Talk:British Standard Whitworth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The contributor of the original article is an American, so I'm going to assume his comments on BSW no longer being used apply particularly to the USA. It's certainly not true in Australia; Nearly all the bolts and machine screws available for sale in hardware stores here are still BSW. Andrewa 06:37, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • As an American, the last time that I saw BSW bolts, screws, and hand tools in the US was in use on British autos and motorcycles dating to the mid 1960's -- or somewhat later.--TGC55 16:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing! Are there special cars, appliances , bicycles etc. made for Australia? Each of these industries converted to ISO standard (metric) screws long ago, even Detroit. How do you find bolts for stuff manufactured abroad? 82.181.150.151 19:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • The article sees from a narrow US view. BSW, BSF, WF, WWF etc. are all Whitworth threads. They were the first thread standards and as Andrew A mentions are still in popular use throughout the world. ISO is a modern preferance but it is not universal. For example, every camera and tripod still uses Whitworth threading, even modern digital ones. Microscopes use standard interchangeable items with British Microscope Society thread which is a Whitworth format. I suspect telescopes and other optical items also follow the standard as they were early adopters of standard threading and likely therefore to be late chnagers to other more recent standards. It is in fact the US that is still pretty isolated with its own system of imperial non-global threads that are certainly not sold much elsewhere whereas we can get just about everything from Whitworth to ISO or even British Standard Pipe Thread :-) Paul J. Weighell - 10/May/2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.9.224 (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CAG- Actually cameras (at least modern ones) do NOT use BSW threads - the threadform is specified in ISO 1220:2010 - and it's 1/4-20 UNC, and basically a (sightly) modified class 1 fit (can't go further without violating the spec's licensing agreement) - but it's definately 60 deg, non rounded, UNC threadform — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.5.55 (talk) 00:26, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


IW[edit]

There was a wrong link to the article de:Whitworth-Rohrgewinde, which in fact describes BSP thread for pipes (R + Rp, not W). As far as I can see, there is no article on W (BSW) thread on German Wiki, except an equally erroneous redirect. --Sokoljan (talk) 21:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'British Morris and MG engines from 1919 to 1955 were built in a factory that used metric threads but with bolts and nuts for Whitworth spanners (wrenches) and sockets' -

Unsure what this means infact its a bit confused, i'm assuming it means the factory had metric tooling but they still used BSW and BSF fasters and tooling to produce the MG parts.

I can't find it with a quick google but wasn't the international metric standard thread introduced around the turn of the 20th century?. It wasn't until 1965 that british standards designated the old whitworth thread forms as obsolete and stated that people should move over to iso metric threads. According to another link the International Standards Organization stated this fact again in 1966.

Just out of interest I still use BSW studding in quantity daily. It's a on a design that dates to the 70's that someone produced due to their available tooling. Everything in whitworth costs about 3 times more than metric :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.9.177.206 (talk) 18:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


"cameras for mounting". This part is not true. The Photo mout threads are 1/4" Zoll (inch) - 20 UNC and 3/8" Zoll (inch) - 16 UNC. They are UNC and not Withworth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.48.45.87 (talk) 08:58, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Is it true that Meccano still uses BSW nuts and bolts? -- SGBailey (talk) 11:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such ISO standard as 1220:2010 (http://www.iso.org/iso/search.htm?qt=1220&published=on&active_tab=standards). Unfortunately, due to the power of the internet, it is quoted in many locations, some even claiming to have read it, but not wanting to publish for fear of breaching copyright. There is, on the other hand, a Japanese Standard JIS B 1220:2010 (http://www.webstore.jsa.or.jp/webstore/Com/FlowControl.jsp?lang=en&bunsyoId=JIS+B+1220%3A2010&dantaiCd=JIS&status=1&pageNo=0). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.33.130.34 (talk) 11:57, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone else see the glaring contradiction in "...world's first national...". Should that not be INternational?202.89.152.114 (talk) 19:39, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cycle thread[edit]

The distinguishing feature of Cycle Thread is that it is 26TPI regardless of diameter. 185.13.106.94 (talk) 23:01, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does "W 1/2" mean Whitworth?[edit]

Here is an example: http://www.wire-brush.co.uk/wirebrushstore/prod_1646675-Steel-Wire-Tube-Brush-40mm-x-W12.html. It says: "Thread size: W1/2".

If so, could someone who knows about this add something to the article about this notation?

192.38.5.154 (talk) 18:40, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong thread angle in picture[edit]

The picture contains a wrong angle. BSW has 55° so half of it is 27°30' but not 22°30' as the picure states. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.38.70.28 (talk) 21:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Standard Whitworth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:35, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Standard Whitworth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:17, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another modern use[edit]

I previously added a note about use of 7/32 BSW on "Bailley" style hand planes, but I now think this is wrong. They use use Witworth form thread but at 20 tpi not the standard 24 tpi, so it is not relevant to this article.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:British_Standard_Whitworth&oldid=1200369376"