On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:50:49 GMT, Lobster
wrote:



I'd definitely really like a Makita; certainly money no object I'd
certainly go for one. Appreciate all the 'economy in the long run'
arguments, but I can't justify the outlay. One reason is risk of loss -
I often use my stuff away from home, carry it around in the car etc
and wouldn't be covered by insurance against theft.

I agree the 6228 is within my budget; however my drill will need to deal
with some masonry work, so I want hammer action which is why I'd
discounted it - I'd be looking at the Makita 8433, at 235 GBP or
thereabouts?

I've never used either a Makita or Erbauer personally: Andy, do you
really reckon the Makita 6228 will give "better results" than a hammer
action 18V Erbauer? (ie nothing to do with reliability or spares
availability)?


The issue is that I don't make buying decisions based on a single
issue of whether the Erbauer is going to drill a hole in masonry at a
certain speed on day 1 in comparison with a Makita on the same day.

I have a Makita 14.4v and a larger 18v, but neither are hammer action.
The 14.4 will comfortably do up to mid range masonry holes - e.g. 8mm
hole for a wall fixing, with no hammer action. The 18v will do
somewhat more. I don't have or use a hammer action on either of
them because for masonry work above that level I occasionally use a
corded drill or more typically an SDS. Either will do a far better
job than a cordless hammer drill, even with decent batteries and
mechanics like Makita produce.

Therefore, I would choose a good quality, well balanced and well
controlled 14.4v drill for small to medium hole drilling, or even
large in some materials, and screwdriving. Then to use something with
more brute force and power than can be achieved out of a cordless tool
by buying a reasonable corded SDS drill. Overall, I think that this
is a much better spread of matching quality and control where needed
ususally more frequently.


I also tend to look much bigger picture, by not limiting myself to
deciding based on what it did on day 1 in the shop and the price. To
me, cost of time is by far the highest cost, therefore I want to have
good quality tools that do a well controlled and precision job and can
be fixed if needed and relied upon for years. For me, this completely
rules out the catalogue and DIY store products that are sold on the
numbers game with seemingly attractive warranties but which in reality
are thrown out and replaced. I think that this is a valueless
concept because it simply encourages poorer and poorer items to flood
the market. I would much rather pay decent money for a good quality
tool that I can use well all day or probably get the job done more
quickly. I don't want to waste half a day waiting in a queue at the
DIY shop to get an exchange on an unknown product.

To me, spares availability, ease of use and build quality are much
larger issues than capital cost.

On the other hand, if purchase price is the biggest issue and cost of
personal time less important, then the equation may be different.

This is certainly a situation where one size doesn't fit all.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl