To go metric, or to not go metric… that is the question. Many countries in the British Commonwealth (their governments, anyway) have thrown their lots with metric. The United States government has tried, but failed. No one really knows why. Some think that it is just because Americans are the most stubborn, stiff-necked people on the face of the planet; others think that Americans are too dumb to comprehend metric (which is an odd opinion to have since metric requires less brain-power than Customary); and still others contend that Customary just works better (we put several teams on the moon with Customary for crying out loud). I myself have sometimes been hypnotized by the uniform order of the metric system... I did not truly understand why metric could never work in the United States as the sole measuring system when I tried to design an acceptable dozenal measuring system based on customary. It was pretty, but it would never be accepted... for the same reason as metric, as it turns out. I did not understand why until I tried to make US Survey measure fit into my system. It would not. As I researched Survey measure (also called Gunter’s), I discovered something intriguing. The US Survey units are not the precise equivalents of international units of the same name. For example, while the International yard, foot, and inch are 1 143 /1 250 m, 381 /1 250 m, & 127 /5 000 m, respectively, the US Survey yard, foot, and inch are 3 600 /3 937 m, 1 200 /3 937 m & 100 /3 937 m respectively. This did not change when the US accepted the more metric-friendly international definitions of units for all other trade purposes. Hence, if you visit the United States today, you will encounter a statute mile that is actually about 3 mm longer than the international mile.

Now, why would that be? Why would we keep our old survey standards when we adopted the international standards for all other commodities? Why is it important that our country continue to be measured in Survey miles? The answer is that we are compelled by market forces to keep our Customary units and make sure they are compatible with our Survey units. If we switched to any other measurement system that was not compatible with U.S. Survey measure, it would shift a huge economic burden to our real-estate market. This burden would be completely unnecessary because it would be artificially imposed and, in essence, a duplication of work. Why? Well, consider the following conversation:

* * *

Metricator: You should switch to metric.

Land Owner/Realtor: Why?

Metricator: It’s more efficient. It is logical and based on the number ten making quick computations easy.

Land Owner/Realtor: Based on ten? You mean decimal?

Metricator: Yes.

Land Owner/Realtor: How is that better than Customary?

Metricator: Try multiplying 3 & 3/4 yards by 1 & 1/2 feet in your head.

Land Owner/Realtor: Nice one. Can you multiply 1.8288 m by 0.6096 m in your head?

Metricator: Touché. But my calculator does decimals for those difficult problems.

Land Owner/Realtor: Well, mine does fractions.

Metricator: Okay, okay. Just trust me. Metric is better. A liter is bigger than a quart, after all. Isn’t buying larger capacity containers better?

Land Owner/Realtor: Sure. But what does that have to do with anything? I mean, if I want bigger, they make 1 qt., 8 fl. oz. containers.

Metricator: Just trust me. Base ten is better. Most of the world uses it. It’ll make our goods more accessible to foreign markets. Heck, our military prefers kilometers and meters to miles and yards because the 1 000 to 1 relationship makes snap battlefield calculations concerning distance easier.

Land Owner/Realtor: I’ll keep that in mind if I ever join the military.

Metricator: Maybe you don’t get it. Check this out. We currently measure land in acres. There are 640 acres to the square mile and 43 560 square feet to an acre. That’s 208.71… something feet squared. You can’t tell me that’s efficient. In metric, land is measured in hectares. That’s 100 x 100 meters and 100 of those fit in a square kilometer.

Land Owner/Realtor: That’s nice.

Metricator: That’s all you have to say?

Land Owner/Realtor: What do you want me to say?

Metricator: I want you to admit that the metric system is better and sign this petition to request that the government make a law that mandates metric as the sole US measure.

Land Owner/Realtor: Oh… so that’s what this is about.

Metricator: So, what do you say?

Land Owner/Realtor: No.

Metricator: No?

Land Owner/Realtor: No.

Metricator: Why?

Land Owner/Realtor: I’m selling my land in the next five years.

Metricator: So?

Land Owner/Realtor: So, have you considered what compulsory metrication would do to the real estate market?

Metricator: No.

Land Owner/Realtor: Let me paint you a picture. I own 50 acres. That’s exactly 5/64 of a square mile. It was precisely surveyed back in the 1800s. It is described in these terms on all of the official documents associated with the title.

