Checkmate Production Slammed
#32
Custom Interiors & More
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,742
Likes: 2
From: Bucyrus, OH.
#33
Registered
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 381
Likes: 4
From: Daytona Beach, Fl.
I am a Checkmate dealer and they are VERY busy. I just sold 3 24's in the last two weeks. I ordered another this week and am 5th in line for a 24. I deal mostly with the outboards and order blank hull with my own rigging. I have the 21's running over 96 on GPS with a single 300xs. I also have a new 28 with twin outboards in stock. I can't wait to set up a new 26 with twin 300xs motors. Should run about 90-92! My website is http://liberatorfl.tripod.com
#36
Registered
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,777
Likes: 12
From: San Diego, California
As an engine builder it still cracks me up that Mercury still keeps controlling performance smaller boat cost like they do.
There is no real cost difference for Mercury to build and deliver a 502Mag 380HP versus a 502HO-430HP to the boat builders like Checkmate who are trying and helping increase the offerings in the 24-29ft performance boat range. Camshafts cost them the same and programming in the ECM cost the same and those are the only two differences between the two model engines! The added cost of catalyst systems required now and their emmission controls have already added enough addtional engine cost to the prospective buyer, why not make the upgrade easier to justify for the new buyers of boats offered by great improving builders like Checkmate.
Obviously interested performance boat buyers and users would opt for the 430HP level engine and its greater performance in these boats, why keep a $5K-$7K higher cost per boat in an industry that needs all the incentives it can muster. this is the same format they used with the 496Mag versu 496HO engines back 2000-thru 2010 years.
If Checkmate could be building and supplying this boat with 430HP versus 380HP for about the same cost, what engine do you think they would select as a builder and seller??
Obviously Mercury likes the added net profit incentive almost any buisness would, but it is not really conducive to expanding and redeveloping the small-midsize performance boat market.
Remember Mercury's future depends on a strong recovering small -midsize boat market also. Sell more boats=needs more engines=Mercury has a bigger market- pretty simple conclusion.
We all know you really never have quite enough power as a performance boater, but the worst thing you can do as a new performance boater is to buy a performance boat with less power than it should really have.
Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
There is no real cost difference for Mercury to build and deliver a 502Mag 380HP versus a 502HO-430HP to the boat builders like Checkmate who are trying and helping increase the offerings in the 24-29ft performance boat range. Camshafts cost them the same and programming in the ECM cost the same and those are the only two differences between the two model engines! The added cost of catalyst systems required now and their emmission controls have already added enough addtional engine cost to the prospective buyer, why not make the upgrade easier to justify for the new buyers of boats offered by great improving builders like Checkmate.
Obviously interested performance boat buyers and users would opt for the 430HP level engine and its greater performance in these boats, why keep a $5K-$7K higher cost per boat in an industry that needs all the incentives it can muster. this is the same format they used with the 496Mag versu 496HO engines back 2000-thru 2010 years.
If Checkmate could be building and supplying this boat with 430HP versus 380HP for about the same cost, what engine do you think they would select as a builder and seller??
Obviously Mercury likes the added net profit incentive almost any buisness would, but it is not really conducive to expanding and redeveloping the small-midsize performance boat market.
Remember Mercury's future depends on a strong recovering small -midsize boat market also. Sell more boats=needs more engines=Mercury has a bigger market- pretty simple conclusion.
We all know you really never have quite enough power as a performance boater, but the worst thing you can do as a new performance boater is to buy a performance boat with less power than it should really have.
Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
#37
Registered
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Ray,
I have no idea about the new motors, but do they have the exact same internals? It would seem that maybe the 430 hp motors might have forged internals?
If they are exactly the same, and the same price to build, then you make an excellent point and why would Mercury have two motors at two price points?
Crazy stuff.
I have no idea about the new motors, but do they have the exact same internals? It would seem that maybe the 430 hp motors might have forged internals?
If they are exactly the same, and the same price to build, then you make an excellent point and why would Mercury have two motors at two price points?
Crazy stuff.
#39
Registered
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,777
Likes: 12
From: San Diego, California
Yes, they both have the same internals except camshafts (same cost for camshafts), same externals and are both built and assembled at Fondulac on the same line. I honestly think it"s a bit crazy and obviously on some smaller boats it may be somewhat driven by insurance requirements, but in a 27-29 footer makes no sense and I feel is counter productive to growing the boating industry. As I said, if every builder had the choice of buying the 380HP versus the 430HP versions for what should be the SAME price, what do you think their decision would be!? Kinda a NO Brainer! Since the SBC at 260-350HP provides the smaller HP area and the Racing HP525's and now HP565 fill the upper HP area for noramlly aspirated efi engines why does the industry even need a 380HP and 430HP seperate versions anyway? Build and supply all 430HP versions and sell them all for the price of the 370 ! Makes more sense to me but I don't begin to know everything about what and why. Maybe someone from Mercury can explain their reasoning.
Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar
Last edited by Raylar; 05-03-2012 at 10:40 PM.
#40
Registered
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 310
Likes: 0



