Printable Version | Subscribe | Add to Favourites
New Topic New Reply
Author: Subject: Imperial or Metric?
alistairolsen

posted on 16/7/09 at 09:42 AM Reply With Quote
Imperial or Metric?

I hear the conversions in the book are a bit ropey and it started on imperial measurements (in 1996 lol)

What did everyone use in their build, the imperial or metric dimensions?

did you build using inch tube or 25mm?

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Mr Whippy

posted on 16/7/09 at 09:45 AM Reply With Quote
just use 25.4mm tube





Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet

View User's Profile E-Mail User Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
ironside

posted on 16/7/09 at 09:47 AM Reply With Quote
. . . and use the McSorley plans:

http://mcsorley.net/locost/drawings/bookChassis.pdf

[Edited on 16/7/09 by ironside]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
mcerd1

posted on 16/7/09 at 10:23 AM Reply With Quote
most square tube comes in metric sizes - e.g. 25mm

and most round tube comes in imperial sizes (converted to metric) e.g. 25.4mm





-

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
chrisg

posted on 16/7/09 at 11:09 AM Reply With Quote
Or use, oh I don't know, maybe a newer book with all the dimensions in mm?





Note to all: I really don't know when to leave well alone. I tried to get clever with the mods, then when they gave me a lifeline to see the error of my ways, I tried to incite more trouble via u2u. So now I'm banned, never to return again. They should have done it years ago!

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
alistairolsen

posted on 16/7/09 at 11:15 AM Reply With Quote
I would have done, but I bought a book chassis, then bought a load of parts, then decided to build a fresh chassis and I dont really want to go back to the beginning and do a roadster. I have both books tho.
View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
chrisg

posted on 16/7/09 at 11:39 AM Reply With Quote
Gawd bless yer, Guvnor!





Note to all: I really don't know when to leave well alone. I tried to get clever with the mods, then when they gave me a lifeline to see the error of my ways, I tried to incite more trouble via u2u. So now I'm banned, never to return again. They should have done it years ago!

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
James

posted on 16/7/09 at 01:04 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by alistairolsen
I hear the conversions in the book are a bit ropey and it started on imperial measurements (in 1996 lol)

What did everyone use in their build, the imperial or metric dimensions?

did you build using inch tube or 25mm?


To be fair to Chairman Ron, The Book was originally written in metric.

It was the people who added the imperial who cocked up the conversions.

I mentally used something of a mix in the end as a 40" width seemed far simpler than 1016mm!

Regardless of that, you're mad not to download the McSorley plans and use them!

Cheers,
James





------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The fight is won or lost far away from witnesses, behind the lines, in the gym and out there on the road, long before I dance under those lights." - Muhammad Ali

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Peteff

posted on 16/7/09 at 02:47 PM Reply With Quote
My tape has metric one side and imperial the other, toss a coin FFS





yours, Pete

I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
alistairolsen

posted on 16/7/09 at 02:59 PM Reply With Quote
thats fine, I dont care which I use as a measurement system when theyre equivalent. Point is, with steel and plans that are badly sorted they arent and using a set of metric plans and inch tube when its actually 25 cos thats all you could get results in errors, hence my asking which people used in this application
View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Staple balls

posted on 16/7/09 at 03:20 PM Reply With Quote
I'd use mm, they're smaller than inches






View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
ironside

posted on 16/7/09 at 04:59 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by alistairolsen
thats fine, I dont care which I use as a measurement system when theyre equivalent. Point is, with steel and plans that are badly sorted they arent and using a set of metric plans and inch tube when its actually 25 cos thats all you could get results in errors, hence my asking which people used in this application


Don't worry too much about it. The book plans are awful, use the McSorley ones - it's for the same car just complete (detail for every tube, including compound angles) and correct, there are no mistakes. There is a note on his site about 25mm vs. 1" box section:

quote:

http://mcsorley.net/locost/

Notes regarding Unit of Measure:
The CAD models were developed using standard measures based on 1" and 3/4" rectangular tubing. The drawings show secondary dimensions in metric and the build accuracy when using the metric measurements should not be an issue. Each measurement that depends on the tubing thickness may be off by at least .4mm (25mm vs. 25.4mm) and this small difference may be compounded during the assembly process. However, the overall effect of the discrepancy is probably negligible given the accuracy of most shop tools (or lack thereof).



