changing school post 11-plus, and never saw an imperial unit again when studying for 'O'-levels and 'A'-levels! 

As for university - use inches, foot-pounds, gallons, Fahrenheit etc. there and people would look at you as if you were an alien! 


*** That was 54 bleeding years ago - die-hard imperialists, it is time to catch up!


----------



## I like Skol (2 Jan 2021)

Sorry Smokin Joe, are you agreeing with me or questioning my statements?


----------



## Smokin Joe (2 Jan 2021)

I like Skol said:


> Sorry Smokin Joe, are you agreeing with me or questioning my statements?


Neither, just making my own point. Using Km or miles on a bike is down to individual preference.


----------



## Paulus (2 Jan 2021)

Drago said:


> I measure my rides in leagues and rods. Keeps it simple.


Poles, perches, chains and furlongs for me.😄


----------



## Twilkes (2 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> I don't rely on road signs... I plan my routes on digital OS maps which use kms and I have my GPS set to kms which matches the units that I worked in when planning the ride. I know that I can average about 16 km/hr when doing very hilly rides, 20 km/hr when doing lumpy rides, and nearer 30 km/hr if making an effort on flatter rides (as long as it isn't windy) so it easy to work out how I am doing.
> 
> I find it much easier to work out gradients in metric units. For example - Otley East Chevin Rd gains near enough 150 m in 1.5 km, so it is 10%. It is about 500 ft in 0.94 miles, which is, er, not as easy to work out in one's head!



+1 for elevation in metres, distances in km just makes sense in association with that.


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jan 2021)

A typical UK map produced by the UK's world-respected national mapping organisation, and used by UK cyclists. Distances measured in kms, elevation in metres...







If I understand it correctly, we are supposed to translate the kms and metres back into miles and feet in case we ever see a road sign that we don't need to use, or talk to someone who has a curious emotional bond with an antiquated system of units that never made sense from the time it was introduced...


----------



## Milkfloat (2 Jan 2021)

Having lived in the UK, the Netherlands and the USA I can just about get by in any unit, however metric makes most sense to me. Having said that; I weigh things in metric, long distances are in miles but short ones are in meters, unless I am going upwards. Pre-decimalisation means nothing to me. It would be nice if the whole world went metric


----------



## tyred (2 Jan 2021)

What was wrong with Cubits?


----------



## Archie_tect (2 Jan 2021)

MartinQ said:


> 240 pennies to the pound, 12 to a shilling, ...?


Don't forget the farthings... and the ha'pennies, thre'penny bits, sixpences, florins, half-crowns, crowns, ten bob notes and guineas...


----------



## Archie_tect (2 Jan 2021)

tyred said:


> What was wrong with Cubits?


Depends who's you used...


----------



## derrick (2 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I got a half crown for pocket money


4 black jacks for a penny.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 Jan 2021)

I’m intrigued by those above who think using km makes things sound impressive. Why do you think this?


----------



## jpj84 (2 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> The marathon is 26 miles 385 yards.


To 90% of the world's population, the marathon is 42.2km. 
It baffles me that we're still stuck with imperial units, when schools have exclusively taught metric for decades. My Mrs insists in using miles, but has no idea how many yards constitute a mile


----------



## itboffin (2 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> I've noticed a lot of cyclists in Britain talking about distances in kilometres.
> 
> Why?
> 
> ...



I agree why km when our cars and road signs are in mph don’t get me wrong I’m not some kind of brexit nutter but we measure in imperial not metric, when I’m in Europe I switch because the road signs are, why would you not pick the default for the country you’re in, doesn’t make sense to me.

also weight myself in stone, lbs and ounces, height in feet and inches because we haven’t changed


----------



## classic33 (2 Jan 2021)

jpj84 said:


> To 90% of the world's population, the marathon is 42.2km.
> It baffles me that we're still stuck with imperial units, when schools have exclusively taught metric for decades. My Mrs insists in using miles, but has no idea how many yards constitute a mile


_"The organisers of the first modern Olympic Games, held in Athens in 1896, devised the marathon race over 40km to celebrate the achievements of Ancient Greece.

*The distance then was extended to the imperial measurement of 26 miles at the 1908 Olympic Games in London,* and increased another 385 yards when the starting line was pulled back so it could be seen by the children in the Royal Nursery at Windsor and still finish in front of Queen Alexandra at the White City Stadium in west London.* This distance was standardised at 26 miles 385 yards (42.195km) in 1921."*_


----------



## Milkfloat (2 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> Well it has really, hasn't it - except for the USA. Oh and some little countries like Liberia and the UK


You forgot the monster that is Myanmar.


----------



## classic33 (2 Jan 2021)

itboffin said:


> I agree why km when our cars and road signs are in mph don’t get me wrong I’m not some kind of brexit nutter but we measure in imperial not metric, when I’m in Europe I switch because the road signs are, why would you not pick the default for the country you’re in, doesn’t make sense to me.
> 
> also weight myself in stone, lbs and ounces, height in feet and inches because we haven’t changed


Do what they did in Ireland, the figures stayed the same on the signs, only the units used were changed. 

First driver caught speeding, when they changed units, was just after midnight on the day the new unit came into force.


----------



## snorri (2 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> This is not meant to be a 'which is better' type thread. I'm just curious.
> For me, it just seems easier to think in miles.


I quite agree, it is easier to think in miles when in the UK, but if you go foreign it can be a struggle doing the conversions in your head when referring to local road signs and maps. Which is why I have two computers on my touring bike, these are quite cheap and save me from a lot of mental arithmetic.
I can't answer for sport cyclists, I don't understand cycle sport.


----------



## Dan77 (2 Jan 2021)

Because imperial measurements are a really poor way of measuring distance. Decimalisation is so much clearer and easier to break down.

We've pretty much done away with feet and inches in manufacturing in favour of millimetres and the only reasons people persist with miles is because of history and the fact it's still how our speed limits and road signs are shown.


----------



## itboffin (2 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> A typical UK map produced by the UK's world-respected national mapping organisation, and used by UK cyclists. Distances measured in kms, elevation in metres...
> 
> View attachment 566991
> 
> ...



you do know if that’s your own OSMaps account you can pick metric or imperial as the default 🙂


----------



## tyred (2 Jan 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> Depends who's you used...


Noah's


----------



## snorri (2 Jan 2021)

Slick said:


> , and when did it become an LGV?


I'm with you there, L for Little, Light or Large?


----------



## Dayvo (2 Jan 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> I’m intrigued by those above who think using km makes things sound impressive. Why do you think this?


Maybe it’s a longing to still be part of the EU! 
😉


----------



## iandg (2 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> A typical UK map produced by the UK's world-respected national mapping organisation, and used by UK cyclists. Distances measured in kms, elevation in metres...
> 
> View attachment 566991
> 
> ...



I think when I started using kms was when I did a mountain skills course and learnt how to use an OS map to navigate. Map scales are metric based and grid squares are 1km - everything was so much easier using metric measurement.


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jan 2021)

Thinking about UK currency decimalisation... I remember people ranting on about it at the time. _Save the shilling! _That kind of nonsense. Within a couple of years nearly everyone had shut up about it and agreed that it made sense.

It would be the same if we actually finished changing over to the metric system.

As for "_We use imperial units in the UK_"... I opened a 2 litre bottle of milk at lunchtime and a 500 g bag of pasta this evening. You won't find much mention of horsepower-hours and BTUs these days but you will see a lot of kilowatt-hours and megajoules.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (2 Jan 2021)

itboffin said:


> I agree why km when our cars and road signs are in mph don’t get me wrong I’m not some kind of brexit nutter but we measure in imperial not metric, when I’m in Europe I switch because the road signs are, why would you not pick the default for the country you’re in, doesn’t make sense to me.
> 
> also weight myself in stone, lbs and ounces, height in feet and inches because we haven’t changed



I am one of those Brexit nutters (and proud to be one) and I continue to use miles for distances, mostly feet and inches for things like DIY, fluids are measured in ounces pints and gallons, and I mostly measure weight in stones and pounds. It works for me and I can easily do the mental conversions such as what so many stones and pounds is in just pounds, in my head without needing to resort to calculators.
People who have only ever done maths in base 10 systems have never developed the mental dexterity to manipulate imperial units. Those of us who use imperial units on a daily basis have no problem mentally calculating everyday things where the units are in 12's, 14's 16's etc. 
Ever noticed that most youngsters who work in shops are really shite at mental arithmetic and have to look at the till all the time to tell them how much change to give the customer? That's the by-product of both metric and calculators. Deal with older people who grew up with imperial units and they are generally way better at doing maths in their heads.


