In the book James Bond: The Legacy, it is quoted that they wanted the first actor who played Bond (which, of course, became Sean Connery) to be “about 12st.” What does “st.” mean, and what is 1st. equal to in kilograms (UK) and pounds (US).
a traditional British unit of weight, rarely used in the U.S.
ST = Stone
A stone is a measurement of weight
One stone weighs 14 pounds.
14 pounds equals 30.8 kilograms
One ‘st’ is one ‘stone’, and equals 14 pounds (around 7 kg). Why the Brits use this unit of measurement, I have no idea.
Stone, equal to 14 pounds. IIRC 1kg=2.2pounds. You can do the maths yourself 
BTW I’m british, and young, and everyone I know quotes weight in stones and pounds, not pounds or kilograms.
stone
1 kilogram = 0.158 stone or about 14 lb to the stone.
12 st = 76 kg or 168 lb.
Not really. 14 pounds equals 6.35 Kg. Otherwise they were looking for an actor who weighed 370 Kg
Thanks for the input.
I believe this is wrong
I believe this is wrong too. I believe one stone is defined as 14 lb exactly and the pound in turn is defined as exactly 453.59237 grams which would make one stone approximately 6.35 Kg or 1 Kg approximately 0.157473 stone.
I saw a documentary about Al Capone on the History Channel. It included some clips in black and white that I think were shot in the 50s. They gave the weight of his armored car in stones - not pounds. That suggests that at some time in the fairly recent past the stone was a commonly used unit of weight in the US also.
OK Sailor, so 1 kg is app .157473 stone. Or .1575 st to 4 places. Or .158 st to 3 places.
What is it you believe is wrong again?
I’ve seen some nitpicking in my time, but saying that something is wrong because the working hasn’t been rounded to sufficent decimal places for your liking takes the cake.
What is wrong is that
implies 1 Kg = 0.158 stone exactly, which is not true, and 14 lbs approximately, which is also not true. It is not a matter of rounding anything.
Yeah, likeantone said it equaled 0.158 exactly. Whatever.
You did. Or at least you implied it, Blake. You could have said "14 lb = 1 stone, so .158 stone is about 1 kg.
And your rounding skills are pretty weak. Yes, it’s .1575 to four places, but to three you round from the original number and get .157 kiliograms.
I find that very surprising. I do not think the stone was used in the USA as a unit of weight and even in the UK it would be used for persons but not for cars. maybe there is some confusion or maybe the producers were trying to sound quaint or something.
And I’m Australian, youngish (33), and the story is similar here. I was born after the conversion to the metric system, yet it is only recently that I’ve felt comfortable using kilograms and centimetres for human measurement. I’m more comfortable simply saying I’m “17 stone”. Actually, no I’m bloody not! Whaddamisaying? Holy Shee-it, it’s time to get some exercise.
lol
(I’m not sure if quoting weights in kg is even becoming more common, though it’d make sense. I always use SI for any scientific measurement.)
So, are your scales marked that way? Or do they just have pounds and everyone has to divide by 14 in their heads?
Scales are marked in stoes, with fourteen graduations between the stones.
Usually, they are marked in kg as well, but I only ever refer to kilos if am talking to the shipping manager in work.
The only hard thing to work out in your head is when you hear an American saying they weigh 175 pounds. Dividing by fourteen is not something I’m too good at.
A small note: I would have thought that we use stones for the same reason all the Imperial measurement ended up being used: they are convenient. On average (at least in the past) an average weight of a person would have been about 10 stone. How much nicer than saying 65kg or 140lb.
Similarly, it is simpler for a person to comprehend their height at 5 (feet) than it is 60 inches or 150cm (or 1.5m).
People generally prefer small numbers in the 5 to 15 kind of range.
This is all my opinion, of course. I have nothing to back it up but there seems to be some logic in it.
pan