Cheap!!!

So many threads deal with those who want to go cheap, either constrution wise, or involving other critical areas of boat ownership & use.

I call this false economy. No problem buying "proper" equipment & materials at the best price. The problem is using materials known to be inferior because they are CHEAP. That word should not be associated with a proper boat.

In the area of longetivity, I have a related story. When I worked construction my friend bought 30-40 dollar work boots. I spent 100+ dollars on mine.

He went through 2-3 pairs a year. Doing the same work mine lasted, (with a resoling, an option not available with cheap boots), 2+ years.

In reality his "bargain" boots cost twice what my expensive ones did. Plus they did not function as well, comfort wise & traction/safety wise, as mine.

As I have stated elsewhere, "I am to poor to be cheap".

A boat deserves the very best you can do.

Take care.

Tim

 

Tim the term cheap is a different term to all people! In your concept, Yes cheap can be dangerous! In other concepts cheap can be simply that "not expensive" or purchase of the right equipment through sensible outlets at a reasonable price! It does not necessarily mean you go to the same point of sale as everybody else (f'instance the majority of equipment for small boats may be purchased far cheaper from a caravan shop - as long as you ensure that you purchase equipment that suits the marine environment! if you buy something with plain steel bolts they will rust out before you know it in a 'salt atmosphere' it will then cost more as you say!)

I've bought expensive boots for the construction industry which have been purely gimmicky and expensive as hell! other cheaper boots have proved better because ther are no gimmicks involved! The cost of anything is not just about how it is there is also the way you use it to be considered!

Having said that Tim, yes I do agree that if you are buying cheap you must know what your doing otherwise you will buy a lemon without realising it - that is not cheap!

cheers - luck with the buying, Mike

 

Like you said cheap means different things to different folks. Don't think I left out the possibility of using less expensive things. I agree, many items can be purchased at a hardware store that are as good or better than the dreaded & pricey "marine" items.

As for boots and the related story. The individual must posses a certain degree of dicernnment. As in anything, this comes with time on earth & our individual experiences.

Becuase of the above. A new builder looking to go cheap is in more danger because of his lack of experience. A old builder will know how to reduce costs significantly without reducing quality.

Have a good one Mike.

Tim

 

I don't think you're allowed to use "cheap" and "boats" in the same post! Gotta be a rule against that somewhere????

Some think I'm cheap. In that I've decided to build my own boat because I don't want to fork over a small kings ransom for a clorox bottle production boat. Even 20 yr old boats in the size we feel we'll be comfortable on for extended inland cruising are well beyond our means, well not means, but what we feel is reasonable to spend on a recreationial activity. I'm just a poor civil servant ya know!

The one thing that bothers me, well really p*sses me off, is purchasing materials or equipment from Supplier A only to find out 2 weeks later that Supplier B has the same item at 20% less!! I think there was a thread here awhile ago about exhorbitant restocking fees! Anyhow, being cheap I do a lot of sourcing of materials and parts on the web. Its a great tool but also has a lot of shorcomings when it comes to getting the apples compared to the apples etc.

Will, because I'm cheap, compromise on the quality of the materials I put into our next boat? Not likely! If anything I fully intend to use the best materials I can get at a price that I'm willing to pay for them. For example: I have a whole lot of choices in epoxy for the boat. The designer has his brand and it's reasonably priced, tested to work with the materials he specifies and provides technical support so there's a lot of value added to just he price of the raw material. Or, I could go with e-Bay seller for the same amount of epoxy and save $500. No testing (risk), no technical support, nadda. No value added there. Guess which one I chose? Same goes for marine plywood, yes at a premium but has some assurance it's superior than buying regular exterior const. grade. I'll use the marine version.

As an example where I believe there are areas to "economize" without sacraficing quality or functionality I just bought a 6 gal h/w heater. $249 Cdn. It wasn't the shiney SS version by the same mfgr which retails for $399. Did I compromise quality or functionality? No and I saved $150. Nobody's gonna see the stupid thing anyways eh?

So for me (us, the Admirnal is paying half although she dones't know it yet) it boils down to a value for money equation and not just being labelled "cheap". I spend a good amount of time researching materials and equipment and sourcing them at the best price I can get. I call that being smart and not cheap!

 

Tim, I totally agree with you. However, I had seen some really poor quality at premium prices, and again, some real quality at cheap prices....

Amateur builders as a rule build their own boats due to a limited or shoestring budget, and they want the most boat for their buck. Of course some of them will cut corners to achieve their objectives - is that a sin? Why do not all of us drive the best wheels there are, again, simply because we drive what we can afford. Same goes for spares for your nice car; OME and branded names are sometimes just to expensive and one takes the other route.
And I think the same argument applies to boats.