----------



## iandg (2 Jan 2021)

I remember all the old codgers in the club moaning when Bart's maps changed from [1/2" to the mile] to [1cm to 1km] - 1:100 000 is so much easier to work with than1:126 720


----------



## slowmotion (2 Jan 2021)

I use the units that are on the local road signs. I'm far too lazy to convert from one unit to another if somebody has already done it for me.


----------



## slowmotion (2 Jan 2021)

We used to dream of pocket money.


----------



## Dayvo (2 Jan 2021)

slowmotion said:


> We used to dream of pocket money.


We used to dream of having pockets.


----------



## Notafettler (3 Jan 2021)

MartinQ said:


> You're posh :-).
> Sixpences and farthings for me.


Slap round the head for me.....if I was lucky


----------



## Notafettler (3 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> Actually,
> 
> Anyway ... People can use what they like. I'm happiest with km. I can convert very quickly to miles if needed. I can't convert feet and yards and stuff like that though, I've never had to do that.


It would appear @ColinJ would disagree with you on that....vehemently!


----------



## ColinJ (3 Jan 2021)

slowmotion said:


> We used to dream of pocket money.





Dayvo said:


> We used to dream of having pockets.


What...? _They actually allowed you to sleep!!! _


----------



## classic33 (3 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> What...? _They actually allowed you to sleep!!! _


They allowed them to dream!
It is possible to daydream.


----------



## andrew_s (3 Jan 2021)

itboffin said:


> we measure in imperial not metric


Driving distances on major roads, speed limits, and pints for pub beer and some milk bottles are imperial. Everything else is in metric.

If you have imperial measurements available for anything else, you've either made the choice to measure that way yourself, or you've converted the units printed on the pack you bought it in.

If you are cycling, signs on minor roads haven't had distances on for many years, speed limits don't apply, maps have 1 km grid lines on, and what you are interested in is not the distance, but how long it will take, and how tired you'll be when you get there (or, in the case of cars, whether you'll have to fill up). 
Since driving times and cycling times are unrelated, there's no reason not to use miles in a car and km on a bike. In either case, the distance to time conversion will be informed by prior experience.


----------



## screenman (3 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I got a half crown for pocket money



I got 2 and sixpence less than that.


----------



## MartinQ (3 Jan 2021)

Dan77 said:


> Because imperial measurements are a really poor way of measuring distance. Decimalisation is so much clearer and easier to break down.
> 
> We've pretty much done away with feet and inches in manufacturing in favour of millimetres and the only reasons people persist with miles is because of history and the fact it's still how our speed limits and road signs are shown.



But they're French, so rational arguments don't apply. They even stopped us calling Uranus the George star. When will it end ...


----------



## steveindenmark (3 Jan 2021)

🇩🇰🇩🇰😁👍


----------



## Venod (3 Jan 2021)

I use miles its what I am used to on the road when driving and cycling, I think the metric system is much easier and would have no problem using it if it was to become law. Orienteering was my main sport for many years and that was all km and all modern maps are metric, but when running I used minutes per mile to guage my pace, I don't know what all my cycling friends use but at this time of year a lot of them post their yearly totals on Facebook etc, these are cyclists of all ages and abilities and everyone of them is in miles for the year.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (3 Jan 2021)

Has anyone else noticed the signs that say 3 miles to such and such a village. Then you’ll pedal for another minute and see another sign which will also say you are still 3 miles from the village. I don’t think miles is an actual unit of length. I wonder how accurate the signs are anyway, and whether they just are an approximation.


----------



## GoldenLamprey (3 Jan 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> People who have only ever done maths in base 10 systems have never developed the mental dexterity to manipulate imperial units. Those of us who use imperial units on a daily basis have no problem mentally calculating everyday things where the units are in 12's, 14's 16's etc.
> Ever noticed that most youngsters who work in shops are really shite at mental arithmetic and have to look at the till all the time to tell them how much change to give the customer? That's the by-product of both metric and calculators. Deal with older people who grew up with imperial units and they are generally way better at doing maths in their heads.


Unfortunately, others never developed the mental dexterity to handle differing viewpoints.


----------



## GoldenLamprey (3 Jan 2021)

Some people live in the past, some in the present. We moved to metric 50 years ago, so plenty of time to get to grips with it, for those who can deal with change.

If you live in your backyard all your life, imperial will be fine. For those who travel, beyond our borders, metric is out there. Being familiar with it is useful.


----------



## Slick (3 Jan 2021)

snorri said:


> I'm with you there, L for Little, Light or Large?


I thought it was length.


----------



## Twilkes (3 Jan 2021)

Thinking about it I honestly think that mile, yard, foot, inch and pint all being single syllable words make a difference. Kilometre, metre, centimetre and litre all take a bit longer to say and feel more clinical. I use metric for precision but tend to use imperial for rough estimates, although I had no idea there were 1760 yards in a mile, or 5280 feet. I'm 43 years old and have all my own teeth.


----------



## MartinQ (3 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> A typical UK map produced by the UK's world-respected national mapping organisation, and used by UK cyclists. Distances measured in kms, elevation in metres...
> 
> View attachment 566991
> 
> ...



Just shows how foresighed Leonardo de Pisa was when he described the Fibonacci sequence 800 years ago. The next/previous number is your km/mile equivalent, so
5 - 8 - 13 - 21 - 34 - 55 - 89 ...


----------



## vickster (3 Jan 2021)

Who cares. Do what you want unless there’s a specific requirement for the alternative (legal, financial, business whatever)


----------



## BoldonLad (3 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> I've noticed a lot of cyclists in Britain talking about distances in kilometres.
> 
> Why?
> 
> ...



Could it simply be younger cyclists who are doing this, the explanation being that they are being/have been taught metric units at school (the UK was meant to go metric at some date in the past, which I forget)?

Born in 1947, I tend to "think" in imperial measures, but, it is no hardship to use Metric, I manage to achieve it without incident when travelling in mainland Europe. I even managed the switch from £sd to £p, without having a breakdown. They are only numbers.


----------



## Notafettler (3 Jan 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Has anyone else noticed the signs that say 3 miles to such and such a village. Then you’ll pedal for another minute and see another sign which will also say you are still 3 miles from the village. I don’t think miles is an actual unit of length. I wonder how accurate the signs are anyway, and whether they just are an approximation.


If it was kilometres it would still be an approximations. 
Anyway your lucky where i live you wouldn't have two signs that close together. 
In fact you would be in the village before the sign for the village name would appear. 
Furthermore the finger posts are hidden in the hedgerow. 
AND where it is a metal posts with the pointers held on with extra large jubilee clips they tend to point in the opposite direction (wind turns them).
Your lucky Its signpost heaven where you live.


----------



## BoldonLad (3 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> I remember my dad giving me a *10 bob note to spend at a fair in the Abbey Fields in Kenilworth in the early 1960s.* That was a lot of money to me at that age. I think the rides were 6d so that was enough for 20! (Different times then... I would have been less than 10 years old at the time but my parents were happy for me to clear off unsupervised for a few hours to spend the cash.)



10 shillings! Could last a week on that in 1960! Real joy as a teenager (1960-1966) was finding a ten shilling note in your jacket pocket, that you had forgotten about!


----------



## Mo1959 (3 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> 10 shillings! Could last a week on that in 1960! Real joy as a teenager (1960-1966) was finding a ten shilling note in your jacket pocket, that you had forgotten about!


