Just put metric equivalents information on the FAQ page

We have had many questions about metric equivalents to our standard American page size and weights, so I looked up what I feel is relavant and posted it on the FAQ page.

Comments

[Kevin WS]

Thank you for this. A very in important aspect.

Because of the weight based system used for American paper, I have often seen variables in the paper thickness for specific weights. You have 385 gsm as one conversion - this is card in metric weights. 220 is about the upper limit in paper. 80 is everyday common paper. Does that sound right?

Something that would really help to check is if you could read the thickness of the common sizes with a Micrometer if you have one. I can then do the same for the common metric grades, and this could be used as a cross check.

Metric paper is normal standard by spec - in terms of thickness/size (within a small tolerance range).

[Dave Miecznikowski]

I am trying to keep this as simple as possible. There are very comprehensive tables and charts all over the internet that give the information you request and more. I have given the information I feel will get you all close enough. Some may want to use thicker or thinner paper than we recommend. Remember what we HAVE ALWAYS SAID, it is your model. Build it your way. More than likely, with the guidance we have given, the limiting factor is going to be the thicknesses available locally. This I obviously cannot control. Try the following link for a simple comparison table. http://www.moscow-printing.com/PaperWeightConversion.html I hope this get you what you want, but I strongly suggest a little research on your own.

[Dave Miecznikowski]

Here is another link to an even better chart. http://www.paper-paper.com/weight.html

[Kevin]

Thank Dave for your response and comments and the two sites you gave.

Believe you me I have researched this at length (having hashed a few models in the past) and also having had connections with the local paper industry.

The problem is that while metric paper is (or should be) bog standard specification (size to weight), American paper is based on the weight as the standard, and this results in paper thickness variability depending on the manufacturer, batch etc. as well as the type (bond, offset etc). So a straight comparison based on paper types is not always accurate depending on stock type..

To quote paperorg.." ISO 536 defines paper weights and grammage, which determine the thickness of the paper. The US and North America use an entirely different definition for paper weights based on basis weight and stock types." http://www.papersizes.org/.

Apples and oranges in other words!

The table you provide is good - I just thought it would be helpful to "metric" modelers to include the thickness.

The paper thickness obviously doesn't have to be exact in terms of substitution. But this does enable one to make a choice as to the correct paper to substitute - assuming one has calipers, otherwise it is a waste of information!

And I don't know if modelers commonly own calipers.

Keep well.................

[Donald Albury]

This gets complicated. I just realized that I have 67 lb. bristol paper that is 147 g per sq. m., and 40 lb. project paper that is 150 g per sq. m. (Throws hands up in air.)

[Dave Miecznikowski]

Now you guys are beginning to understand why I have for so long, avoided this subject. It still boils down to what you can purchase. Local stores will have a very limited selection. With the internet, all bets are off. You can buy whatever you want, but you are still experimenting, because you will never know, until you hold it in your hand, how thick cardstock will be. Once you have experienced various thicknesses and you know what you like, stick with it.