When I used to built boats for a living, we had many comebacks with failures of quality branded items over the years, some of these even when first used to the dismay of the owner. IOW, quality products do not always means free of problems/flaws. Most of the times brand names are hype - isn't it nice to brag at the clubhouse that your boat is fitted with Harken hardware for instance, whereas Barton, costing a fraction of that, does the same job?

But to get back to your quote; how would the average Joe sailor or amateur sailor knows it is (known) inferior quality?

 

That is a double-bladed sword Wynand. If one has not been around long enough to develop a sense for discerning quality I reckon asking a number of people and seeing where the trend leads "might" work. Depends on who they are asking.

Places like this forum might help.

I never equated cheap with inexpensive (I don't think). Nothing wrong with, and even smart & commendable, to find the best price for quality gear.

Affordability. I fish a decent flyrod (approx. $80.00 US), it gets the job done.
I would like to fish an Orvis or equivelant, but cannot afford it.

A galviniced but proper strenght & size turnbuckle from the hardware store would be a fine substitute for one priced 5 times as much from a marine supply. Shiny is not that important to me. Functionality is.

Thanks for your comments Wynand. Hope all is well down your way.

Tim

 

I agree with walrus here 100%. It depends on how you use the word cheap. Cheap as in poor quality as tim refers to or cheap as in less expensive. Cheaper means less cost but not necessarily poor quality.

I am not of the opinion that you get what you pay for. As the conversation has mentioned foot wear I too can offer similar. I buy running shoes a lot (Yeah yeah) I have paid a lot and have bought seconds. The seconds had been rejected because too much glue had been used.

I had those shoes for maybe a year where other fancy stuff I can stuff up in 3 months if im lucky. The exess glue did in fact make a better product.

I think the word "cheap" fails us here. A frugal shopper is not a cheap person. The word cheap is not definitive enough for the use we give it.

 

I should have titled the thread "Inferiour Materials & Equipment".

Frosty, do not think I ever heard you agree with the Walrus before!

Tim

 

In England there are two popular phrases . . .

"Cheap and Cheerful" - something inexpensive that does a job

and

"Cheap and Nasty" - self explanatory realy

I think what people like me need to know is, how to tell the difference.

Read PAR's comment on this thread - http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=18416&page=2 . . . it made me rethink my idea of 'cheap'

 

hey timbo,
yeppers I bought some 100 shoes, here made china, very comfortable, lasted 9 months, shop did not want a bar of WHY,
I used to buy Florsheim, and they last 30 years, so went back, there
and same boats I give 10 years warrantty on my hulls,
thanks for feedback,
I heard today that the moderator Jeff had given my name to a query abt neg feed, so much for the integrety of this place

 

Sometimes cheap doesnt matter, electricity, water, women and beer.

Theres probably some other items that dont suffer from the effects of cheap.

Cheap air ticket same thing just cheap.

I saw some baby chicks in the market, they were going cheep.

 

Value!

I have a foot in two camps, marine and property development. For the past ten years the UK property development has been working to the buzzword "whole life costings". This echos your initial point of the overall cost of a component against the expected life or cost of ownership. This is where we shouldnt be looking at cost but at value. (and for those in the industry please dont raise the chestunt of value engineering, if applied properly the concept is correct. unfortunately the bean counters get to it and it ends up being cost engineering). Over a 25 year period the typical cost breakdown for building and operating a facility is 20% capital and 80% operational, this data comes from the Building Perfomance Group with whom I worked with in the UK. Whether you see value in increasing your capital costs to reduce your overall whole life cost is directly down to whether the operational costs effect you or not.

It would be interesting to do an analysis on the whole life costs of boat ownership. Does anyone know if this has been done? I would be happy to collaborate with other builder's, charter management and maintainance shops to put this together.

Matt.

 

I don't know about boats, but it certainly has for ships. I don't know the figures though. In the UK MoD, different agencies are responsible for the initial acquisition of ships and the through life support. So, as you say, the first agency tries to build the thing cheap and allow the ship to have high maintenace costs. The second agency is constantly lobbying for the ships to be better designed and built in the first place, so they don't have to spend so much looking after them...
Value engineering! You are absolutely right, a decent idea completely misunderstood and mis-applied by bean counters. They fail to understand that something is only better value if it is cheaper whilst offering equal functionality. Not a difficult concept, but I have yet to find an accountant who got it. And they paid soo much...

 

I paid a premium price for 2 x stainless hooks for my winch and a rope. Both of them opened out with very little weight.

A hook at half the price from a lifting supplier was rated, and was no problem.

A point to make is cheap may not last, but do you want it too.

At my age a cheap item will probably outlast me.

Poida

 

Poida-- good point. A tailor wanted to sell me an expensive suit, I said why is it so expensive , he said that it would last 20 years.

Who the hell wants to walk around in the same suit for 20 years. Im not from Cornwall!!