Ruger Forum banner

41 - 58 of 58 Posts

Retired Moderator & Gunsmith
Joined
16,181 Posts
Charlie_K, Hey, watch it .... I am a Pi baby, born on 3.14 馃槃
 

"The Real Deal"
Joined
6,773 Posts
What makes my brain hurt is when you discuss a cartridge and you call it by how you know it as 30 luger but someone will call it the military equivalent? 7.65脳21mm Parabellum ...
Or a 9mm short.. :oops:
 

Registered
Joined
305 Posts
Ah, the metric system. As an engineer geek, we were taught the metric system and once used to it, its a much easier system than ours.

Which brings me to what I consider a funny story. About 8 to 10 years ago we had a government contract to upgrade the firing ranges around military bases in the USA. Everything from small arms qualification ranges to the computerized Multi-Purpose Range Complexes 5 miles long where they fire everything from small arms, to tanks, to helos and A10s. About half way through the program, the Army Corps of Engineers decided they wanted every dimension in our reports, plans, and specifications to be "dual units". So on a drawing you would see something like 2.54 cm (1 in) when you wanted to spec say the thickness of something. Yes metric as the standard and english equivalent following.

Fast forward a couple years. The projects finally go to construction and they are trying to buy standard stuff that is manufactured by english dimensions. Like say they needed a bunch of plywood. So the specifications would be CDX grade plywood 1219.2 mm by 2438.4 mm (4 ft by 8 ft). Everybody was getting confused. Things were not fitting together. Change orders followed. The bids started getting higher. The construction crews had issues communicating with the engineers and everybody had issues communicating with the government.

So, then they paid us to rework a bunch of the projects changing all the units to english first, then metric equivalents second. Finally, somebody with common sense dropped the metric requirement and we were back to where we started. Specifying 2 by 4's that were closer to 1 1/2 by 3 1/2's. In the end only the target distances remained in metric so the boys in camo could use meters to range there big toys with.
 

"The Real Deal"
Joined
6,773 Posts
Ah, the metric system. As an engineer geek, we were taught the metric system and once used to it, its a much easier system than ours.

Which brings me to what I consider a funny story. About 8 to 10 years ago we had a government contract to upgrade the firing ranges around military bases in the USA. Everything from small arms qualification ranges to the computerized Multi-Purpose Range Complexes 5 miles long where they fire everything from small arms, to tanks, to helos and A10s. About half way through the program, the Army Corps of Engineers decided they wanted every dimension in our reports, plans, and specifications to be "dual units". So on a drawing you would see something like 2.54 cm (1 in) when you wanted to spec say the thickness of something. Yes metric as the standard and english equivalent following.

Fast forward a couple years. The projects finally go to construction and they are trying to buy standard stuff that is manufactured by english dimensions. Like say they needed a bunch of plywood. So the specifications would be CDX grade plywood 1219.2 mm by 2438.4 mm (4 ft by 8 ft). Everybody was getting confused. Things were not fitting together. Change orders followed. The bids started getting higher. The construction crews had issues communicating with the engineers and everybody had issues communicating with the government.

So, then they paid us to rework a bunch of the projects changing all the units to english first, then metric equivalents second. Finally, somebody with common sense dropped the metric requirement and we were back to where we started. Specifying 2 by 4's that were closer to 1 1/2 by 3 1/2's. In the end only the target distances remained in metric so the boys in camo could use meters to range there big toys with.
To many of the crew trying to steer the helm of the ship.
 

Registered
Joined
8,001 Posts
Ah, the metric system. As an engineer geek, we were taught the metric system and once used to it, its a much easier system than ours.

Which brings me to what I consider a funny story. About 8 to 10 years ago we had a government contract to upgrade the firing ranges around military bases in the USA. Everything from small arms qualification ranges to the computerized Multi-Purpose Range Complexes 5 miles long where they fire everything from small arms, to tanks, to helos and A10s. About half way through the program, the Army Corps of Engineers decided they wanted every dimension in our reports, plans, and specifications to be "dual units". So on a drawing you would see something like 2.54 cm (1 in) when you wanted to spec say the thickness of something. Yes metric as the standard and english equivalent following.

Fast forward a couple years. The projects finally go to construction and they are trying to buy standard stuff that is manufactured by english dimensions. Like say they needed a bunch of plywood. So the specifications would be CDX grade plywood 1219.2 mm by 2438.4 mm (4 ft by 8 ft). Everybody was getting confused. Things were not fitting together. Change orders followed. The bids started getting higher. The construction crews had issues communicating with the engineers and everybody had issues communicating with the government.

So, then they paid us to rework a bunch of the projects changing all the units to english first, then metric equivalents second. Finally, somebody with common sense dropped the metric requirement and we were back to where we started. Specifying 2 by 4's that were closer to 1 1/2 by 3 1/2's. In the end only the target distances remained in metric so the boys in camo could use meters to range there big toys with.
The good old army corps of engineers ... I too work in the engineering field and more times than not the army corps is trying to go up stream when the rest were going down ...
 

