Skip to content

Cm to Inches Converter

Last verified May 2026 — runs in your browser

1 centimetre = 0.3937 inches.To convert cm to inches, multiply by 0.3937 (or divide by 2.54 — the exact definition since the 1959 International Yard and Pound Agreement).

Convert Centimeters to Inches
0.393701

Quick Values

Formula

Inches = Centimeters × 0.393701

Quick reference table

Common centimetres to inches — includes the canonical 2.54 cm = 1 in anchor.
Centimetres Inches
1 cm 0.3937 in
2.54 cm 1 in
5 cm 1.9685 in
10 cm 3.9370 in
15 cm 5.9055 in
30 cm 11.8110 in
50 cm 19.6850 in
100 cm 39.3701 in
152 cm 59.8425 in
170 cm 66.9291 in
183 cm 72.0472 in
200 cm 78.7402 in

How to Convert Cm to Inches

  1. Enter the length in cm.Type the length in centimeters.
  2. See the inches.The equivalent in inches appears instantly, shown as decimal and fraction.

Centimeters to Inches Converter

Type any length in centimeters — TV diagonal from a metric retailer, height from your passport, monitor size, picture frame opening, package dimensions for international shipping — and the page renders the equivalent in inches underneath at six-decimal precision. Useful when comparing display sizes from US-spec catalogues with European ones, communicating your height to American friends, sanity-checking a furniture spec from a metric source against an imperial doorway, or filling in international shipping forms that demand inch dimensions.

About this tool

The conversion uses the international yard and pound agreement of 1959: 1 inch = 2.54 cm exactly, which makes 1 cm = 1/2.54 ≈ 0.3937007874 inches. This is a defined relationship — there's no measurement error in the underlying constant, only in the rounded output (six decimals here, 12+ in the unrounded internal calculation). The same factor is enshrined in NIST SP 811:2008 (Thompson & Taylor) in the US, BS 350:2004 in the UK, and ISO 80000-3:2019 internationally. Common reference points: 1 cm = 0.394 in, 10 cm = 3.937 in, 30 cm = 11.811 in (≈ 1 foot), 100 cm = 39.370 in, 170 cm = 66.929 in (≈ 5'7"), 180 cm = 70.866 in (≈ 5'11"), 250 cm = 98.425 in (≈ 8'2"), and 25.4 cm = 10 in is exact by definition. For converting a cm height into feet+inches use the result divided by 12 — 170 cm → 66.929 in → 5 ft + 6.929 in.

  • Exact SI factor 1 inch = 2.54 cm (so 1 cm = 0.3937007874 in)
  • Live conversion as you type — no Convert button
  • 6-decimal-place precision for engineering-grade accuracy
  • Swap button to flip to the reverse inches-to-cm page
  • Copy result as "X cm = Y inches" with a single click
  • Accepts decimal cm input including negative for relative measurements
  • Quick presets for common lengths (TV sizes, paper, body height)
  • No upload — every conversion runs locally in your browser
  • Useful for international shipping forms, US/EU display catalogues, body height comms
  • Reference: 30 cm ≈ 1 ft · 100 cm = 39.37 in · 170 cm ≈ 5'7"

Free. No signup. Your inputs stay in your browser. Ads via Google AdSense (consent required).

Frequently asked questions

Why is "1 inch = 2.54 cm" exact and not measured?

The 1959 International Yard and Pound Agreement (Federal Register Doc 59-5442, published 30 June 1959 and effective 1 July 1959) defined the yard as exactly 0.9144 metres for six countries — the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Dividing by 36 inches per yard yields 0.0254 m = 25.4 mm = 2.54 cm per inch, exact by definition. Before 1959 each country had its own yard prototype with small mutual differences at parts-per-million scale; the agreement froze the relationship to make engineering and trade calibration interoperable across the six signatory nations. For everyday cm-to-inch conversion this means there is no measurement uncertainty in the constant — only in the rounding of the displayed result.

Does rounding to 4 vs 6 decimals matter for my project?