I have done exactly this, using the McSorley book chassis plans and metric (25x25x1.5mm) tube. It turned out just fine. Hope that sets your mind at ease.

Simon

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
alistairolsen

posted on 16/7/09 at 09:08 PM Reply With Quote
Thats good to know. Yeah, Id read that note when I dwnloaded the plans, just wondered if anyone had made a conscious decision and run into any problems.
View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Peteff

posted on 16/7/09 at 10:27 PM Reply With Quote
If you cut all your pieces of metal and weld them together and are less than 3mm out over the length of your chassis you are doing very well, don't sweat the little things or you will never get the job done.





yours, Pete

I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Ninehigh

posted on 17/7/09 at 07:02 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Staple balls
I'd use mm, they're smaller than inches


Yeah you get more to the pound

Is there a site for these Mcsorely plans or shall I just google them?






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Peteff

posted on 17/7/09 at 07:10 PM Reply With Quote
McSorley.net

Here's the site but it's in the forum links as well under the title top left of your browser.





yours, Pete

I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
aitch

posted on 6/12/09 at 09:09 PM Reply With Quote
gotto be the same whether its imerial or metric

me id go for metric purely for sourcing fixings

aitch

View User's Profile E-Mail User Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
907

posted on 6/12/09 at 10:51 PM Reply With Quote
If you build in imperial it will shrink 3mm when you weld it.

If you build in metric it will only shrink an eighth.



Paul G

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
boggle

posted on 6/12/09 at 10:57 PM Reply With Quote
just divide or times by 25.4.....

then they are all the same.....

PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
gazza285

posted on 7/12/09 at 04:35 AM Reply With Quote
I don't use foriegn.





DO NOT PUT ON KNOB OR BOLLOCKS!

View User's Profile E-Mail User Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
alistairolsen

posted on 7/12/09 at 08:06 AM Reply With Quote
The discussion wasnt about imperial or metric as such, I know they are equivalent. The discussion stemmed from the reported inaccuracy in uncle rons conversion from one to the other, and the reputed fact that the plans were originally imperial





My Build Thread

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
procomp

posted on 7/12/09 at 08:25 AM Reply With Quote
Hi

The Westfield chassis he copied was in imperial. He just didn't know how many MM's there where in an Inch.

Chers Matt






View User's Profile E-Mail User Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
David Jenkins

posted on 7/12/09 at 08:46 AM Reply With Quote
Some of his measurements work in imperial, others work in metric...

I found that making the pieces oversize and adjusting them to fit was the best policy. I didn't have the McSorley plans when I made my chassis...






View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
alistairolsen

posted on 7/12/09 at 09:02 AM Reply With Quote
I used the Mcsorely plans and cut oversize by hacksaw and filed back to ensure a close fit to reduce weld shrinkage.





My Build Thread

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
britishtrident

posted on 9/12/09 at 08:52 AM Reply With Quote
The book might be metric but Ron original drawings were in imperial.
So it started out as imperial was converted to metric then a back to imperial conversion --- argh no wonder it had so many rounding errors.


quote:
Originally posted by James


To be fair to Chairman Ron, The Book was originally written in metric.

It was the people who added the imperial who cocked up the conversions.

I mentally used something of a mix in the end as a 40" width seemed far simpler than 1016mm!

Regardless of that, you're mad not to download the McSorley plans and use them!

Cheers,
James






[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member

New Topic New Reply


go to top






Website design and SEO by Studio Montage

All content © 2001-16 LocostBuilders. Reproduction prohibited
Opinions expressed in public posts are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
the views of other users or any member of the LocostBuilders team.
Running XMB 1.8 Partagium [© 2002 XMB Group] on Apache under CentOS Linux
Founded, built and operated by ChrisW.