Registered
Joined
7,866 Posts
I say five five six and seven six two. Always have, and it鈥檚 said in the military nearly universally. If someone said five point five six I鈥檇 look at them weird lol.
 

Registered
Joined
4,398 Posts
Or a 9mm short.. :oops:
I'm much more likely to refer to 7.65 Browning, since that's how most of them (except the little Savages) are marked.

9mm Browning Short is another popular marking, sometimes as "Court" or "Corto".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tacky

Retired Moderator & Gunsmith
Joined
16,181 Posts
I think the 380 Auto wins the prize for having the most names. It started out in the US as a 380 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol). In 1926, SAAMI officially changed it's US name to 380 Auto. In Germany it is called a 9mm Short or a 9mm Kurz (Kurz means "short" in German). In Belgium, John Browning got the honors so it was called a 9mm Browning or 9mm Browning Court. In Italy it was called a 9mm Corto. Of course the military has to chime in with 9x17mm.

The 7.65 Browning is the same as a 32 Auto .... not even close.
 

Retired Moderator & Gunsmith
Joined
16,181 Posts
I'm glad it worked out for you.
 

Registered
Joined
977 Posts
What I often gag at is saying the M-1 was chambered for the .30-06. The .30-06 cartridge was replaced around 1921 by the Caliber .30 M-1, and later by the .30 M-2 cartridges.

And, on pet peeves, calling every .45 Automatic a M1911 instead of Government Model. In fact, most so called M1911s are closer to M1911A1.

But I have learned to keep my mouth shut rather than beng called some kind of Nazi.

Bob Wright
 

Registered
Joined
16 Posts
(The following is offered with a smile and not scathing intent)

I hope the OP sees the irony.

Saying Pi equals 3.14 is a shortcut, because that is not what Pi equals (but is close enough for someone to understand). Just like "five five six" is close enough for someone to understand when the person actually means "five point five six."

Good communication is usually about providing accurate information without being pedantic by being more precise than necessary. When talking to American gun folks, almost always will "five five six" be understood when discussing rifles.

Question to the OP, did you grow up saying "point thirty eight" or "point forty five" or "point three zero eight" when dealing with imperial caliber names?
 

Registered
Joined
951 Posts
Any computer geeks out there? The metric system is a "base 10" just like the number of fingers on your hands. The US system of weight and liquid measurement is a binary system (octal base). Think: 8 ounces = 1/2 lb, 1 cup. 16 oz =1 pound, 1 pint, 2 cups. 32 oz = 2 pounds, 1 quart, 4 cups. 64 ounces = 4 lbs, 1/2 gallon, 8 cups, 128 oz = 8 lbs,1 gallon, 16 cups. People think the metric system is more modern but what can be more modern than a binary system used in virtually all computers?
I think that in the early days of "precise" (i.e., kinda repeatable, and using a common measurement system) measurement, the measurement tools had a lot to do with the measurement philosophy - using 2 sticks for a rude set of dividers, it's a lot easier to split a given length into 2 parts than it is to accurately divide it into 10 parts; similarly, it's easier to halve a given weight (again, using rude scales) or volume (given a relatively matched pair of containers) - hence the reliance on factors of 2 in determining measurement units.

Of course, when a measurement standard is enacted using the length of a royal finger, then things can get messy when trying to incorporate the new standard into existing common units...
 

Registered
Joined
94 Posts
You're dealing with language and a living language, such as American English, always changes. Some times it's regrettable, like when the definition that one learned in school is no longer valid or when a definition flips completely. It's really noticeable in specialized speech communities.

One thing that a living language does is shorten awkward phrases. Five-point-Five-Six becomes 556. This is normal with the several languages that I am familiar with. Many people hate this; many reject this and stick to the "old" way; many people have jobs because of this.

So, take heart. All is well in the English language and you are free to use 5.56 or 556.

HTH
 

Registered
Joined
12 Posts
It's not a particularly big deal, but surely I can't be the only one.

When it comes to military calibers like the 5.56x45mm or 7.62x39mm, when somebody says the name out loud they'll say five five six or seven six two. But growing up I didn't hear this, I could only go by the names as they were written. I always pronounced them as five point five six, and seven point six two. Just like how pi is three point one four. Even today I still pronounce their names as they appear.

Anyone else in the same boat or am I the odd one here?
I hear both. The decimal point is correct but either way we know what they mean
 

Registered
Joined
2,225 Posts
trigger creep, Roger that and only computer nerds say "dot".
That is so true... Good point ! ... (I'm sorry..I didn't mean to make a bad pun ...it just slipped out... honest )
Gary
 
41 - 58 of 58 Posts
Top