I remember finding a ten bob note in the street and being a good girl handed it in to the local bobby.......we still had a village bobby then! Nobody claimed it so I got it back


----------



## Notafettler (3 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> when they switched from 1:63,360 (yes, really!) to 1:50,000


Why does that matter? Why does it have to be rounded up? Do you like rounding everything up?


----------



## Notafettler (3 Jan 2021)

BoldonLad said:


> 10 shillings! Could last a week on that in 1960! Real joy as a teenager (1960-1966) was finding a ten shilling note in your jacket pocket, that you had forgotten about!


You "found" a 10 shilling note in your pocket? How could you not know you had 10 shillings note somewhere. I cried with joy for a week and day, when I found a 6 penny piece in a road drain. I regularly looked in them to see if any money had been washed down into them. Had to get 4 friends to help lift the drain cover off. Obviously I had to give them a penny each but I still had 2 pence for myself. Enough to buy some chips on a Wednesday as my parents only had enough money to feed me on a Monday and Friday. You must have lived in a 10 bedroom mansion and gone to Eaton.


----------



## Low Gear Guy (3 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> Won't change the grid lines. They were in km even on the old 1 inch maps. Nor will it change the contours and spot heights, they've been in metres since the early 70s when they switched from 1:63,360 (yes, really!) to 1:50,000


I have a 1:25000 map of Purbeck with the altitude in feet. This confused me as the 600m ascent seemed remarkably easy.


----------



## Notafettler (3 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I remember finding a ten bob note in the street and being a good girl handed it in to the local bobby.......we still had a village bobby then! Nobody claimed it so I got it back


It was mine, I went to the police station to ask if anyone had handed it in. He said no. If I recall rightly he was your dad. Another bent copper.


----------



## figbat (3 Jan 2021)

Some interesting arguments and information both ways, but a couple of pedant-trigger points from me:

- the use of “kms”... what is a kilometre-second? Units are not pluralised
- the use of “meter”... this is a device that measures things, like a gas meter or odometer. The unit of distance is the metre.

Another thing too, this is more a personal preference but is based in some logic. How would you pronounce “kilometre”? The tendency is to go with “ki-LOM-itter” but I suggest that this is an Americanised pronunciation that follows their preference for emphasising the second syllable (eg CaRIBBean, oREGano, conTROVersy, HiROSHima). I prefer KILLO-metre, which is how I hear all Europeans say it and aligns with kilogram, kilowatt, kilobyte etc). Plus I’ll always say CAR-i-BE-an, OR-i-GAR-no, CON-tro-VERS-ee and HIR-o-SHE-ma.


----------



## Notafettler (3 Jan 2021)

As a massive aside
24 Hours in a day
60 minutes in an hour
60 seconds in a minute.
Degrees minutes and seconds on a normal compass.
Do the metric fascists!! Want to change that too?!!
Or to decimal for that matter.


----------



## ColinJ (3 Jan 2021)

figbat said:


> Some interesting arguments and information both ways, but a couple of pedant-trigger points from me:
> 
> - the use of “kms”... what is a kilometre-second? Units are not pluralised


You are correct and it is a mistake that I slip into making. Must try harder!


----------



## Notafettler (3 Jan 2021)

Next the remainers/metric fascists will want us to drive on the "wrong" side of the road.
Mod please don't delete its meant as humour...honestly!!! see i have added exclamation marks.


----------



## Ian H (3 Jan 2021)

Miles for (most) time-trials, km for audax events, either or both for touring or day rides. Either again walking or driving.


----------



## simongt (3 Jan 2021)

Could always do the reverse and measure in traditional English leagues. As one league is three miles, that wouldn't impress many when you told them you've just cycled fifteen leagues instead of forty five miles - !


----------



## Sniper68 (3 Jan 2021)

I use miles 99% of the time because I ride in the UK 99% of the time.
When I ride abroad I use KMs because all the signs use KMs
Running I use KM purely because it seems to be the preferred unit.5K,10K.
I can cross convert easily enough so either or it doesn't bother me
Most cycling challenges seem to erring towards KMs now.In fact all the monthly challenges on Strava are in KMs.
*Edit*
I've just noticed the Strava banner in my sig is in KMs....strange as my default units are set to miles
*Edit2* 
Fixed.VeloViewer was set to metric


----------



## Paulus (3 Jan 2021)

derrick said:


> 4 black jacks for a penny.


In my day you could get 8


----------



## Dayvo (3 Jan 2021)

Paulus said:


> In my day you could get 8


Or Fruit Salads.


----------



## Mo1959 (3 Jan 2021)

Dayvo said:


> Or Fruit Salads.


I like fruit salads. I also remember the old penny chews being so big that you had to whack them on the kerb to break them in half to fit in your mouth!


----------



## BoldonLad (3 Jan 2021)

Mo1959 said:


> I like fruit salads. I also remember the old penny chews being* so big that you had to whack them on the kerb to break them in half to fit in your mouth! *



Is that not because you have a petite lady sized mouth?


----------



## I like Skol (3 Jan 2021)

I'm no brexit nutter and neither am I clinging to an outdated system for sentimental reasons. The simple fact is that distances in this country are measured and quoted in miles and we are stuck with it for the time being. It's a crazy situation I agree. We should never have gone metric just get on with it and finish the metrification properly IMO.


andrew_s said:


> Since driving times and cycling times are unrelated, there's no reason not to use miles in a car and km on a bike. In either case, the distance to time conversion will be informed by prior experience.


That's madness and pointless.


Ming the Merciless said:


> Has anyone else noticed the signs that say 3 miles to such and such a village.


Exactly, MILES!

OS maps don't seem to quote distances in any particular unit actually and contain many references to milestones and mileposts (MS & MP) while they do give distances at the map edge where a major road leaves stating the nearest large town in km and miles. We should not get confused by the fact that the grid ref system uses squares equating to kilometres and easily divisible into 10ths, 100ths and 1000ths to very accurately pinpoint a place on the map and in reality on the ground. This is not related to distance.

In fact, reading through the whole thread the overwhelming impression I get is that actually, apart from the few international competitive disciplines where km are standard, the reason most cyclists use km is purely due to the 'proper cyclist' BS.

To put it another way. Go into the pub and buy a pint, in fact buy several, and a few days later when you are laughing with your mates about what a great night you all had I bet you don't say 'I was sh!tfaced, I drunk 4.546 litres of Old Granny Codswallop's Mind Bender....."?

Miles are a stupid, outdated measurement, but it is the one we are currently stuck with. I'll be happy when kilometres are officially adopted and will willingly swap over, but for the time being I don't feel the need to try and sound like I am part of 'the club' or instil some kind of mystical awe about my pass time in none cycling acquaintances.


----------



## Adam4868 (3 Jan 2021)

Always miles and feet and inches.I did a apprenteship in feet and inches and it's stuck with me ! I can't visualize metric ☹️


Mo1959 said:


> I like fruit salads. I also remember the old penny chews being so big that you had to whack them on the kerb to break them in half to fit in your mouth!


We use to leave them in your pocket at school to go soft... then roll them in a big ball and shove them in your gob ! Healthy lunch


----------



## classic33 (3 Jan 2021)

Notafettler said:


> As a massive aside
> 24 Hours in a day
> 60 minutes in an hour
> 60 seconds in a minute.
> ...


Already been done, metric time.





As for the clocks!


----------



## BoldonLad (3 Jan 2021)

Notafettler said:


> You "found" a 10 shilling note in your pocket? How could you not know you had 10 shillings note somewhere. I cried with joy for a week and day, when I found a 6 penny piece in a road drain. I regularly looked in them to see if any money had been washed down into them. Had to get 4 friends to help lift the drain cover off. Obviously I had to give them a penny each but I still had 2 pence for myself. Enough to buy some chips on a Wednesday as my parents only had enough money to feed me on a Monday and Friday. You must have lived in a 10 bedroom mansion and gone to Eaton.



I was talking about when I was 15+, was working, one way or another, and out drinking with “the mates”. Not unusual to tuck a ten shilling note away, when slightly befuddled, then, find it several days later  the joys of youth.