Metricator: So?

Land Owner/Realtor: So, I try to sell it – but your law would require me to market it in metric. I guarantee you a conversion from Survey measure to metric would render a repeating decimal.

Metricator: So?

Land Owner/Realtor: It will make calculating a precise dollar amount more difficult… not to mention the fact that ‘50 acres’ has more advertising appeal than ‘20.234365… hectares.’

Metricator: So round down to 20…or up to 21.

Land Owner/Realtor: Can’t. I’m required to give an accurate description of the land.

Metricator: I see.

Land Owner/Realtor: Also, I wouldn’t be permitted to do a simple calculation myself. All of the land would have to be resurveyed based on the square kilometer rather than the square mile in order to render a precise geodesic description of the property… that, and the government wouldn’t just take my word for it that the description was accurate.

Metricator: Ah…

Land Owner/Realtor: And this would have to be done all over the country. Every parcel of land currently owned in the US would instantly be transformed into some odd repeating decimal number of hectares. It takes a lot of money to re-survey an entire country.

Metricator: Yes; I suppose it does. But wouldn’t the social good of switching to metric be worth it?

Land Owner/Realtor: Excuse me? Do you realize what you’re suggesting?

Metricator: Apparently not.

Land Owner/Realtor: The land market will become depressed because of the extra expense involved in re-surveying. That money has to come from somewhere, so that is money that will not be spent in other market areas… so those areas will also be affected. You would be causing harm to the economy by repeating work that has already done. The land is already surveyed. No one has a problem using Customary units… except, apparently you and your ilk. To replace something that works just as well as the alternative even though it will require you to spend a lot of money that you would not otherwise have to spend simply defies common sense.

Metricator: Maybe you’re right. When you put it that way, I can’t argue with you. I’ll get out of your way now. Have a nice day and thank you for your time.

* * *

So, there you have it. That, in a dramatized nutshell, is why the U.S. cannot abandon customary linear measure.

However, I do have a few suggestions that will bring our capacity and mass units more in line with metric.

This all started with the carat. I am annoyed by this unit that measures something like 3.086 grains and does not match any Troy unit. However, the carat has been defined as exactly 200 mg. This gave me an idea for a new Jewelers’ measure that would replace Troy. The advantages of such a system is that, since it would be metric based, it would make international exchange and pricing of jewels by mass easier. In this system, 1 grain would equal 1/3 of 1 carat exactly, or 200/3 mg (a abandon the traditional 4 gr./1 c. relationship since the current relationship is much closer to 4/3). 8 carats exactly would comprise 1 pennyweight – all other measurements would be the same. The beauty of this system is that, since it is metric based, and since the carat is allowed for use even in countries where Customary units are banned, jewelers should be able to legally use this new Customary Jewelers’ mass.

After I designed my Jewelers’ mass, I designed a new Avoirdupois mass based on the new Jewelers’ grain and a 27 gr. dram (the current dram is 27.015625 gr. ).

Great. Now we have a nice, more rounded metric base for out mass schemes. But what about capacity? Well, we aren’t committed to a relationship between mass and capacity (in the US, anyway); and, though they won’t admit it, neither are the metric people; 1 mL of water does NOT equal 1 g. A common complaint is that the quart is smaller than the liter; so we should switch. I say okay. Make a liter equal to 1 quart. Base our capacity on that relationship. Sure we will be giving up our nice round cubic inch value for the gallon, but we will be able to confirm it with metric (4 000 cm³). Besides, the 277.419… cubic inch imperial gallon hasn’t bothered the British any. I say it’s a win-win. We get bigger capacity units AND we get to keep our binary divisions of those units. Besides, the average American probably won’t notice… most probably think of the liter as the metric equivalent of the quart anyway.

Now, without further ado, allow me to present my pragmatic new measurement system. Since linear and area measures will remain the same, I will only present the mass and capacity charts.

* Used in weighing gold, silver, other precious metals, and precious stones. These measures are particularly important for precisely weighing money in the Pound-Shilling-Penny system.

Return to Nearly Everything You Need to Know About Weights and Measures

Return to The Whitten Word

* * *

Weights & Measures