ddaaggeett

A case for the imperial 1/16" instead of the metric mm

I'm a big fan of the base-10 metric system. The decimal system is clearly the more logical approach to quantifying anything.

But in practice I find when it comes to using a tape measure (with imperial units), there are countless instances where I have to rely on estimating a length finer than the 1/16th inch increment.

• "Why not use a tape measure with finer increments? Shouldn't 1/32" or 1/64" tick marks do the trick?"
• "Isn't this why you should use metric? Millimeters would make it easier to get a closer reading of your length."

Though these concerns are valid, I would contend using the unverified skill of "eyeballing" a measurement is more reliable than using pre-determined tick marks, and this method works better within the larger spacing of the 1/16" ticks than 1mm ticks.

Unfortunately there isn't a way to replicate my thoughts as I map a measurement to a cut, but it goes similar to the following as I eyeball the distance between two 1/16" ticks:

• ... and some change
• slightly after
• 40% beyond
• 20% before

This probably wouldn't fall under best practices, but it turns out to be consistent and reliable ... for me.

---

Please consider my other thoughts.