Construction Quality Facts/Actual Observations

We hear so much talk these days about the quality and fit and finish of these new boats. We also all like to follow up with a story that justifies our perceived views of what boat is better built than another.... Problem is, a statement like "Well, my neighbor had a Malibu and it was junk compared to my supra...." is not really easy to verify, and here on WW, is more often BS, than not.

What I was thinking, was that it would be good to have a thread with factual differences in the building processes of the boats, and factual evidence, or personal experience to back it up. The only thing I would say about "personal experiences" would be to stick to things that are verifiable, and backed by actual facts.

I know this will run off from the main objective. This is WW...... But I would like to try to keep it simple and to the point. We all know that all of these boats are mostly equal on overall quality.

Now, some of you may know that I have owned Bu's, many MC's, and currently on my second G. I have crawled around, through, and under, every one of them. I have also done major modifications to them all, and have had the interiors completely gutted out of every one, and spent many hours doing handstands in the compartments of them. I have also done the same in a couple friends SC products, but I won't get into those too much.

These are my observations and ratings for the brands I have dealt with.

Base Electrical-
1- MC by a land slide. (Limited to experience with 2011+ X25, XStar, X30, X23)
Not only do they start with every single foot of wire being marine grade tinned wire, they also enclose 99% of all wiring in neat and clean wire loom. On top of that, all connections in the boat use sealed connectors except the connectors that are in the upper portion of the tower, and the cabin courtesy lights. MC also incorporates glassed-in chaseways, which keep the wire in place for the life of the boat. Also, the helm wiring is a lot cleaner because of the harness designs and use of wire loom. MC also seems to always use bussing connectors to split up a common circuit, rather than butt splices and a heat shrink tube.

2-CC (limited to my experience with G Boats)
Tinned wiring, more sealed connections than typical, but only the engine compartment wiring is in wire loom. The rest is unjacketed and simply zip tied to those little glue-in zip tie tabs. Helm wiring in both my G21, and G23 was a rats nest because of individual wires going in a million directions. Overall, the system is well done for longevity, as the important circuits have sealed connectors, the engine bay wiring is protected, and the wire is tinned for long life in harsh environments.

3-Bu, and SC (Limited to experience with a 2010 LSV, a 2014 Mondo, and a 2014 SA)
It has been a a few years since I have been elbows deep in a new Bu. The experience that I do have, would put it in a class just like CC overall, except most of the wiring was not tinned. The newer Supras and Moombas are also in this classification. IMO, overall well done systems, but missing a couple of the little details that might help 15-20 years down the road.


Electrical Componentry-

I am going to put MC, and SC in position 1, and CC in position 2. the reason being they use FW Murphy components. I am not going to argue quality on the components, or state anything that deals with touchscreen or software reliability. That is a waste of time. The reason that I chose this, is simply because all of the major electronic componentry comes from one manufacturer. The boat control systems, PDM's, and engine control is all made by the same company to work as one system. I think I can justify it as a fact, that this is, more often than not, going to give a better overall fusion of system operation.

The only reason for MC and SC being rated above CC, is that they have redundant switching that fully bypasses the touchscreen. It might never need to be used, but it is an added feature. I have been through the electrical systems very comprehensively in all of these, and the redundant switching does, in fact, bypass the touchscreen. It does not, however, bypass the power distribution modules. That said, I have heard of plenty of touchscreen failures, but never any PDM failures. (It might be a FACT that others have)


Hull Construction overall- This can certainly be argued, and I am not an engineer, but I will stick to basic observations. We all know that none of the brands suffer from hull failures.

1- CC (referring to G series only)
Considering the fact that is uses a full length stringer system that also incorporates several sections of lateral supports, it is already one of the more rugged "looking" backbones. Add the fact that G series boats also have a heavy duty fiberglass liner incorporated into the entire lower section of the boat, and it really appears to be overbuilt to the max. So much talk about shoebox fit, but a G has a whole additional shoebox in the lower half of the boat. It effectively has a double hull on the entire portion of the hull that is outboard of the center stringers.

