All of Those Scrap Drill Bits!

[pfredX1]

Yup I've been going nuts buying corded drills at garage sales for $3 a pop. They're good around to shop to power homemade gadgets. It is a motor with a gearbox and a chuck. Some I even use as drills. You still can't beat a corded drill for power. http://i.imgur.com/kiZ1am6.jpg

[Frank S]

Frank S - Your story prompts mine. In recent years everyone is giving up on corded drills and going over to cordless. So perfectly good corded drills sell for next to nothing at estate and garage sales. Often at the next garage sale or flea market space there will be a complete cordless set with aged out batteries for which there are no usable replacements available at any price. Worthless, but there maybe a $30-$40 price tag on it. Go figure.....
Some time back I bought a good sized inverter to use in my truck for various stuff I use on long camping trips. When confronted later with a $5 used 1/4" corded drill I realized the inverter would drive it. It sits behind the seat of my truck with a bag of common resharpened drills. It's been useful more than once. One of these days I'll add some hex bits and wood spade drills to the bag. 5/8 spade drill is easy to resharpen and can drill a hole in a piece of wood for an emergency repair big enough to pass a rope through.

I've never been much of a fan of the battery powered so called power tools. Even though I have owned my share of them. They're good for the first few months of use as long as you use them regularly, but accidentally store one just partially discharged once and you might as well huck it in the rubbish bin. or cut it open, make it corded connected to a DC power supply
A mechanic friend brought over his brand new $1,800.00 IngersolRand impact wrench to demonstrate how powerful it was. I told him yep it is the most powerful 1/2" drive impact I've ever seen, since even most 3/4" pneumatic impacts cannot break loose Budd wheel lug nuts however come back in 6 months and show me how much you still love it.
As long as I have the engine running the inverter in my 85 SR5 will power just about every power tool I have except for my 9" Ingersol Rand angle grinder I don't worry with my 93 F350 since I have a Miller Bobcat 225 in it with its 8500 watt generator

[volodar]

"I can't resist my urge to point out that, if we used the metric system (or at least a rational nomenclature in the inferial system), none of this screwing around would be necessary. When I'm king, naming a drill anything but its size will be a capital offense. (Same for wire and sheet.)"

I couldn't agree more.

[Ed Weldon]

Volodar - I will agree with you when machines, cutting tools, measuring tools, fasteners, fluid connectors and stock material sizes of similar grade and quality graduated in size according to metric measures cost the same or less than similar American system products.
Further I feel there should be a special place in the dark nether regions of the universe for whoever created all the extra and largely unnecessary metric thread and fastener combinations.

[pfredX1]

If you made sheet or wire then you'd understand what the gage systems are for. Elves do not just magically produce those goods after all. So mortals are compelled to work within the practical physical limits of materials. Each gage graduation is based on the draw strength of materials. Thinner wire and sheet is made from thicker wire and sheet. The gages are the steps between each drawing. Or in other words you get what we can make. I'm sorry if the numbers do not align with what you consider to be proper either. But that's just how it all breaks down.

[volodar]

To me, "size" means measure. 12 gauge, #50 drill bit, or M size mean nothing until I translate these descriptions into actual sizes, and I mean measurements, by looking things up on tables. That's just not how it all breaks down in the rest of the world, or in mine - for good reason.

[mklotz]

If you made sheet or wire then you'd understand what the gage systems are for. Elves do not just magically produce those goods after all. So mortals are compelled to work within the practical physical limits of materials. Each gage graduation is based on the draw strength of materials. Thinner wire and sheet is made from thicker wire and sheet. The gages are the steps between each drawing. Or in other words you get what we can make. I'm sorry if the numbers do not align with what you consider to be proper either. But that's just how it all breaks down.

There's nothing wrong with using specialized nomenclatures of convenience DURING THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS. Labeling sheet by the number of times it's been through the rolling mill may make work easier in the factory that makes sheet.

But that's no reason at all for allowing that internal nomenclature to escape into the customer's world. He's interested in how thick it is, not how many times it's been through the rollers. Label it for sale with its thickness expressed in the measurement system used in the country of sale.

[mklotz]

To me, "size" means measure. 12 gauge, #50 drill bit, or M size mean nothing until I translate these descriptions into actual sizes, and I mean measurements, by looking things up on tables. That's just not how it all breaks down in the rest of the world, or in mine - for good reason.

I couldn't agree more.

Your mention of "12 gauge" brings to mind one of the most egregious idiocies of shop nomenclature systems making their way into the marketplace.

Most shotguns are labeled by a gauge number. For example, a 12 gauge is one of the more common sizes used in hunting. Yet the number tells one nothing about the bore diameter of the weapon.

The gauge number represents the number of lead balls of a diameter equal to the gun bore that are required to make a weight of one pound. So, if you lack a conversion table, you'll need:

lead casting equipment
drop tower
scale
calipers

to determine bore size.

Of course, it could be done mathematically, but few people will be able to set up the required equation, much less solve it. One would still need the density of lead and, lacking a table, a separate casting/measuring/weighing would be needed to find the density.

Labeling by size would eliminate all this faffing about.

[Ed Weldon]

Marv-I usually agree with you; but when it comes to labeling products sold into a global market both the maker and the user are facing a legal swamp. And when it comes to large sheets of material labeling can be a real nuisance for the shop in the middle between the final customer and the material manufacturer.
About drill bits. I work with a lot of small drill bits and it is getting ever more difficult for me to see the markings on the shanks. Metric drills are seriously quarantined in my shop because I have no drill gauges in those sizes and if they are available from the EU are likely very expensive. I'm glad I can still read the vernier scale on my micrometers and control my aging fingers.
About the metric system. It was created by scientists and approved by logical lawyers. These are people who couldn't manufacture a ham sandwich if their life depended on it. And as far as logic is concerned; well, that is a one dimensional string of "it-then" statements. Useless in making stuff up to the point where we adopted computer controlled manufacturing processes.
So they gave us the meter and based it on a dimension extremely important to all of us: The varying distance between two imaginary entities, the Equator and the North Pole. That standard is on its second iteration (wavelength of a specific light emission); but that was before we observed the existence of gravity waves. This will all be very important when there is nothing left except me and ye and a box of chocolate bars. (so before we decide how to divide up the contents of the box we must measure the wavelength of Krypton light)
Then these great minds decided that physical measurements should have a numerical base of 10. This is a serendipitous and arguably near useless choice as it has only two integer factors. A base of 8, which would be a better choice, has 3 integer factors that form a natural binary progression. By far the most efficient choice for a number system and that which evolved in the English/American measurement system with its easy to visualize fractional divisions.
Lastly I want to comment on the evolution of the words "mils" and "tenths". These two are very relevant to measures most important to our conversations about what we do as machinists. They are just plain easier to deal with than "tenths of a millimeter", "hundredths of a millimeter" or "microns", which are well below the realm of most of our work.

[Jon]

Relevant per non-base 10 systems: The Dozenal Society of America (previously the Duodecimal Society).