Marten@ScandinavianTrials Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Sounds simply thrilling! Actually it was quite interesting. Traveling around alot measuring the earth using trigonometry... However the book was more of a novel portraying the quest more than the specifics of triginometry... Thankfully. T33zr: Not even sure that the inches we used here in Scandinavia are the same as the imperial inches though. "Aln, famn, tum, fot..." Everything relating to bodyparts, quite difficult when people tend to differ in size. Read somewhere that in order to find some sort of standard you would measure the king and use the dimensions of his bodyparts. Messed things up when a new king came though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psycholist Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 Read somewhere that in order to find some sort of standard you would measure the king and use the dimensions of his bodyparts. Messed things up when a new king came though... Which body parts exactly did they measure? ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Smith! Posted May 23, 2008 Report Share Posted May 23, 2008 I think you'd struggle to fit 50" in a metre. 1 meter = 39.3700787 inch i can sidehop 1.14300 meters. and my bar height is 1.0287 meters thats how i measure how big my sidehops are. Matx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bikeperson45 Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 ve been brought up with metric, so I'm gonna stay with METRIC 223 CM sidehop that sounds much better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skoze Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 ve been brought up with metric, so I'm gonna stay with METRIC 223 CM sidehop that sounds much better That's, like, 7ft? I normally measure where it comes up on my body/ bike, then if i can really be arsed, measure how high that is when i get back. Our measurements are just "special". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish-Finger-er Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 I always thought it was just because it seemed easier. you can compare it to your wheels. and also, when taking off a a slightly unlevel surface, its easy to get a measurement thats one or the other with inches. so theres less argument over it. (say we used centrimetes, and someone was taking off an angled surface, landing to a flat one, itd be 33" in one place, and 34" 1 foot further down the slope. fairly easy to measure. but doing it with cm, every 3 or so inches, itd go from being 85cm, to 85.8cm (or 86 cm as itd be commonly rounded up to.) and youd get people bitching about cm's on side hops. and theres not much difference between a 118 and a 119 cm, i.e its the tread on your tyres, whereas to move up an inch, is a noticeable difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben John-Hynes Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 (edited) Right, get this... Why do we measure most stuff in inches, But gaps in feet? What a puzzler... Edited May 24, 2008 by Benjaminge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aener Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 'Cause a lot of people get into the hundreds, and that's just impractical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben John-Hynes Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 Aaah didn't think of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christophe' Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 ive herd 6 is normal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave85 Posted May 24, 2008 Report Share Posted May 24, 2008 6 is a very small herd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.