Hi Folks,Well two new threads in one day, what do you know about that. I just can't keep sticking my "two cents," in on other post when it seems to be so fare off the original topic. Plus I have a feeling that some good conversation topics are going to get lost. This topic is far removed from: "Is a 16" Makita Circular saw worth it?" where it started. So out of respect for the original poster, keeping things germane to the subject, and respect to our patient moderator. I shall start this one with a little cutting, pasting and some new feedback.Metric is better in so many ways, I couldn't begin to count them in this entry, that you are most right about. As for how it is better, simply put, it just easier that dealing with fractions and having a common standard of error, be it 1 mm for timber framing and .25 mm for furniture. The trade here in the states has a "vale," over it, one that someone like me can see very plainly.Take some of the major brands of tools, Makita, Hitachi, Ryobia, Bosch, Festool, the list goes on, they are all metric. Some like Festool do not even try to hide it they simple sell only the metric version, not a "masked," American market version. So most tools I use are metric by their nature.I can't tell you how many architects love metric, and not just over seas. I recently had one tell me, "do you know why that room on the print is a strange dimensions, because of conversions from metric to imperial." I do have my own saw mill so I do cut to metric dimensions, not that I have to though. I work with many different groups of timber framers, designers, and the like, so I just do quick conversions to metric. Also, a lot of green rough lumber comes off the mill in metric. One local sawyer consistently cuts his 4/4 stock to 100 mm and he doesn't even know it.As for restoration work, it is the same thing, most "hand hewn," 8 inch post are closer to 200 mm than they are to 8". Matter of fact a frame this last summer, a "Dutch Barn," from New York had closer whole numbers in metric than it did inches or feet through out the frame. So restoration has never been that much of a challenge either. A small project I had to assist with last week, a "Run-in Shed," for some rather expensive breeding cattle would come as close to a challenge as I see. The original frame had been cut to 12 feet in width. The client needed more room and was not happy with the original design, wanting the front to span at least 18' without any posts. So the frame I cut that plugs into the old one, is 3658 mm by 5600 mm long. Now remember I use "line rule" for lay out so even on the width I dealt with a whole number of 3400 mm, easy.It is very practical to convert. I use metric, my tools are metric, the software is based in decimals so metric is easy there as well. I recently had this very same discussion with some one that gave me a dimension 17' 6 5/16" or 210 5/16". I converted it to 5342 mm, which for most is a much simpler expression, not as annoying to write down, or remember; 53 42 is much easier than 210 5/16" or 210.3125".If I have a new client I do just that, covert 12" (1 foot) to the metric foot of 300 mm. For the purpose of the design and conversation process, it works just fine. I simple listen and talk in the "generic foot." The end product is so close to the conversational design that unless the client is helping cut the frame, they do not notice, (though they get this explanation from the very beginning and it has never seemed to bother any of them.) Most folks know metric is easy, they just don't get a chance to use it. My students respond pretty quick to it and there only chief complaint is not getting to on other job sites. I tell them to push back and/or convert for their own peace of mind. By the way the last 12" beam of "rough stock" I got from a local mill, (not my own,) was 301 mm, and if I had to convert, it would be 305 mm, not 304.8. beside with "line rule," none of that matters anyway.I have read most recent,a post about not being able to find a 50 mm chisels for the reason for not using metric and that the imperial system is divisible by more numbers. The chisels in Japan are excellent, and come in so many hundreds of varieties, all are metric in their sizing, that I have found. With that said, I have no problem using a 2" chisel, for it "over cuts," a mortise just the correct amount for a 50 mm tenon to fit snugly but not have the qualities of, as my grammy would say, "a frogs hiney under water." I want my joint to be snug at raising not so tight I have to force them together.Once a builder said to me, you can't divide 100 mm as easy as you can 12", and I replied you are correct. However, I can divide the "metric foot," (300 mm) in more ways than you can your 12 inches, and that is what I think in and use with my clients when discussing design, (at least with the one's that use the imperial system.) Also, 12 inches is not the only thing that has to be divided, you also have to deal with 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, and so on, none of those are very easy to manipulate, at least compared to 1/10, 1/100, 1/1000.So let it begin...Regards,Jay