On top of that, they have far less holes/openings in the inner deck walls of the boat. This is largely due to the fact that less access is needed to remove seat/trim etc. due to a reason that I will get into in the interior section. (It is actually a downside for CC in that section)

2- MC
Limited to the facts that MC uses a full length stringer system, with lateral supports incorporated into the structure, as well as a one piece deck. Once again overkill IMO, but notable differences of fact.

3- Bu
Neither Bu or SC use full length stringers AFAIK, and they also don't have integrated lateral supports in the framework. I am placing Bu in the third spot, because the MXZ line has one piece top decks. Otherwise, I have a hard time distinguishing the construction differences between a Bu and an SC product. They are very similar (as well as MANY other aspects of these two brands IMO).

4- SC for the reasons above. Obviously still exceptionally well built. Just not overkilled quite as much as the others that I have experience with.


Interior Vinyl-
1-MC
I have to give them the top spot for this for a couple factual reasons that are important to ME. It is just plain cooler in hot weather. It breathes well, and is just plain comfortable.

I have also found it to be extremely durable, but I have no factual observation, or measurable test to compare it to the others. I was simply tasked with having to cut a section out of one of my seats with a razor blade (Installing rear speakers in my X23), and it was VERY difficult to puncture, and to cut. It kinda blew my mind.

2- Bu, CC, and SC-
I honestly don't have any observations to compare these. They have all seemed to be very high quality, and well put together. The only downside, would be that I get sick of the sweat slime on 90+ degree days, and boy do they get hot in the sun.

Bu might actually deserve this spot (or number 1), because they now have stay-cool vinyl as well. However, I don't have experience with it.

CC uses plastic liners, and vented sections on their seats. I think this is to prevent mold issue from ever happening in the foam. I have no evidence that this helps or not.


Base interior construction-

1- MC
Main reason being that all of the seat backs are bolted in with stainless bolts, and the seatbacks have stainless nut inserts. Same goes for all of the seat hinges. Every interior cushion fastener has a stainless nut to thread into. Not a single fastener is threaded into the plastic seat backing.

2- Bu and SC
Many connection points with stainless fasteners and embedded nuts, but not nearly all of them. I have never observed a problem with fastening this way. It might not be as comprehensive, but it seems to work well.

disclaimer- I have never had to remove seatbacks from an SC product. I don't have a lot of detail on the fastening system.

3- CC
All seat backs and vinyl trim panels are installed with plastic Christmas tree push pins, except the rearmost seatbacks which are only held in by a couple self tapping screws..... (are you kidding me??). That said, the hinged seat bases are fastened with stainless bolts that are threaded into stainless embedded nuts in the seat base.

This is the reason for the note on hull construction..... Because you simply pull on the seat backs to remove them, there is no need for access areas to remove bolts. Makes for a stronger hull, but a pathetic fastening system for most of the seating.

However..... I have also never seen anyone have issues with the plastic fasteners.


Trim-
This is a tough one, because matters of "fact" could actually differ, based on personal taste. I will stick to the perceived amount of engineering effort that goes into the components.

1- MC
Pretty sure everyone would agree that they spend more time designing/carving trim than any other manufacturer. Billet might not be everyones favorite, but I think we can agree that it is the most expensive/time consuming to design and manufacture. and it certainly gives you a very high quality finish product.

2- Bu and SC
Both brands blinging it up a bit more than CC, but not quite to the level of MC.

3- CC
Not much effort on going crazy with trim detail. Ironically, I like this fact. I believe a lot of others do as well. CC really takes a classic and basic approach to this.


Towers-
They are all excellent IMO. Thanks for stopping by.

Other componentry-
Seems like most of this stuff is the same in all brands. The more expensive boats just have more expensive versions.

I am sure there are details I missed in my personal observations.

I would love to have construction details for all the other brands, and how they compare to the data above.