From BNorrell@QuadraMed.com Fri, 03 Aug 2001 16:12:40 -0700 From: "Norrell, Brian" Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 16:12:40 -0700 Subject: RE: completely off-topic question... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Title: RE: completely off-topic question... Check your math: .311 * 250 inches = 77.75 INCHES, = 2.15 yards. That is for the projectile alone.  The cartridge is larger than that, plus a sizable gap between them could conceivably get you to 9. Brian Norrell Manager, MPI Development QuadraMed 511 E John Carpenter Frwy, Su 500 Irving, TX 75062 (972) 831-6600 -----Original Message-----From: Jacques Kilchoer [mailto:Jacques.Kilchoer@quest.com]Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:55 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: completely off-topic question... > -----Original Message----- > href="mailto:MGogala@oxhp.com">mailto:MGogala@oxhp.com] > > AFAIK, the phrase "the whole 9 yards" precedes WWII and comes > from WWI. > Allegedly, it was > the size of the ammo belt for the maxim machine gun. The > whole 9 yards meant > "to fire it all". With all due respect, Mr. Gogala, that seems a little doubtful to me. a) This sounds very much like the "World War II aircraft ammunition belt" explanation, which explanation has been disputed. I found this site on the Maxim Machine Gun: http://users.erols.com/hyattg/usmcguns/max_08st.htm Which has the following information: - Caliber 7.92mm (.311 inch), same as the German infantry rifle. - Rounds per belt = 250. I don't know anything about guns, but don't the above numbers mean that the ammunition belt would be at least .311 * 250 inches long? (i.e. 77.75 feet or 26 yards) b) If the expression dates from World War I, why would the first mention in print date from 1966? Or do you know of an earlier reference in print?