Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

[25thmustang]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

Although not a runabout/bow rider like seems to be the general conversation, when I found my 29'er the biggest selling point to me was being inboard. 99% of express boats in that size are stern drive and I didn't want the additional moving pieces and parts. At that time I also looked at a 26' cruisers inc vee express, which was an inboard 26' cruiser. Not very many built, but amazing to see twin 350 inboards in a full on 26' express cruiser.

 

[haulnazz15]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

Size is another factor. Inboards usually have a removable swim platform so it does not count in the length. As a result a 21' inboard usually is equivalent to a 23' I/O. That balances the price a bit.

That's not really correct. Many, if not the majority, of boats (regardless of drive type) have extended swim platforms that are not included in the boat length. If you go look at that Cobalt you mentioned, the 210 measures at just shy of 21', but with the swim platform it's 23', same as you inboard. The length you mentioned has nothing to do with drive line configuration, and more to do with typical options and standard model number designations in the marine manufacturing industry.

Yes, volume is a large factor in the prices being higher, but I'd imagine the main thing bolstering the price is reputation and certification. Very few boats are tournament-certified, even in the inboard world. The Big 3 are about the only ones who are certified to pull in an actual tournament, so they command a higher price. The other brands are typically a good bit cheaper because they can't be used in a sanctioned tournament, and become a toy for those who want the "professional slalom/wakeboard boat" without the professional price.

 

[emilsr]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

Here is one at only inboards:

1990 Baja 200 SK

Interesting. I don't ever remember seeing one.

Definitely an early 90's Baja with the pink and teal. Hopefully it doesn't have the early 90's Baja transom rot to go along with the colors. :lol:

 

[rallyart]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

haulnazz, my 21'8" Sanger is 21'8" from nose to transom. A Cobalt 210 extends a long way back of the transom with the extended platform off. The engine is pretty much in the same location with a V-drive inboard as it is with a sterndrive so it sticks about as far forward to eat similar space. There are a few inboard wake or ski type boats that have a built in platform, but not many. Almost all current I/Os have a lot of boat behind the point where the sterndrive is attached. When I was test driving the Cobalt 210 and the Sanger 215 in 2006 the Sanger had more interior space, a higher person capacity, and a much higher load carrying capacity. The Cobalt 210 is a very good boat but it cost more than mine, where I live, and did not suit my needs as well.
Sangers have been certified for three event tournaments and are currently certified, and often preferred for Barefoot tournaments. But yes, it does cost them money for certification and a lot for the bigger tournament boat companies to sponsor riders.

 

[salty87]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

Uh - no. The transmissions are the worst part of an inboard ski boat.

try again. velvet drive transmissions are very popular in wake/ski sized inboards and larger cruisers too. hurth is another well respected brand. although admittedly there are lots more i/os sold than inboards people need to do repair work on their outdrives way more often than an inboard transmission. change the fluid on schedule and you can forget about it. outdrives take all sorts of extra care...bellows, grease, extra winterization, complicated gears, noisy/clunky shifting...

Very few boats are tournament-certified, even in the inboard world. The Big 3 are about the only ones who are certified to pull in an actual tournament, so they command a higher price. The other brands are typically a good bit cheaper because they can't be used in a sanctioned tournament, and become a toy for those who want the "professional slalom/wakeboard boat" without the professional price.

no doubt certification costs more but wakeboarding tournaments have stolen the spotlight from skiing events. more than the old big 3 pull those contests. they all command ridiculous prices nowadays but you'll also get a much more complicated boat....internal ballast systems, fly by wire controls, electronic dashboards w/ programmable settings to remember ballast levels & speed for each rider- even integrated cameras, surf wave shaping transom attachments, hydraulic towers, etc, etc. all sorts of stuff to break after the warranty ends.

 

[oldjeep]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

try again. velvet drive transmissions are very popular in wake/ski sized inboards and larger cruisers too. hurth is another well respected brand. although admittedly there are lots more i/os sold than inboards people need to do repair work on their outdrives way more often than an inboard transmission.

All I can say is 2005 Malibu Response - 3rd trans so far, and it is used almost exclusively to run back and forth through a course.

2005 Bayliner with a Mercruiser - changed oil every couple years, pulled the upper once to replace a seal.

Not sure what you think you have to do to winterize an I/O, but the process is basically unclip the drain lines and park it.

 

[salty87]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

which brand transmission? that's crazy. i have '87 velvet drive with over 1300 hours with at least half of those hours running 1500 lbs ballast. i'm tempting fate by admitting this but i've never changed the fluid and i put the last 1k hrs on it. it's never missed a beat. darn, i better go change that fluid now that i've asked for trouble.

 

[oldjeep]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

which brand transmission? that's crazy. i have '87 velvet drive with over 1300 hours with at least half of those hours running 1500 lbs ballast. i'm tempting fate by admitting this but i've never changed the fluid and i put the last 1k hrs on it. it's never missed a beat. darn, i better go change that fluid now that i've asked for trouble.

Engine is a 5.7 black scorpion, I think the trans is a mercury but not sure - FIL's boat.

 

[haulnazz15]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

Oh, I know how fancy the wakeboard boats are with the internal ballast, PerfectPass, pylon cameras, etc. The thing is, in comparison with the Cobalt mentioned earlier, most of those are options on it as well (internal ballast, PerfectPass, etc). Sangers are good boats, but they don't command the same price as the Bu's or MC's. I would bet that the Cobalt's price lines up with the Malibu pretty well as they would be similarly appointed despite the drive line difference.

There's no argument about what does/doesn't suite your needs, Salty87. It's not about one boat being "better" than another as they are designed with different end goals. If you want a 3-event boat, or like to play with the same equipment the professionals use, a V-drive or DD boat is the only real option. If you want to cruise, run in shallow or unfamiliar waters, and be able to take waves/chop better, the I/O or O/B is the winner.

That said, I do think many of the wakeboard boats are over-hyped. I know that they produce a more perfect wake than an I/O, but there are many I/O's that produce a comparable wake as well. The issue is that many of the wakeboard boats, don't have a wake for skiing any better than an I/O, which to me, makes them less valuable. Now on a very select few V-drives, and pretty much all DD's, the slalom wake can't be touched by any I/O, so I can understand them commanding a higher price for that ability.

 

[salty87]

Re: Why are inboards more expensive than stern drives?

don't believe i said anything was "better". that's in the eye of the user/buyer and their needs.