----------



## matticus (3 Jan 2021)

I like Skol said:


> We should not get confused by the fact that the grid ref system uses squares equating to kilometres and easily divisible into 10ths, 100ths and 1000ths to very accurately pinpoint a place on the map and in reality on the ground. This is not related to distance.


ISn't it?


----------



## Sniper68 (3 Jan 2021)

Adam4868 said:


> Always miles and feet and inches.I did a apprenteship in feet and inches and it's stuck with me ! I can't visualize metric ☹


We learned both Metric and Imperial and Metric is much simpler for measurements.
I used to work with a bloke who'd mix both.He'd say something like 1metre,2 foot,4 inches and 5 little sticks(mm)
All Steel we make at work is sold in metric nowadays.We had to have special stuff made for USA orders as they still want it in inches and feet.


----------



## Drago (3 Jan 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> I’m intrigued by those above who think using km makes things sound impressive. Why do you think this?


I certainly don't. I associate km with things like "diet", "low calorie" and "reduced fat", things no thrusting go-getter would ever consider.


----------



## ColinJ (3 Jan 2021)

Something that does bother me is people mixing their units. I have even seen cycling magazines doing it e.g. "A hilly 50 mile bike route with 1,750 metres of climbing"...


----------



## Oldhippy (3 Jan 2021)

They are both perfectly good ways of measurement and what is best determined by what you grew up with. I can imagine 6 feet but not 2 metres in my head. I can work with both but work in Imperial.


----------



## Shreds (3 Jan 2021)

Imperial all the way, except fractions. mm are much easier to visualise and comprend than 3/32, 8/11th etc


----------



## Oldhippy (3 Jan 2021)

I used to love slide rules and log tables. I was lonely child.


----------



## Drago (3 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> Something that does bother me is people mixing their units. I have even seen cycling magazines doing it e.g. "A hilly 50 mile bike route with 1,750 metres of climbing"...


That might be an age thing. Im in my 50s and can work interchangeably in either because I was taught both in school. I can do rough, but pretty close, conversions, from one to another with barely any thought.

Thats why I don't understand it when people complain imperial measurements are difficult. They're only difficult if youve not been taught them - after all, you'd find speaking Spanish difficult if youd never been taught it and lived with it, so a commentator blaming the system for a lack of their own knowledge and education is a bit daft. I know bugger all about molecular biology, but the failing there is mine and not the subject matter.

All joking asaide, as a practical matter I'm completely happy and comfortable using either and have no preference. Being English by birth and Scottish by the grace of God I would always say imperial, but in reality if I awoke tomorrow to find one or the other had disappeared from the face of the Earth it would cause me little angst.


----------



## matticus (3 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> Something that does bother me is people mixing their units. I have even seen cycling magazines doing it e.g. "A hilly 50 mile bike route with 1,750 metres of climbing"...


I would say elevations in metres are much more available now. In the EU they rule, and a Google map shows them.
And OS maps.


----------



## ColinJ (3 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> I would say elevations in metres are much more available now. In the EU they rule, and a Google map shows them.
> And OS maps.


But that doesn't persuade them to do the distances in km!


----------



## matticus (3 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> But that doesn't persuade them to do the distances in km!


Why would they? Road signs are still in miles!

;-)


----------



## Ming the Merciless (3 Jan 2021)

Wait till they hit a junction with no sign posts. Whoa, there by dragons, I’m staying put.


----------



## Cerdic (3 Jan 2021)

Thanks for all the replies. Very interesting!

I use miles because I drive a lot. So I visualise distances in miles - it just seems the natural thing to do having grown up in Britain...


----------



## ColinJ (3 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> I'm a bit puzzled by all these people who find the distances marked on road signs an indispensable part of cycling. Must make cycling rather awkward because they're kind of rare.


I'm going to take a look on Streetview to see if 2 road signs that I saw on a ride were still in place when the Streetview car went along there. I'll be back to explain later...

PS I got really tired on a long ride and a pair of those '_indispensable road signs_' indicated that I was getting further away from my destination as I actually got closer to it... It completely did my head in! I just checked and they have now fixed the mistake. I think they'd probably inadvertently swapped them when they were first erected.


----------



## Ridgeway (3 Jan 2021)

My guess is those that insist on using imperial units for their cycling achievements in the UK still buy bikes measured in centimetres and wheels/tyres measured in millimetres They also set their torque values in Newton metres and drink from bottles filled by the millilitre.

UK roads will be updated one day with both measurements, it will be half a step into the future


----------



## classic33 (3 Jan 2021)

Sniper68 said:


> We learned both Metric and Imperial and Metric is much simpler for measurements.
> I used to work with a bloke who'd mix both.He'd say something like 1metre,2 foot,4 inches and 5 little sticks(mm)
> All Steel we make at work is sold in metric nowadays.We had to have special stuff made for USA orders as they still want it in inches and feet.


https://www.chronos.ltd.uk/product-...-metal-ptfe-nylon/metal-bar/brass-flat-strip/


----------



## Spartak (3 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> Thanks for all the replies. Very interesting!
> 
> I use miles because I drive a lot. So I visualise distances in miles - it just seems the natural thing to do having grown up in Britain...



Km's for me..... 

I'm still European 🇪🇺


----------



## I like Skol (3 Jan 2021)

Ridgeway said:


> My guess is those that insist on using imperial units for their cycling achievements in the UK still buy bikes measured in centimetres and wheels/tyres measured in millimetres They also set their torque values in Newton metres and drink from bottles filled by the millilitre.
> 
> UK roads will be updated one day with both measurements, it will be half a step into the future


So what you are saying is that we use the prevailing units, of which miles are currently the unit of distance.


----------



## Ridgeway (3 Jan 2021)

No just reminding ourselves of the irony of forgetting that most of our lives are metric and yet we hang on to a legacy of forgotten days in some small areas


----------



## I like Skol (3 Jan 2021)

Ridgeway said:


> yet we hang on to a legacy of forgotten days in some small areas


Who is hanging on?

Yet another baseless accusation of hanging on, clinging to, sentimentality for. All I and others like me are suggesting is that we use the official units so that we are all 'singing from the same hymn sheet' and there is a common language, avoiding any misunderstanding.
What should be happening is that the government should stop dithering and make the switch to km, although they have lots of other more pressing issues on their plate at the moment.


----------



## Sniper68 (3 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> https://www.chronos.ltd.uk/product-...-metal-ptfe-nylon/metal-bar/brass-flat-strip/


That’s not the Steel we make!
We make Aerospace grade Steel,Steel for Oil&Gas and Steel for Automotive parts in very large quantities!


----------



## classic33 (3 Jan 2021)

Sniper68 said:


> That’s not the Steel we make!
> We make Aerospace grade Steel,Steel for Oil&Gas and Steel for Automotive parts in very large quantities!


Brass, not steel!


----------



## Drago (3 Jan 2021)

Ridgeway said:


> My guess is those that insist on using imperial units for their cycling achievements in the UK still buy bikes measured in centimetres and wheels/tyres measured in millimetres They also set their torque values in Newton metres and drink from bottles filled by the millilitre.
> 
> UK roads will be updated one day with both measurements, it will be half a step into the future


Not through choice. We were quite happy with frames in inches and 27" wheels, and no bugger asked our opinion before foisting cm's and 700c upon us.


----------



## Venod (3 Jan 2021)

Drago said:


> before foisting cm's and 709c upon us.


FFS I can't keep up with all this new stuff.


----------



## Donger (3 Jan 2021)

Why decide? Why not use both?





I've rigged my bike up to take two identical trip computers when desired .... the one on the left set to Km and the one on the right set to miles. 

When following Audax UK route sheet instructions I keep a very close eye on the Kms to make sure I turn in all the right places. I also set that one up when riding in Europe. I'm not blessed with Carol Vorderman's maths skills, so converting on the hoof isn't always a piece of cake, and without the miles display, I would seldom know exactly what speed I am doing in mph. Watching a Km speedo lulls you into thinking you are going faster than you are, and I find I need the speed in mph to keep to my customary pace on a long ride and make it back before dark.