For consumer-grade use (TV diagonals, body height, package dimensions, picture frames) four decimal places of inches are well below the precision the underlying source measurement carries — a TV diagonal is itself spec-rounded to the nearest tenth of an inch by the manufacturer, so 4 dp output (~25 µm of resolution) is already an order of magnitude finer than the input. For engineering drawings specified in metric whose inch translation will be re-machined on CNC equipment, six decimals preserves micrometre-scale precision. The internal calculation uses full IEEE-754 double precision (15–17 significant decimals); the displayed six is a deliberate rounding that avoids the false precision of "0.39370078740157480315 in" that no real-world dimension actually has.

Why is a "32-inch TV" sometimes 31.5 in actual diagonal?

TV manufacturers label products in "class" sizes — round numbers like 32, 43, 55, 65 — that approximate but do not always equal the measured diagonal. Industry practice (descended from the original 1966 FTC Picture Tube Rule, repealed October 2018) plus general truth-in-advertising principles place the actual diagonal on the spec sheet, even when the box and marketing copy use the rounded class number. A product called "32-inch" typically lists an actual diagonal slightly under 32 in on the spec sheet — often around 31.5 in (≈ 80.0 cm); a "55-inch" label commonly maps to roughly 54.6 in (≈ 138.7 cm) of measured diagonal. When converting cm to inches to compare a European catalogue against a US one, look at the spec-sheet diagonal, not the class size on the box.

How do I express a cm height as "5 ft 10 in" form?

Convert cm to total inches (170 cm × 1/2.54 = 66.929 in), divide by 12 to split feet and remainder (66.929 ÷ 12 = 5 with remainder 6.929 in), and the answer is 5 ft 6.929 in — usually written 5'7" after rounding to the nearest inch. The page output is total inches; the feet+inches form is a derived display. Common heights for reference: 160 cm = 5'2.99" → 5'3"; 170 cm = 5'6.93" → 5'7"; 180 cm = 5'10.87" → 5'11"; 190 cm = 6'2.80" → 6'3". US passport, driver's license and USCIS immigration forms ask for height in feet+inches; converting from a passport that reads "1.78 m" to "5'10\"" is the most common consumer use case.

Why do mental shortcuts like "1 cm ≈ 0.4 in" produce errors over long lengths?

The exact factor is 0.39370 in/cm; the popular shortcut 0.4 overstates each centimetre by 0.00630 in (~1.6%). On a 30 cm cabinet cut that compounds to 0.189 in ≈ 4.8 mm — the difference between fitting and not fitting in the slot. For sub-metre lengths the absolute drift is small but linear (a 10 cm strip is off by 1.6 mm; a 20 cm one by 3.2 mm); for anything dimensional that needs to mate (door frames, cabinet runs, monitor stands, picture frames) prefer a calculated 4-decimal value over a mental approximation. The trap applies in reverse too: "1 in ≈ 2.5 cm" understates by 0.04 cm/in, which over a yard-long piece (36 in) drifts by 1.44 cm.

Sources (5)
  • U.S. National Bureau of Standards (1959). Refinement of Values for the Yard and the Pound — International Yard and Pound Agreement (1 yd = exactly 0.9144 m → 1 inch = exactly 25.4 mm = 2.54 cm; reciprocal 1 cm = 1/2.54 = 0.39370078740157480… in, non-terminating in decimal but exact in rational form). Federal Register Doc 59-5442, published 30 June 1959, effective 1 July 1959 (joint declaration with the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa).
  • International Organization for Standardization (2019). ISO 80000-3:2019 — Quantities and units, Part 3: Space and time (current edition; revises ISO 80000-3:2006, which itself superseded ISO 31-1). ISO Technical Committee 12 (TC 12 — Quantities and units).
  • Thompson, A., & Taylor, B. N. (2008). Guide for the Use of the International System of Units (SI) — NIST Special Publication 811, 2008 edition (supersedes the 1995 edition; SI redefinition updates of 2019 are reflected separately in NIST SP 330 9th edition). U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MD — physics.nist.gov/cuu/pdf/sp811.pdf.
  • British Standards Institution (BSI) (2004). BS 350:2004 — Conversion factors for units (engineering, industry, and trade conversion factors). BSI Knowledge, London — current edition; supersedes BS 350-1:1974 and BS 350-2:1962.
  • World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (2018). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 — Success Criterion 4.1.3 Status Messages. W3C Recommendation 5 June 2018; carried unchanged into WCAG 2.2 (Recommendation 5 October 2023).

These are the original publications the formulas in this tool are based on. Locate them by journal name and year on Google Scholar or PubMed.

By ·