Jump to content

Feet and inches

Recommended Posts

Who's this "they"? If the Bank of England decided there were to be 100 pennies in a pound then the calculation was done and set in stone. If then some retailers decided to do their own conversion and added a few pence here and there then it is the retailers who are to blame, in short they were on the fiddle. That is not the fault of metrication that's a failing of capitalism, another argument for another day.

 

Who would want to go back to a currency that doesnt even add up properly?

 

They is retailers, and the government should have had the brains to see what would happen, as everyone else did, and left things as they were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Care to show your working ? We can’t both be right altho’ both of us could be wrong.

 

You ARE both wrong, it's three pounds and sixpence ha'penny. LOL

Edited by Ontarian1981

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank god there's no longer a need to work out how much 4' 7 1/2" of material costs at £1 19s 6d a yard.

I think it’s Three pounds and tenpence three farthings.

I calculate to £3/1/2d rounding up.

You ARE both wrong, it's three pounds and sixpence ha'penny. LOL

 

Three different answers. Not much of an argument for using imperial units and pre-decimal currency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Three different answers. Not much of an argument for using imperial units and pre-decimal currency.

 

Touche :help:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Touche :help:

 

Only small errors though -unlike putting the decimal point in the wrong place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only small errors though -unlike putting the decimal point in the wrong place!

 

I wouldn't mind my pension deposits having the decimal point a little bit further to the right.:wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You ARE both wrong, it's three pounds and sixpence ha'penny. LOL

 

£1/19/6d per yard =1/1d per inch (rounded up)

 

4ft 7 ½ins = 55 1/2ins so

 

55 ½ x 1/1d = 60 sh 1 ½ d = £3/0/1 ½ d

 

If you added the fractions of farthings, it might be close to your figure.

Edited by carosio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Decimalisation was going to turn us into a nation of maths geniuses.

 

How did that work out?

 

Well, it certainly didn't work in my case...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
£1/19/6d per yard =1/1d per inch (rounded up)

 

4ft 7 ½ins = 55 1/2ins so

 

55 ½ x 1/1d = 60 sh 1 ½ d = £3/0/1 ½ d

 

If you added the fractions of farthings, it might be close to your figure.

 

I never work things out conventionally, it's a habit I have. I got where I got to by saying to myself all I have to do is put a value to a inch and a half as 4' 6" is obvious as it is a straight yard and a half .

Edited by Ontarian1981

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£1/19/6d per yard =1/1d per inch (rounded up)

 

4ft 7 ½ins = 55 1/2ins so

 

55 ½ x 1/1d = 60 sh 1 ½ d = £3/0/1 ½ d

 

If you added the fractions of farthings, it might be close to your figure.

 

or

 

£1/19/6d per yard =474 pence per yard

474 pence per yard= 13 16/100 pence per inch

4' 7½" = 55½"

So cost is 730.45 pence

Which is £3.0s.10d

 

The method of calculation varies by a packet of 10 cigarettes in 1971.

The error/tolerance in the measurement of the wood might seem to some insignificant but if you were building an estate the potential for fraud would be and was huge

If it was engineering metal the costs and inaccuracy would also be very much greater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
or

 

£1/19/6d per yard =474 pence per yard

474 pence per yard= 13 16/100 pence per inch

4' 7½" = 55½"

So cost is 730.45 pence

Which is £3.0s.10d

 

The method of calculation varies by a packet of 10 cigarettes in 1971.

The error/tolerance in the measurement of the wood might seem to some insignificant but if you were building an estate the potential for fraud would be and was huge

If it was engineering metal the costs and inaccuracy would also be very much greater.

 

Yes, although I was calculating on the nearest whole ha'pennies or farthings rather than small fractions or decimal points. Someone selling a few yards of cloth (at that time) probably wouldn't have used those so, your 16/100 could be rounded up to a farthing, or ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
or

 

£1/19/6d per yard =474 pence per yard

474 pence per yard= 13 16/100 pence per inch

4' 7½" = 55½"

So cost is 730.45 pence

Which is £3.0s.10d

 

It’s 13point166666666 d/inch recurring, which, when mutiplied by 55point5 is 730.75d which is Three pounds and tenpence three farthings (I can’t seem to do fractions on this iPad)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.