I used to be indecisive ...


----------



## classic33 (3 Jan 2021)

Donger said:


> Why decide? Why not use both?
> View attachment 567163
> 
> I've rigged my bike up to take two identical trip computers when desired .... the one on the left set to Km and the one on the right set to miles.
> ...


Now you're not too certain.


----------



## Donger (4 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Now you're not too certain.


I'll set 'em up, you tap 'em in.


----------



## Andy in Germany (4 Jan 2021)

Cerdic said:


> I've noticed a lot of cyclists in Britain talking about distances in kilometres.
> 
> Why?
> 
> ...



To be honest, it's the path of least resistance. I can't visualise miles any more and I use metric measurements at work. And because it sounds more impressive...

When at school our lessons were a battleground between imperial and metric measurements, being a non mathematician I tended to gravitate to metric because I could understand them without having to learn everything by heart: times tables were hard enough.

Curiously though I still felt the need to reach an imperial century and this remains my current best... will have to try for 200k next year.


----------



## Venod (4 Jan 2021)

It has been explained why some cyclist use kms, but are these dedicated solo riders, I don't do many club runs nowadays, but all group rides are listed in MPH pace, and while riding it is an aim to keep to this pace so everybody has their Garmin (other devices are available) set to imperial measurements, so in my experience most cyclists still use miles, are there clubs that operate in KPH? I mean local clubs not organisations such as Audax.


----------



## figbat (4 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> I would say elevations in metres are much more available now. In the EU they rule, and a Google map shows them.
> And OS maps.


And yet aircraft fly at altitudes measured in feet.


----------



## Dayvo (4 Jan 2021)

We ought to adopt the Cockney rhyming slang with regard to monetary terms. They ‘ad it well sussed! 

_The most widely recognised Cockney rhyming slang terms for money include 'pony' which is £25, a 'ton' is £100 and a 'monkey', which equals £500. Also used regularly is a 'score' which is £20, a '*bullseye*' is £50, a 'grand' is £1,000 and a 'deep sea diver' which is £5 (a fiver)._


----------



## Kryton521 (4 Jan 2021)

Learned metric in school. Couldn't tell you how far it is, "to that over there" in feet/yards but it's xyz in metres.

We kept "imperial" measurement as England refused to meet with continental scientists to agree a universal measurement system. So Brexit has been in the making since 1816!!!


----------



## icowden (4 Jan 2021)

I always thought a fiver was a "Godiva" (lady)


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Jan 2021)

Low Gear Guy said:


> I have a 1:25000 map of Purbeck with the altitude in feet. This confused me as the 600m ascent seemed remarkably easy.



The 1:25,000 first series started in 1945 and were compiled from the six inch mapping. So used the original aerial spot heights, contours in feet. It wasn’t till the second series in 1974 that contours and spot heights in metres appeared.

I too remember first map reading using feet and then metres on 1:25,000 first series, subsequently second series.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Jan 2021)

Here you go, first series 1:25,000 sheet covering Kinder Scout and still using feet. First set of maps I learnt to navigate with.


----------



## figbat (4 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> IIRC there was an incident in Canada where an aircraft ran out of fuel mid-flight (the "Gimli Glider") due to an error where imperial units for fuel density were used instead of metric and the tank was only half filled.


Indeed - a great bit of flying averted a disaster there. Oddly, the units mistakenly used were a mix of avoirdupois and metric - pounds per litre.

The Mars Climate Orbiter was not so lucky, destroying itself on arrival at Mars thanks to a unit error.


----------



## Once a Wheeler (4 Jan 2021)

I suspect some of it is to do with distance data now being frequently related to other data sets such as biometry, meteorology, gearing and power output that are now most commonly expressed in metric units.

There is some jokingly quaint contrarian fun to be had in buying 5lbs 12oz of potatoes at four shillings and ninepence a pound; but for all practical purposes thoroughgoing metrication must be the better way.


----------



## straas (4 Jan 2021)

Because we use the metric system? 

Miles are outdated and should be removed from use. 

In my job I have to work in, miles, metres, yards and chains. It's infuriating. But at least I don't have to work in units of pounds for force like the americans.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> Just to ensure we stay on topic: It's possible that if I went out for a ride with my Garmin mistakenly set to miles instead of km I could inadvertently destroy myself.



Well if you set out on a 200 kilometre winter ride, and it turned out to be 200 miles. You might be destroyed at the end of the latter but not the former.


----------



## I like Skol (4 Jan 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Well if you set out on a 200 kilometre winter ride, and it turned out to be 200 miles. You might be destroyed at the end of the latter but not the former.


Or you might accidentally crash into Slough, and that would be disastrous


----------



## Venod (4 Jan 2021)

Once a Wheeler said:


> I suspect some of it is to do with distance data now being frequently related to other data sets such as biometry, meteorology, gearing and power output that are now most commonly expressed in metric units.



Gearing is an interesting one I am not anti metric but I always refer to Gearing in inch numbers.


----------



## Once a Wheeler (4 Jan 2021)

Venod said:


> Gearing is an interesting one I am not anti metric but I always refer to Gearing in in inch numbers.


Your observation also agrees with my experience. However, the inch system is effectively a comparative index and not a true indication of the gear. The inch index is reasonably simple — high=>100, low=<40 — but a so-called 100" gear actually propels the bike forward by about 315", not 100". The equivalent metric usage — high=>8m, low=<4m — has the advantage of giving the real advance of the machine for each complete chainwheel rotation and is, I think, equally intuitive. Each to his or her own; but when the question is 'How many pedal strokes to a particular distance?' metric wins every time.


----------



## classic33 (4 Jan 2021)

Once a Wheeler said:


> Your observation also agrees with my experience. However, the inch system is effectively a comparative index and not a true indication of the gear. The inch index is reasonably simple — high=>100, low=<40 — but a so-called 100" gear actually propels the bike forward by about 315", not 100". The equivalent metric usage — high=>8m, low=<4m — has the advantage of giving the real advance of the machine for each complete chainwheel rotation and is, I think, equally intuitive. Each to his or her own; but when the question is* 'How many pedal strokes to a particular distance?' *metric wins every time.


I freewheel downhill, thereby reducing the number of pedal strokes required


----------



## Sharky (4 Jan 2021)

Dayvo said:


> We ought to adopt the Cockney rhyming slang with regard to monetary terms. They ‘ad it well sussed!
> 
> _The most widely recognised Cockney rhyming slang terms for money include 'pony' which is £25, a 'ton' is £100 and a 'monkey', which equals £500. Also used regularly is a 'score' which is £20, a '*bullseye*' is £50, a 'grand' is £1,000 and a 'deep sea diver' which is £5 (a fiver)._


Pony is also slang for something else ...

e.g. That route you took us on was "pony"


----------



## Dayvo (4 Jan 2021)

Sharky said:


> Pony is also slang for something else ...
> 
> e.g. That route you took us on was "pony"


Yeah, from ’pony and trap’.
My grandmother was a Cockney - she toned it down as she got older.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Jan 2021)

Once a Wheeler said:


> Your observation also agrees with my experience. However, the inch system is effectively a comparative index and not a true indication of the gear. The inch index is reasonably simple — high=>100, low=<40 — but a so-called 100" gear actually propels the bike forward by about 315", not 100". The equivalent metric usage — high=>8m, low=<4m — has the advantage of giving the real advance of the machine for each complete chainwheel rotation and is, I think, equally intuitive. Each to his or her own; but when the question is 'How many pedal strokes to a particular distance?' metric wins every time.



Why do metric bikes have a smaller gear range?


----------



## DaveReading (4 Jan 2021)

figbat said:


> And yet aircraft fly at altitudes measured in feet.



Though not in Russia or China.


----------



## Sniper68 (4 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Brass, not steel!


I know which is why I didn't understand why you quoted me originally?


----------



## figbat (4 Jan 2021)

DaveReading said:


> Though not in Russia or China.


It seems even there it isn't that straightforward. Feet at higher altitudes, metres lower down.


