please use meters

I can deal with meters. But what I can't deal with is European climbing grades.

Rockbanned wrote: Actually 3.24 sir... heh heh heh

WRONG!!
You actually need 3.28084 feet per meter.

I'm tired of the base 60 time system. I wish someone would develop a metric system for that.

Michael C wrote:I can deal with meters. But what I can't deal with is European climbing grades.

But they are so much easier to say. Plus, because I climb 10s, I will become a pro overnight if we switched over. So I might be biased so that I say I can climb 10b.

How about a setting where a user can select "meters" as the length unit and *PRESTO* the entire site then displays all lengths in meters. One could even choose a grading system and see all climbs in French grades, or whatever ...

Eliot Augusto wrote: But they are so much easier to say. Plus, because I climb 10s, I will become a pro overnight if we switched over. So I might be biased so that I say I can climb 10b.

10s in YDS translate to 6a to 6b+ in the Euro system. I think you're doing it wrong, you're going to be more of a beater if we switch... So will I by the way.

the op does have a point. everyone use meters for their ropes. With out google, how many people know how many feet a 50 meter rope is? then if you a sport climber you have to divide that number by two, carry the one... that is just too much math.

Jason Todd wrote:

We're also the country that lost a mission due to imperial units:
cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/…

"Lockheed Martin helped build, develop and operate the spacecraft for NASA. Its engineers provided navigation commands for Climate Orbiter's thrusters in English units although NASA has been using the metric system predominantly since at least 1990."

This is the US. Lets go back to the way it used to be and sell ropes in feet instead of meters. That would take care of all the problems. Besides, doesn't it sound more impressive to say you have a 196 foot rope instead of a 60 meter rope or the pitch was 150 feet instead of 45 meters.

I walked several feet with my meters

Boissal wrote: 10s in YDS translate to 6a to 6b+ in the Euro system. I think you're doing it wrong, you're going to be more of a beater if we switch... So will I by the way.

I was hoping that the knowledge of no euro 10s existing would be a giveaway that I was joking.

matt c. wrote:the op does have a point. everyone use meters for their ropes.

In US climbing, that's actually a somewhat recent development and due to the rope manufacturers more so than climbers.

Marc801 wrote: In US climbing, that's actually a somewhat recent development and due to the rope manufacturers more so than climbers.

how recent? more or less recent than cams? I have noticed that when climbing a lot the 'historical' routes they have been put up with a 50m route. are you telling me that rope used to be sold in 164 foot lengths?

I could be way off base and as a disclaimer, it still have all my hair.

I have no idea when rope lengths started to be sold in meters. I used to do a lot of climbing in the early 80s and have just gotten back into it. In the early 80s the most common ropes were 11mm in 150 or 165 foot lengths. That is roughly 45 and 50 meters. And yes, cams were just making the scene back then.

Ummm, what the Hell is going on in here?

My bad! Thought you guys were talking about something else important.

By-the-way, I use inches. 2755.90625 sounds a lot bigger than 70 meters - I think it impresses the ladies.

:)

We should use cubits. All other measurements are blasphemy.

Matt Wilson wrote:We should use cubits. All other measurements are blasphemy.

Spot on man!

These holy men agree with you:

landoverbaptist.net/showthr…

matt c. wrote: how recent? more or less recent than cams? I have noticed that when climbing a lot the 'historical' routes they have been put up with a 50m route. are you telling me that rope used to be sold in 164 foot lengths? I could be way off base and as a disclaimer, it still have all my hair.

Much more recent than cams. Friends were the first spring loaded cams that worked well and were reasonably light (there were earlier attempts and there were also passive devices) - they first became available in 1977. The widespread use of meters instead of feet for rope length really became noticeable circa 2000. The common rope lengths were 150' in the 70's which transitioned to 165' in the 80's and continued into the 90's. Many of those historic routes were indeed done with 165' ropes, and, no, they were not sold in 164' lengths - 50m is close enough to 165' for all but the most anal retentive, especially with the length variance in ropes. Going further back in time the "standard" rope length prior to 150' was 120', which explains some of the curious intermediate anchors on some historic routes.

Eliot Augusto wrote: I was hoping that the knowledge of no euro 10s existing would be a giveaway that I was joking.

Obtuse at best.

Jason Todd wrote: Spot on man! These holy men agree with you: landoverbaptist.net/showthr…

based on this most compelling evidence i will agree to now use cubis. but i reserve the right to sandbag such length in manner make the very measurement useless to anyone.