No. I work with some companies in Canada and they send us drawings with metric dimensions. You should hear some of the plans reviewers at building departments bitch and whine, those are the nice ones though most of them just reject the plans if I submit the "non-Americanized" plans.
This is what I cannot stand about my fellow Americans.
I don't mind Americans preferring US Customary aka US Standard (not to be confused with "Imperial" -- more in a bit), but they should be ready to accommodate metric without bias. But because too many Americans have this attitude on metric, the problem continues. But that's the funny part ... the US Standard is 100% based on metric!
Unlike the British, the US actually "standardized" on Metric in the second half of the 19th Century. By "standard," I mean the US made sure its Standard was 100% based on metric -- to at least 5 significant digits (later 7 and then 10), the same precision of the metric system itself at the time (1870s) -- something the British did not do, and why the UK has had all sorts of issues in manufacturing the US has not.
There's no better example of this than in the SLR v. FAL magazine specifications -- something only the British have issue with in their SLR, while American manufactured FAL units have no issues whatsoever (despite using machines in US Customary).
Which is why Europeans snubbing the US over the Standard is just as bad in reverse. The US actually had the foresight to recognize Metric should be the standard, even if not used in direct reference. So we don't have conversion and other issues, especially in cases where the US purposely redefined its standard to be exacting to 3-4 digits (e.g., 1" = 25.4mm, exactly). That should be recognized, and it is not by most who assume US = Imperial.
EDIT: Civil disciplines are the most entrenched, plats and land surveys going back hundreds of years. But as of the '90s, civil is
often required to show metric in all
standard, reference type records documentation
(e.g., plats, geodetic, etc...).
Mechanical discplines are also entrenched, as US manufacturing has been a staple. But it's not as bad as one thinks. I.e., when it comes to traditional manufacturing, especially through even the early age of CNC, divisions of 2 are better than 10 for precision. So 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, etc... are more precise than 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, etc... Which is why you still see 0.5, 0.25, 0.125, 0.0625, etc... with metric. In fact, it's not uncommon to find 3.175, 6.35, 12.7, etc... in mm, because it corresponds to 1/8", 1/4" and 1/2". This is very unlikely to change anytime soon either.
Electrical Engineering discplines have almost always been Metric in the US. This is largely because electrical disciplines started after the introduction of metric to the world. It's why you would traditionally see a PC computer case in the US that has US Standard dimensions for the case, but metric for the dimensions of the power supply contained within. Any more things have gone completely metric in the PC world though, with a few exceptions. But mil space has been long gone, and didn't survive in the IC era.
But I fully expect to see miles and degrees F continue in the US. More and more we're starting to see km and degrees C also reported. It doesn't mean the US is backwards. It just means we have our casual references. The UK has far more issues than the US, especially in its overseas territories, which is why too many Europeans automatically assume the US has as many issues.
In reality ... the US went metric a long time ago. It's just that we continue to use our "Customary" units that are fully standarized on metric, something the UK never did. That forced the issue in the UK ... although they still uses miles, and Imperial gallons are utterly different, and not based on metric either. E.g., 40mpg-UK is 32mpg-US, because an Imperial gallon is 25% larger than US Customary, which is 20% smaller.
Which also goes to explain the ignorance behind why so many from the UK think US cars get worse gas mileage too. And it becomes a self-fulling argument.
