Paul in Houston TX wrote on Wed, 07 Dec 2016 17:42:10 -0600:

That was a good analysis. Thank you.

I appreciate that you didn't take my rant personally as it is a diatribe
I've given often, which is that quality and cost are two different things,
and they are essentially unrelated.

A perfect example, by the way, is the cost of fruits when they're NOT in
season. The cost is high when the quality sucks and the cost is low when
the quality is good.

Same with airfare. The cost is low when nobody is flying (i.e., the quality
is high) and the cost is high when everyone is flying (i.e., the quality is
low).

My point is that price bears no direct relationship to quality but people
*use price* as a substitute for the quality metric.

My thoughts were from a mechanics viewpoint. I no longer do that work but
did for many years professionally.

I can't help but agree that if you change tire valves all day, every day,
the cost of the tool doesn't matter one bit. What matters is how well the
tool helps you do the job fast and efficient.

Therefore, since cost isn't at all a concern, the *price* of that tool will
likely be high (because of the lack of downward pressure on pricing). Also
that tool may have a lot of engineering in it to eke out the last iota of
speed and efficiency in removing and replacing valves.

But that type of speed and efficiency doesn't generally play a role in
backyard mechanic metrics. For a backyard mechanic, it could well be that
storage costs outweight tool-quality metrics, for example.

What I found was that a $3 wrench would last one or two uses but a similar
$20 wrench would last a life time. I still have my Proto, Snap-On, and Mac
after 40 years and they still work fine.

I agree. My Craftsman wrenches were bought in the 70s and they're still the
same now as they were then. I'm glad I bought them. Same with my floor jack
and 6-ton jack stands, having gone through very many lesser quality
versions over the years (most of which failed at some point).

The cheap Chinese junk lasts a week at most.

You say cheap but what you mean is low quality.
Low quality junk only lasts a week at most.
I agree with that concept.

For example, I never buy those yellow-and-black screwdrivers they sell in
grocery stores. They all suck, right? But my point isn't that they suck
because they're cheap.

My point is that they suck because they suck.
That they suck has nothing whatsoever to do with the price.

They suck at any price.

Poor quality steel, poor quality manufacturing, but they look splendid when first
purchased. I will continue to buy the best if I intend on keeping them.
I buy Chinese junk for use at remote locations for a few days and then
give it away or throw away before I fly home.

Again, junk sucks because it's junk.
It matters not what price you paid for it.

My only beef is that people *think* price is an indicator of quality.
It is not.

Quality is an indicator of quality.
But that takes technical thought to figure out quality.

People use price (which is just a number) as a substitute for technical
merit.