
07-17-2008
|
|
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13
Rep Power: 0
|
|
|
"Lightly used" or "well maintained"
I'll throw this open for discussion and see if there are any takers:
All things being roughly equal--same age (say 1990), model (30-ft Catalina), price (~$25K), location (Chesapeake), etc.--which do you think would be a better buy for the money--a "lightly used" boat or one that has been "sailed a lot" but responsibly maintained. For the purposes of discussion, assume that a survey of each turned up no major problems.
A couple of things I can think of off the top of my head:
--you may need to buy a lot of gear for the lightly used, whereas the well used may be better equipped and the previous owner may have updated and added the things that a barebones boat doesn't have.
--is a lightly used engine that is fired up once in a while but has then sat around for most of its life really better than one that has been exercised and maintained regularly? I know that mechanical things like engines like to be run.
--if a boat has really been used very little over a 20-year period, are there systems, parts, etc. that are just waiting to give out once you start using them? More so than one that has been updated regularly?
--other thoughts?
I've been on a sailing hiatus for a number of years and am looking to get back into the sport and am in a position to buy a boat. At least half the battle, of course, is to figure out what would work for my situation and how to keep the $'s reasonable, especially the maintenance costs. I'm looking for a weekend and occasional week-long cruiser for a family of three on the Chesapeake.
|