I started working with the metric system shortly after graduating from college, so I am more used to that than imperial. I find the metric system far easier than imperial for reverse engineering something, the nominal dimensions are almost always a whole mm. The ISO tolerances make figuring out what bearing fits to use, shaft sizes for couplings, etc. very simple.I don’t know why I fight the metric system. It’s so simple.
When a dimension says .5 or 6 x 28 mil. I have no idea what dimension that is.
But, if it’s a hex on a bolt, 7/16 or 12mm etc. is easy to understand as this comes from experience.
Old habits and all.
I noticed even on older machine tools the bearings often are standard metric sizes.I started working with the metric system shortly after graduating from college, so I am more used to that than imperial. I find the metric system far easier than imperial for reverse engineering something, the nominal dimensions are almost always a whole mm. The ISO tolerances make figuring out what bearing fits to use, shaft sizes for couplings, etc. very simple.
I think a lot of that came from the dominance of European companies making ball bearings, and they don't make much in inch sizes. The founders of FAG Bearings developed the rolling machine that made balls a uniform size and roundness and started the widescale manufacturing of ball bearings. Being German, they only made metric sizes. Timken pretty much had the tapered roller bearing market cornered, so if something had tapered rollers, it was likely inch based. Now there is plenty of competition with metric tapered roller bearings, so that seems to be changing to metric sizes as well.I noticed even on older machine tools the bearings often are standard metric sizes.
Shocking.
Wow. It's hard, right, so you can't just turn it true?Check out the quality on this jippo production spin indexer.
Thus is a kit, I’m fixing it as I go along but, come on.
It’s very manageable with carbide. I cleaned it up.Wow. It's hard, right, so you can't just turn it true?