Why are Inboards more Expensive

nope that one looks good to me. I didnt realize thats what it was, still learning the ins and outs of this forum thing.

not in my world.lol

79 the bad thing about it though is the guy on a tight budget cant afford a descent boat

eric lavine wrote: 79 the bad thing about it though is the guy on a tight budget cant afford a descent boat

I agree. That ego driven money flinging balloons prices for every one and eventually causes problems. As the inflated prices are not based on a real overall market value.

I think the trends in fashion/life-style image follow an over all mood though. A couple of years ago the new home industry in this resort based region of Oregon I live in was booming. There were young 20 something year old guys all over with $40K trucks pulling $60K boats. These same guys were all over the winter ski resorts with bling abound. Now that construction market has imploded and I see very few of these big bling trucks on the road. It's like some one shipped them all out of the state. At the same time it seems the fashions are more humble.

Maybe a little economic slowdown does a little good from time to time. Per haps the price of new boats will level off for a while and allow our in comes to catch up?

From what I hear through the grapevine is there are doing some great things with the Perfect Pass, eventually they will incorporate the electronic shift transmissions into the system to allow you to control prop speed (trolling valve) which means you will be able to obtain 3 rpms on the prop if needed for docking purposes and picking up the skier, and slower cruising speeds in the no wake zones.
I really dont know much about the perfect pass system so correct me if im wrong.

I guess if she looks good enough in bikini it it might be worth it.

tight budget? someone not living at mommy's house, 3 kids,1 wife,(not working) 2 car payments, and the burning desire to go skiing on the weekends.....just abot half the population. there's no way i could plop down 60k on a boat
I divide life in 2 category's 1. necessity 2. pleasure. one is needed one is not

1 wife,(not working)

Sounds like somebody missed this small detail in their pre-nuptuial agreement.

snob, that was an example, but i did get baited and switched on the working thing

Momma always used to say........

" Marry for money, Love can grow!"

needless to say ; I didn't listen to her.

I read this post through rather quickly, so I may have missed something, but there seems to be one thing not mentioned and that is the cost of an outdrive. By "an outdrive" I don't mean "an outdrive boat" vs "an inboard boat" I mean JUST the outdrive unit itself.

They are very expensive compared to an inboard's more simple transmission.

That makes the original question here a legitimate one. There are certainly huge variations in quality, etc. to consider, but when you look at the price of an outdrive (sterndrive) unit they can range from $6,000 to $13,000 (for example for a new Volvo lower unit (just the drive -- with no engine). Check out Sterndrives.com.

For a rebuilt upper and lower gear case for even an old Volvo 280, you could spend as much as $11,000.00! (Hard to believe, huh?)

My point is if you compare the cost of a (for example) Borg Warner Velvet Drive (or something similar) as used in many inboards you're looking at maybe $1,400 to $2,400.

So if the quality of the boats selected for comparison are similar, the boat with the Stern Drive should cost more!

Don't get me wrong. I have an old boat with an inboard, an old boat with a stern drive, and an old boat with an outboard and I've generally always liked an inboard set up the best, but a stern drive is fairly complex and gives certain significant advantages (won't go into that). Because of the complexity and cost of that extra hunk of engineering hanging off the back of the boat, I would think they would cost more.

BUT, there is desireability to consider. In- boards do a lot of things well and are easier (I'd say) to work on, cheaper to fix, etc. etc.

And re-sale, which was mentioned, probably does come into play somewhat. I've got a 1999 Chevy Astro All Wheel Drive for sale (how did that get into the story?) AND... I've watched (on eBay) the 2WD ones (that cost less originally and have less capability) sell quicker and sometimes for more money than the AWD's "I THINK" just because the AWD's are harder on gas.

Likewise, the inboards I think have some appeal to the buyer who will be doing some of his own work. Outdrives are "more scary" to work on.

There's my 2 cents.    



For an idea of the cost of various marine propulsion systems, check out these sites:
http://www.marinepartsexpress.com/mercruiser.htm
(complete engine and stern drive packages)
or
http://bpi.ebasicpower.com/c/ALL3D/Velvet+Drive+%2810-17%29+Transmissions
shows Borg Warner Velvet Drives @ $1,400 - $2,400

Actually, I did sort of forget to mention that I picked up a used Volvo 280 outdrive that has worked fine for about 6 years now for $300

I guess I was just making the point that there's a more complex piece of equipment involved with a stern drive so you'd think it would cost more, but that could, as you've pointed out, be a bad thing.

Oh, and not to confuse things, but you can't compare a Merc Alpha drive to a Volvo either!

Usually the simpler something is the less trouble they give and I believe this definatley holds true for inboard boats. We have had a ton of boats in the past, outboards, I/O, and inboards too of coarse, and I will say the inboards are not only easier to work on but you don't have to work on them near as often when they get older. I used to live in Fla. and until they finally put channel markers in the bay , running aground in the shallow bays- sometimes on oyster bars, meant death to the out-drives of the era. Meanwhile an inboard could survive this all to common occurance again and again. Outboards usually didn't last long either. I know this is hard to fathom this day in age with modern electronics and markers in every channel but it used to be common to see boats idling around the shallow bays turning up sand and silt when coming in on a low tide. This was not intentional and we went dead slow but it was unavoidable at the time. Point is inboard running gear can take a lot more abuse than the other alternatives. This is why all commercial boats have used inboard propulsion until the introduction of pods.

I would agree with everybody. Correct crafts are tanks. I baught an 83 that had been in an accident. I paid 2k for the boat and spent $100 in fiberglass stuff to fix it. One good test of a tuff boat is to head for some rollers on the lake in any boat and see how much the holl shakes. Then do the same in a correct craft and note how rigid the hull is. I could go on for hours about CC.

Project Man

eric lavine wrote: 79 the bad thing about it though is the guy on a tight budget cant afford a descent boat

They can't.

Not that my boat is not decent, I put sweat blood and tears into my 78 that I got for 4500 like 7 years ago. But you bet your A$$ I would trade it in for a new Air nautique if I could .

I have a mortgage, and am underpaid. So until that second part changes, I will soldier on with my martinique.