----------



## Once a Wheeler (4 Jan 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Why do metric bikes have a smaller gear range?


There is no difference in the gear range, just in the way it is expressed. Similar to the UK practice of expressing vehicle fuel consumption in miles per gallon compared to the continental practice of expressing it in litres per 100 kilometres, the actual consumption is not affected.


----------



## Ripple (4 Jan 2021)

Because I'm foreigner and while I adjusted to am/pm timing very quickly, my brain refuses to use miles instead of kilometres.


----------



## Ian H (4 Jan 2021)

For precise measurement I'll stick to one system, but it could be either metric or imperial. For general use I'm happy to mix it up: "3m of 4x2"; "60 miles with 1000m climbing". I also organise an imperial century audax event.


----------



## classic33 (4 Jan 2021)

Ripple said:


> Because I'm foreigner and while I adjusted to am/pm timing very quickly, my brain refuses to use miles instead of kilometres.


Use the 24 hour clock, for example it is 17:56 at the time of posting this.

Use the metric clock posted earlier!


----------



## classic33 (4 Jan 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Why do metric bikes have a smaller gear range?


Maybe because that's how they build them.


----------



## Ian H (4 Jan 2021)

Venod said:


> Gearing is an interesting one I am not anti metric but I always refer to Gearing in inch numbers.


I don't think there's an exact metric equivalent for the 24" gear.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (4 Jan 2021)

Kryton521 said:


> We kept "imperial" measurement as England refused to meet with continental scientists to agree a universal measurement system. So Brexit has been in the making since 1816!!!



We've always been obstinately different and stuck two fingers up at other nations way of doing things. You'd think the rest of the world, especially the EU, would have come to realise by now a lot of us in the UK have no intention of trying to fit in with what others think of as logical or sensible. Being the awkward squad is nothing new for us.


----------



## keithmac (4 Jan 2021)

classic33 said:


> Already been done, metric time.
> View attachment 567061
> 
> As for the clocks!
> View attachment 567062



They were doing so well until they got to the clock face, if it's 10 hour days you'd never get to 11 o'clock, nevermind 20..


----------



## Ian H (4 Jan 2021)

SkipdiverJohn said:


> We...us...


Nothing to do with me.


----------



## classic33 (4 Jan 2021)

keithmac said:


> They were doing so well until they got to the clock face, if it's 10 hour days you'd never get to 11 o'clock, nevermind 20..


You'll have noticed the 2 just above the centre of the dial. Indicates Version 2, with 20 hours in the day.

The chart is Decimal Time.


----------



## tyred (4 Jan 2021)

If we all switched to using binary the telephone dial pad would become much simpler (and phone numbers much longer!).


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Jan 2021)

Once a Wheeler said:


> There is no difference in the gear range, just in the way it is expressed. Similar to the UK practice of expressing vehicle fuel consumption in miles per gallon compared to the continental practice of expressing it in litres per 100 kilometres, the actual consumption is not affected.



Suggest you check your post again , as to why I asked that question 😂


----------



## pjd57 (6 Jan 2021)

When I get to about 80ish, I might go metric and change my birthday miles ride to km.
I've already chosen this year's 64 mile route. All I need now is some reasonable weather for the start of March


----------



## Ming the Merciless (6 Jan 2021)

Because they are better


----------



## MartinQ (7 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> We have the Babylonians and their base 60 system to thank for that. But we express it in base 10,
> 
> There are those who think we'd be better off switching to base 12 numbering http://www.dozenalsociety.org.uk/ Now that would be fun!



And we have the Italians (Leonardo de Pisa) <- {Indians,Muslims} to thank for the base 10 decimal notation, otherwise we'd all still be using Roman numerals.

Going to base 12 would also fit with going back to inches, shillings, ...


----------



## MartinQ (7 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> But to be fair to Roman numberals they are base 10 but they are a bit rubbish, as they lack zero.


It could equally be argued that they're base 5 but agreed about the lack of zero and the need for an ever increasing number of letters as the numbers grow. The real problem was multiplying and dividing with them. Even so it took a long time for decimal-place value to take over in Europe.

From memory, the Babylonian numbers were similar, going up to 12 then going up to 60 as 5*12. However my cuneiform isn't what it used to be.


----------



## the_mikey (7 Jan 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> 50,000 km a month is a lot 😀




That's 50Mm, know your metric prefixes! 
I haven't ridden 50µm today, too cold.


----------



## Ridgeway (7 Jan 2021)

the_mikey said:


> That's 50Mm, know your metric prefixes!
> I haven't ridden 50µm today, too cold.



I rode 50,000,000,000µm this afternoon

PS: aren't they suffixes


----------



## figbat (7 Jan 2021)

the_mikey said:


> That's 50Mm, know your metric prefixes!
> I haven't ridden 50µm today, too cold.


That gets me to another thing - in metric we like to have multiples of a thousand for up and down the scale, but in imperial we have fractions like 16ths, 32nds and 64ths... _and_ “thou”. Make yer mind up!


----------



## figbat (7 Jan 2021)

Ridgeway said:


> I rode 50,000,000,000µm this afternoon
> 
> PS: aren't they suffixes


No, definitely a prefix... although I would have gone for “suffices”.


----------



## the_mikey (7 Jan 2021)

Ridgeway said:


> I rode 50,000,000,000µm this afternoon
> 
> PS: aren't they suffixes



As they appear on paper they do look like suffixes, but they're known as prefixes!


----------



## Mark pallister (7 Jan 2021)

Dan77 said:


> Because imperial measurements are a really poor way of measuring distance. Decimalisation is so much clearer and easier to break down.
> 
> We've pretty much done away with feet and inches in manufacturing in favour of millimetres and the only reasons people persist with miles is because of history and the fact it's still how our speed limits and road signs are shown.


And it’s what’s shown on your car speedometer


----------



## figbat (7 Jan 2021)

Mark pallister said:


> And it’s what’s shown on your car speedometer


UK cars must also be able to display km/h, although continental European cars don’t have to be able to display mph. Maybe Brexit will fix this demonstrably discriminative issue.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (7 Jan 2021)

the_mikey said:


> That's 50Mm, know your metric prefixes!
> I haven't ridden 50µm today, too cold.



Indeed it is and if you refer back you will see that they did say 50k and did not indicate units km, m, cm, miles or otherwise 😂 In a thread about km we must assume 50,000 km!


----------



## ColinJ (7 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> But to be fair to Roman numberals they are base 10 but they are a bit rubbish, as they lack zero.


Strictly speaking, they were base X!


----------



## RichardB (8 Jan 2021)

MartinQ said:


> Just shows how foresighed Leonardo de Pisa was when he described the Fibonacci sequence 800 years ago. The next/previous number is your km/mile equivalent, so
> 5 - 8 - 13 - 21 - 34 - 55 - 89 ...



I had noticed this, too. It's not exact, but near enough for approximation purposes. I've wondered for a long time if this is just a coincidence, or if there is a deeper connection between the two. Probably coincidence. Incidentally, there is a book called 'Nature's Numbers' by Ian Stewart which has a fascinating chapter on the Fibonacci sequence, relating it to the Golden Mean/Golden Section, the design of flower heads, snail shells and all sorts. Out of print now, but worth tracking down a copy if this kind of thing floats your boat.

Being brought up on Imperial units (ho ho), my mental arithmetic is quite good, so for miles/km I just multiply or divide by 1.6. Easy and near enough for most purposes.


----------



## RichardB (8 Jan 2021)

Notafettler said:


> AND where it is a metal posts with the pointers held on with extra large jubilee clips they tend to point in the opposite direction (wind small boys turns them).



FTFY. Been there, done that, watched the confusion.


