Why's the F4U so expensive?

[Kweassa]

I've been seeing some figures about the cost of fighters in WW2.

 P-51s or F6Fs are rated around 50,000$...
 P-47 around 80,000$...
 P-38 at 13,000~14,000$....
 F4U at a whoppin' 150,000$... (!)

 
 Now, I'd understand twin-engined aircraft being more expensive, since it means double the cost of engines, fuselages, components, and etc etc.. but why's the F4U so expensive?

 Any particular reason behind it's megalomaniacal price?

[Arlo]

Before this goes too far .... sources?

[Kweassa]

Before this goes too far .... sources?

 Nothing much, I guess.

 It's from a sweeping search on Google, trying to find price tag for these fighters. The figures for the P-51, P-47, and the P-38 I've seen before, but it wasn't easy trying to find one for a F4U.

 Wiki mentions the production cost at 150,000$, and I was trying to confirm if other sources say this. I couldn't find any direct answers, although I did find multiple articles mentioning the price of the Hellcat as 50,000$ during first production, and then the costs falling down to 35,000$ or so as the war progressed.... and most of these articles go forward to mention that the F4U was three times as expensive... so I assumed the 150,000$ figure might actually be right.

[Shuckins]

According to Corky Meyer, test pilot for Grumman, Corsairs took longer to manufacture than Hellcats.  This was because the F4U used the more complicated flush riveting for the entire airframe and required compound curvature skin panels, which were more difficult to manufacture.  I would surmise that these two things also drove up the price.  According to Corky, the Navy could purchase three Hellcats for the price of two Corsairs.

Regards, Shuckins

[Kweassa]

Then the "three times as expensive" bit in internet articles may be a misinterpretation of what Meyer said..?

 In that case, if the Hellcat can be tagged at 50,000$, then a F4U would be at 75,000$. This price does seem more believable.

[E25280]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_199812/ai_n8809022

This article says:

Adm. Metzger, the director of the fighter desk at the Navy Bureau of Aeronautics during the War, was quoted as saying that the production capability of Grumman and the practical simplicity of the Hellcat's construction allowed the Navy to purchase Hellcats at a rate of five for the same price as three Corsairs. That the Grumman portion of the airplane cost the Navy only $35,000 is impressive in today's context because that money probably wouldn't buy a page change in a pilot's flight manual for the F-18 Hornet!

That's all my limited attention span could find.

[leitwolf]

The price for the P-38 is bogus. You forgot a digit there?

[moot]

Yep, how does something like a P38 cost so much less, unless it's and early model and the rest are late runs?..

[bozon]

I've heard Vought's production efficiency was much lower than Grumman's, but this is ridiculous.

[Shuckins]

E2's figures are correct.  My fallible memory isn't what it used to be...and that's what I was relying on when I quoted Corky Meyer.

The five-to-three production ratio, lower price, sound low-speed handling, visibility, and performance only slightly less than that of the Corsair were solid reasons for the Navy's preference for the Hellcat during the mid to late war period.

[TimRas]

"Unit cost for the F6F, less government supplied equipment (primarily engine, prop, armament, radio) was initially $50,000, dropping to $35,000 by the end of the production run. This was 2/3rds.the cost of the F4U Corsair. Not only was the Hellcat a fine airplane, it was a bargain for the taxpayers as well. "
http://rwebs.net/dispatch/output.asp?ArticleID=25


Unit costs of USAAF planes:
http://www.usaaf.net/digest/t82.htm

[Hornet33]

Do you REALLY want to know why the F4U was so expensive????
































YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR SEXY!!!!!!!!:aok

[moot]

[photoshoped gullwinged F14]

[Saxman]

Exactly. You get what you pay for.

[Platano]

how much would a 109G cost if there would be one for sale?