May I present the NEW IMPERIAL SYSTEM:

Length

1 new inch = 2.5 cm
The new inch will be subdivided into fifths, one fifth being 0.5 cm.

1 new yard = 100 cm or 200 fifths.
The new yard will be subdivided into 100 cm or 40 new inches.

1 new foot = 25 cm, or 10 new inches
There will be four feet to the new yard.

1 new mile = 1 km, 1000 yards / metres or 4000 feet


Mass

1 new grain = 1 gramme

1 new ounce = 25 grammes

1 new pound = 500 grammes
There will be 20 new ounces to the pound and 40 new ounces to the kilo.

1 kg = 2 new pounds

1 new stone = 5 kg or 10 new pounds

1 new hundredweight = 50 kg or 100 new pounds

1 new (long) ton = 1000 kg or 2000 new pounds


Area

1 new acre = 0.5 hectare


Liquid Volume

1 new fluid ounce = 25 ml
There will be 20 new fluid ounces to the new pint, and 40 new fluid ounces to the litre.

1 new pint = 500 ml

1 litre = 2 new pints

1 new gallon = 5 litres

Don't you all think that this would make the imperial system much more transparent ?

Sounds like a recipe for confusion.

Conrad, your proposed 'new' system sounds like a system that *New* Labour might be interested in

[Catchphrase: 'We must modernise']

<<
Sounds like a recipe for confusion.
>>

That's a good one coming from someone advocating traders should be able to choose beween either of two sets of totslly incompatible units.

ignoring meter man (as we all tend to)....


---Conrad !!!---

Are you BEGGING for Xcole to drop by?

Now SHHHH!

I think that eventually, these will be something like the definitions that imperial measurements will tend to.

Inclined to agree with that Ross.

The foot (for exampe) that we know nowadays is not the one of antiquity.

These measures do evolve and change with time according to need.

In the modern age there is a need for traditional units to be compatible the now well established international system (SI).

People like distinct idiosyncratic names for units, but they don't, in the end, mind how big or small they are.

We see this in metric - Litre, tonne, micron, mil, kilo and so on.

There is nothing wrong with this but is important that folk understand how the different size units relate to one another.

This tends to be easier with metric because of its sructure. Traditional units have a bewildering variety of factors. They also suffer too much from regional variations e.g. Imperial pint, US pint.

In the end common sense will prevail. Humankind will not survive without it.

<<<People like distinct idiosyncratic names for units, but they don't, in the end, mind how big or small they are.>>>

This is demonstrated by the use of yards and metres in Britain. While these days most people would be more familiar with metres, in everyday speech many people (even those too young to know exactly what a yard is) still use phrases like "a few hundred yards away" etc. The two are close enough, that in most cases whether you say yard or metre is irrelevant.

The names of units have more value than the exact sizes. I for one, would rather continue asking for a pint of beer, than half a litre, if in future beer is sold in 500ml.

"This is demonstrated by the use of yards and metres in Britain. While these days most people would be more familiar with metres, in everyday speech many people (even those too young to know exactly what a yard is) still use phrases like "a few hundred yards away" etc. The two are close enough, that in most cases whether you say yard or metre is irrelevant."

I almost agree - but realise that the majority would take an opposite approach.

Whereas most would find it strange to hear "metres" in a news description instead of feet or yards (except for track and field) those same people would see "100 metres" as being "100 yds" or even (in younger people) "100 yds plus 10%"

<<<Whereas most would find it strange to hear "metres" in a news description instead of feet or yards (except for track and field) those same people would see "100 metres" as being "100 yds" or even (in younger people) "100 yds plus 10%">>>

It obviously depends how old you are. Almost everyone under the age of 30 knows a yard as "a metre minus 10%" For older people I'm sure its the other way round.

You're not seriously suggesting that younger people are more familiar with yards than metres are you?!

Depends on whether that young person plays/watches football or plays/watches track and field events.

But the more people here "its only 100yds on the left" (for example) the more the human mind evolves to interpret and learn what people around are saying and adopt.

I've no doubt I said "metre" a lot in my pre-teen days at school. I now know that I say yards almost exclusively - it comes from living life.

P.S. I'm not into football!

I meant "hear" - of course

This of course proves my point that the reason for the dominance of imperial is not that the units are 'better', but merely that they have been used by the majority for a long time.

Not once have *I* said that imperial is better.

I rank both systems very highly for different reasons/applications.

1. We have been over why the above system would not work.
2. Why not let's do the sensible thing and adopt US mass internationally, but Imperial capacity.

Bryan,

1. What system? If you are referring to the original poster's, such a system would not necessarily be unworkable, though I consider it undesirable.

2. That is what I have said...

Andrew Usher