----------



## RichardB (8 Jan 2021)

Shreds said:


> Imperial all the way, except fractions. mm are much easier to visualise and comprend than 3/32, 8/11th etc



I grew up with Imperial, but I'm happy to use either. I think the advantage of the Imperial system is that it is based on human dimensions (inch = thumb joint, foot = foot, mile = 1000 steps, furlong, chain, etc) so it is more intuitive than a system based on the length of a random steel bar in a fridge somewhere. But with the advent of calculators and computers, there is no question that metric is easier and more useable. We will eventually be 100% metric, I am sure, but I will regret the passing of the old system. However, if I feel too nostalgic I always remember a conversation I had on a motorcycle forum where we were discussing tuning modifications. An American guy chimed in with (to paraphrase) "What you need to do is machine about nineteen and one-half sixty-fourths from the surface of the cylinder head." Now that IS crazy.

FWIW, when I make a table, I plot out in my head the length in feet, the height in inches, and the wood stock in inches or board feet, because these make more sense to me. When I do the actual making, everything is in cm, except for any intricate joints, which I measure in 1/10th mm, because calculations are simpler. Horses for courses.


----------



## figbat (8 Jan 2021)

RichardB said:


> I grew up with Imperial, but I'm happy to use either. I think the advantage of the Imperial system is that it is based on human dimensions (inch = thumb joint, foot = foot, mile = 1000 steps, furlong, chain, etc) so it is more intuitive than a system based on the length of a random steel bar in a fridge somewhere.


Oh come now, it's not that difficult. A metre is defined as the distance travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second; how is that not easy to visualise? 



RichardB said:


> Horses for courses.


Now THERE is an imperial animal - measured in hands (4 inches) and raced over furlongs and miles.


----------



## RichardB (8 Jan 2021)

figbat said:


> Oh come now, it's not that difficult. A metre is defined as the distance travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second; how is that not easy to visualise?



You are quite correct. The metre bar hasn't been used since 1960. Just one more way in which I am falling behind.

Back with you in a couple of microfortnights.


----------



## Andy in Germany (8 Jan 2021)

figbat said:


> Oh come now, it's not that difficult. A metre is defined as the distance travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second; how is that not easy to visualise?



This is what happens when nerds are put in charge of defining things.


----------



## figbat (8 Jan 2021)

Andy in Germany said:


> This is what happens when nerds are put in charge of defining things.


In defence of nerds, it is, at least, consistent and unchanging which a physical item is not. The kilogram is was the last remaining SI measure that is defined by the thing rather than a concept; the search continues is over (now I am behind the times as I didn't realise they had found an absolute definition - the kilogram is now defined by taking the fixed numerical value of the Planck constant to be 6.62607015×10^−34 when expressed in the unit J⋅s, which is equal to kg⋅m^2⋅s^−1, where the metre and the second are defined in terms of c and Δ_ν_Cs.


----------



## matticus (8 Jan 2021)

figbat said:


> In defence of nerds, it is, at least, consistent and unchanging which a physical item is not.


I think they should just crowd-source this stuff - it would be obvious if it ever drifted significantly out of whack. Would save a lot of money (that we could spend on feeding poor countries and new iPhones).


----------



## figbat (8 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> I think they should just crowd-source this stuff - it would be obvious if it ever drifted significantly out of whack.


They crowd-sourced the current US president...


----------



## Andy in Germany (8 Jan 2021)

figbat said:


> In defence of nerds, it is, at least, consistent and unchanging which a physical item is not. The kilogram is was the last remaining SI measure that is defined by the thing rather than a concept; the search continues is over (now I am behind the times as I didn't realise they had found an absolute definition - the kilogram is now defined by taking the fixed numerical value of the Planck constant to be 6.62607015×10^−34 when expressed in the unit J⋅s, which is equal to kg⋅m^2⋅s^−1, where the metre and the second are defined in terms of c and Δ_ν_Cs.



I'm sure that makes logical sense, but I don't really understand most of it...


----------



## matticus (8 Jan 2021)

MartinQ said:


> 5 - 8 - 13 - 21 - 34 - 55 - 89 ...


Ladies n gennulmen, we present to you: the new Campag _Gravelissimo c_assette! Italian beauty+maths


----------



## Notafettler (8 Jan 2021)

Paulus said:


> In my day you could get 8


In my day A penny would get you a lorry load
And the lorry


----------



## Chap sur le velo (8 Jan 2021)

RichardB said:


> I think the advantage of the Imperial system is that it is based on human dimensions ... mile = 1000 steps...so it is more intuitive


Blimey with a stride of over 5' you get no argument from me, big fella.


----------



## RichardB (8 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> The thing is: It _isn't_ really based on human dimensions. Some people's feet are about a foot long - but most people's aren't. The chain? Yes, very intuitive - although I prefer the standard "piece of string". The furlong? errrm a long furry thing?



No, I disagree. The old measurements were based on human dimensions, but in the vast majority of cases there was no need to be absolutely precise. A foot is about the length of an average adult foot, for example. A mile was a thousand steps (the Roman _mille passus_), again variable with stride length, but a useful concept. There were plenty of more precise measurements (troy and avoirdupois ounces, drams and the like for commercial purposes, for example) for when accuracy was needed. But for day-to-day transactions, 'about a foot', 'about an inch' and 'about a mile' were adequate. A furlong was originally a 'furrow-long' - the length of an average furrow in a field. In a society where the majority of people worked on the land, that would have been a useful mental image to describe a distance. Again, originally it would have been an approximate distance, and only became defined as 1/8 mile or 220 yards much later. Agreed, the more people needed to calculate rather than estimate, the clumsier and more frustrating the old system became. But its basis in human factors is why I think people feel comfortable with it.



Dogtrousers said:


> But like you, and I'm sure many people, I'm entirely happy with either because I've dealt with both a lot. With some exceptions: My bathroom scales are marked out in kilos and stone, so both make sense to me. But any weight (of people or things or stuff) expressed American style in pounds makes no sense to me at all.



I'm with you here. I think of my weight as 'something stone something' and always have. If I'm watching it go up or down, I tend to measure in kilos for all the obvious reasons. But a 200lb person - are they ridiculously skinny or a lump of lard? I'd have to divide by 14 to have a clue to the answer. 2lb of flour, no problem. 200lb of adult - reach for the calculator.


----------



## RichardB (8 Jan 2021)

Chap sur le velo said:


> Blimey with a stride of over 5' you get no argument from me, big fella.



The Romans (_mille passus_) measured a step to where the same foot touched the ground, not one foot to the other, so a stride length of about 2' 9", which is my own stride length, give or take. We're not so different.


----------



## matticus (8 Jan 2021)

People disagree, but I STILL say that the easiest numbers to think about are quantities you can see in your head.
e.g. 3 apples? easy. 7? Yeah sure. 33? Well, sort of, certainly harder. 77? well, it's a big pile isn't it! But you wouldn't be very accurate :P


----------



## Glow worm (8 Jan 2021)

I was thinking I'm happy using either but must admit if someone gives their weight in KGs I have absolutely no idea! And I did once have to take a bike computer back to the shop because I discovered it only measured in KMs when I got it home.

One thing I do struggle with (along with most things in life to be honest!) is hill gradients in %s. Not really a metric thing as such I guess, but does seem to be a relatively recent thing- at least UK. I can easily visualise a 1 in 8 or 1 in 10 hill but a 75% one, no. I just assume it means you can get up 75% before you're knackered. I'm sure it's very straightforward to understand but I have a mental block. Being thick doesn't help either.

Edit- I should add that luckily for me, hill gradients are not things that trouble us here in East Anglia.


----------



## Tribansman (8 Jan 2021)

This is broadly accurate ...

"0%: A flat road

1-3%: Slightly uphill but not particularly challenging. A bit like riding into the wind

4-6%: Manageable but can cause fatigue over long periods

7-9%: Starting to get uncomfortable for seasoned riders, and very challenging for new climbers

10%-15%: Usually tough and you'll start to get sore (but dependant on gearing), esp if for any length of time

16%+: Very challenging for nearly all riders

Btw, the steepest measured gradient on a paved road is 35% (Baldwin Street, New Zealand)


----------



## ColinJ (8 Jan 2021)

Glow worm said:


> One thing I do struggle with (along with most things in life to be honest!) is hill gradients in %s. Not really a metric thing as such I guess, but does seem to be a relatively recent thing- at least UK. I can easily visualise a 1 in 8 or 1 in 10 hill but a 75% one, no. I just assume it means you can get up 75% before you're knackered. I'm sure it's very straightforward to understand but I have a mental block. Being thick doesn't help either.


