It kills me when I see conversions from FFU to SI using these "exact" formulations when the original FFU wasn't that exact to begin with. And then when the conversion is from SI to FFU everything is rounded to even numbers to give the impression it was measured that way.
I remember seeing 25 mm converted to 1 inch and then the 1 inch back converted to metric as 25.4 mm, a change of 0.4 mm. We need to get away from these unnecessary exact conversions and do exactly what the FFU-ists do. We should round to hard metric and give the impression metric was intended all along. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. BTW, BWMA members hate rounding a pint to 600 mL or a pound to 500 g, even though more is received. It is the thought of a pound not being a pound any more and adding to the argument that the pound and other FFU units are not exact and change at the drop of a hat. Euric ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nat Hager III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, 2004-06-06 08:56 Subject: [USMA:30053] RE: Horse racing > >>At the same time, keep in mind that, in the US, a hand is > 4 inches, which is not exactly 100 mm. > >> > > Sure, an imperial hand is officially 101.4 mm. But for me 100 mm is > close enough, particularly when measuring horses. > > Gosh this FFU is so confusing, all the odd numbers and the > rounding?!.... > > <g> > Nat > >
