DSK wrote:
wrote:
Top of the line fittings would be absurd on a bottom of the line boat.
Thus a person must decide the merit of putting such valuable fittings
on his less than strong boat. I believe that even low cost boats are
useful to cruisers.
I wouldn't argue the point, except that it's not a question of spending
money for good fittings so as to have bragging rights. The better
fittings are stronger, more reliable, will last longer, etc etc. If you
don't want to have your mast fall down, then they offer a greater
benefit than the cheaper fittings... even on a cheaper boat.
Your call is whether it's enough greater benefit to justify the added
expense, which will vary widely from person to person & wallet to wallet.
DSK
Just curious - are the mechanical fittings statistically better? I
mean, I suppose it could be shown that they are stronger (if properly
done!) but is there actually any evidence that boats with normal
swages are far more likely to loose the rig? I don't know of many
failures that are caused by swages letting go under normal conditions
- most seem to be other components (spreaders, etc), poor maintenance,
or the extreme stresses of heavy weather racing.
The one argument that makes sense is that mechanical fittings can be
inspected and reset by a skilled owner. This would seem to make them
cost effective for the long term owner, as well as good insurance for
the self reliant cruiser. But for the "past-its-prime" boat,
relegated to daysails at the family cottage, I don't see the value.