That is a very good example of how easy it is to switch from one system to another. I grew up with (e.g.) 1-in-10 but barely noticed the change to 10%.


----------



## matticus (8 Jan 2021)

Tribansman said:


> This is broadly accurate ...
> 
> "0%: A flat road
> 
> ...


Not bad.  Now are you going to do the fun side: signs on _des_cents??


----------



## Glow worm (8 Jan 2021)

Tribansman said:


> This is broadly accurate ...
> 
> "0%: A flat road
> 
> ...



looks like a useful reference thanks.


----------



## GoldenLamprey (8 Jan 2021)

That's the thing about 'intuitive'. Many conflate it with 'familiar'. Metric is easy enough to visualise once you use it a little. I find it hard to think in mph now, apart from speed limits when driving.


----------



## Tribansman (8 Jan 2021)

matticus said:


> Not bad.  Now are you going to do the fun side: signs on _des_cents??



I'd just suggest 'Weee' for 1-3% and adding an extra 'e' for every 1% from there


----------



## Glow worm (8 Jan 2021)

ColinJ said:


> That is a very good example of how easy it is to switch from one system to another. I grew up with (e.g.) 1-in-10 but barely noticed the change to 10%.


Sounds easy enough. so with a 16% hill, apart from avoiding it, that would be about 1 in 6 and a 1/4 ?

On another note- I've heard bookies have started, or are to start doing odds in %s rather than just saying 8 to 1 or 60 to 1 etc. The world is rapidly becoming way too complicated for me. And on that note- I'm off for a hill/ betting free ride


----------



## ColinJ (8 Jan 2021)

Glow worm said:


> Sounds easy enough. so with a 16% hill, apart from avoiding it, that would be about 1 in 6


That's right.


Glow worm said:


> ... and a 1/4 ?


25% (we do have some round here!)

I might as well do all the obvious ones (rounding some to whole numbers)...

2% = 1-in-50
3% = 1-in-33
4% = 1-in-25
5% = 1-in-20
6% = 1-in-16
7% = 1-in-14
8% = 1-in-12
9% = 1-in-11
10% = 1-in-10
11% = 1-in-9
12% & 13% = 1-in-8
14% & 15% = 1-in-7
16% & 17% = 1-in-6
20% = 1-in-5
25% = 1-in-4
33% = 1-in-3


----------



## classic33 (9 Jan 2021)

figbat said:


> Oh come now, it's not that difficult. A metre is defined as the distance travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second; how is that not easy to visualise?  *
> 
> 
> Now THERE is an imperial animal - measured in hands (4 inches) and raced over furlongs and miles.


That's the old(1983) definition!
*2019 definition:*
The metre, symbol m, is the SI unit of length. It is defined by taking the fixed numerical value of the speed of light in vacuum c to be 299792458 when expressed in the unit m⋅s−1, where the second is defined in terms of the caesium frequency ΔνCs.


----------



## RichardB (9 Jan 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> These are interesting historical curios - for which thanks - but they don't give the imperial system any _intuitive _advantage.



I don't think I ever said that the Imperial system was _better_ or had an intuitive _advantage_. I was just having a few thoughts about how the system came about (i.e. it's not as barmy as it looks) and why some people find it hard to let go. I don't disagree that the SI system is far superior for all practical purposes in the world we live in. I was taught all the rod/pole/perch nonsense at primary school and metric was a relative novelty at secondary school, but even I use metric for most purposes today, and feel comfortable with it.

Weight - grams and kilos (except for general statements about bodyweight, when st/lb)
Volume - cc, litres, cubic metres (firewood and water metering), haven't thought of gallons in years, but beer in pints ALWAYS
Distance - mm/cm/m except in informal conversation, miles for journey distances, km otherwise.

I'm about 80% converted.


----------



## I like Skol (9 Jan 2021)

RichardB said:


> Weight - grams and kilos (except for general statements about bodyweight, when st/lb)
> Volume - cc, litres, cubic metres (firewood and water metering), haven't thought of gallons in years, *but beer in pints* ALWAYS
> Distance - mm/cm/m except in informal conversation, *miles for journey distances*, km otherwise.


Funny thing about buying liquids isn't it. Milk and beer still commonly traded in pints while nearly all other consumable liquids are sold in millilitres or litres. I suppose saying "give me half a litre" in a pub doesn't quite roll off the tongue the same as "I'll have a pint"? Like wise with milk. I still buy it in pints (albeit 4 pint cartons at the supermarket) . The metric version of the 4 pint milk carton always feels like a bit of a con to me, like I am being short changed! Mrs Skol tries to buy the filtered Cravendale shoot if she can get away with it because she thinks it is 'better' (don't ask me why, we use the normal milk at a fair rate of knots so it never has time to go off ) and I grumble and complain about the expense! Her excuse is that it isn't much more expensive, which would be right if they were like for like, but the several pence more for her carton of boutique milk is in reality considerably more than several pence when you factor in the reality because her carton is 2 litres while mine is 4 pints (2.272Ltr).
The pint is an oddity, but the mile is still the official unit. If pubs stopped selling beer in pints and changed to half and quarter litres I bet 'the pint' as a unit of liquid would quite rapidly fall out of use (apart from for CAMRA members ).
Miles and mph would also soon fall out of use if the kilometre was made the official unit. Mpg will probably be more resilient, as clinging to its use allows us to compare modern vehicles against ones that we owned 'back in the day'. I buy fuel in litres but convert this to gallons to calculate fuel consumption in mpg. Mpl seems just wrong and litres per 100km also involves converting one of the metrics between imperial and metric (I felt it was necessary to insert a link explaining the difference between a metric and the metric measurement system..... sorry). Once distance is measured in km and fuel in litres then a natural adoption of the ltr/100km will be inevitable.

As I have said previously, I and many like me are not resisting the metric system. We are simply working with what we have until the switch is properly completed.


----------



## RichardB (9 Jan 2021)

I like Skol said:


> I buy fuel in litres but convert this to gallons to calculate fuel consumption in mpg. Mpl seems just wrong and litres per 100km also involves converting one of the metrics between imperial and metric (I felt it was necessary to insert a link explaining the difference between a metric and the metric measurement system..... sorry). Once distance is measured in km and fuel in litres then a natural adoption of the ltr/100km will be inevitable.



"Dad, how do I ...?"
"Divide by 4.54608, easy."
"Nerd."

I think it's the only conversion factor I know to 5 decimal places.

And litres per 100 km is just _wrong_, because a *good* number is a* low *number, whereas any fule kno that with fuel consumption a *good* number is a *high* number. 

I'm semi-serious. These things are completely ingrained, and exist in a part of the brain that is very resistant to change.


----------



## biggs682 (9 Jan 2021)

KM's are higher so looks better but i use miles


----------



## Tribansman (9 Jan 2021)

I definitely think in miles and on the rare occasions I've tried to use km - on long audaxes mainly, as distances between controls, etc are stated in km and it's easier to split 1200km into chunks than 745 miles - I am mentally converting them back into miles to be able to properly visualise the distance.

So as you kind of suggested @I like Skol guess it's about what's intuitive / we think in, as it is for speaking other languages. I'd probably only start thinking in kms if I moved to somewhere where that was the common currency so was immersed in it and 'how long a km is' became hard wired in


----------



## figbat (9 Jan 2021)

I like Skol said:


> Funny thing about buying liquids isn't it. Milk and beer still commonly traded in pints while nearly all other consumable liquids are sold in millilitres or litres.
> [...]
> The pint is an oddity, but the mile is still the official unit. If pubs stopped selling beer in pints and changed to half and quarter litres I bet 'the pint' as a unit of liquid would quite rapidly fall out of use.


The Weights and Measures Act still allows for beer and milk to be sold in pints, so it is still an “official” unit. Pretty much all other items must be sold in metric, by law.


----------

