Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I just watched a video on youtube from interbike and the guy in the video was explaining the specs on the bike and he was switching back and forth between the metric and imperial system. I just thought it was stupid, not to stick with one system. So I thought I would break down the components after witch system is used to describe the specs. This is valid for the US and UK.

Overall weight: Imperial.
Frame weight: Imperial, although metric is sometime used, especially for racers.
Frame size: Imperial, metric the norm for racers.
Wheel size: Imperial
Wheel weight: Metric
Rim width: Metric
Spoke width: Metric
Tyre size: Imperial
Tyre weight: Metric
Tube weight: Metric
Fork travel: Metric and Imperial, with metric becoming dominant.
Fork weight: Metric and Imperial
Fork steerer tube: Metric
Fork Metric and imperial: Metric
Fork stanchions: Metric
Rear shock travel: Metric and Imperial
Rear shock weight: Metric
Brake weight: Metric
Brake disc size: Metric and Imperial
Pedal weight: Metric
Crank arm length: Metric
Bottom bracket size: Metric
Seatpost size: Metric
Handlebar size: Metric
Handlebar rise height: Imperial
Grip weight: Metric
Stem size: Metric
Stem weight: Metric
Saddle weight: Metric
Weight of every component of drive train: Metric

= 24
Imperial = 10

Metric wins by a landslide.

101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
It's strange to use two systems interchangeably like that. In my country we sometimes use inches to describe all wheels, but that's about it. I know that officially the UK has switched to metric, although they still use some of the imperial system.
I found this picture while reading about the imperial system on Wikipedia, it says alot.

1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.