Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: lml
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2002 15:15:41 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1683941@logan.com>
From: RWolf99@aol.com
Subject: High End vs Low End
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Brent Regan writes:
"Why should I spend $25 for one livelock when I can get a box of 100 at the 
98-cent store? So what if a few fall out?"

The implication is that spending less than the highest amount possible gives 
an unsafe result.  While Brent's main point is that an el cheapo EFIS won't 
be as robust as a unit that has passed a full MIL-SPEC environmental 
certification may be valid, his example is wrong.

Why should I spend $25 for a fastener that has no additional strength or 
robustness than the Southco or Dzus fastener that worked for 25 years on my 
Cessna, and also which cost less than 1/10th of the Livelock?  Does the shiny 
finish of the Livelock add any value?  Here's an example where cheaper is 
just as good (structurally speaking).  

What about the Bosch relays that many of us have switched to, that cost $4 
rather than the failure prone $20 aviation relays?  Here's an example where 
cheaper IS better.

Brent's observations are generally pretty insightful, often inciteful, and 
always entertaining.  But I had to put my two cents in against the 
generalization that more money always equates to higher safety and 
reliability.  It may be the way to bet, but there are exceptions.

- Rob Wolf