Obviously neglect is the predictor of future failure...but the comments in this thread had me wondering:
What is the life cycle (repair/rebuild/replace) of a winch?
I understand that use, environment, and care all have bearing on the answer.
But when would veteran spoolers consider replacing vs. rebuilding?
Good question! I think you pretty well answered the question yourself. A winch will give you years of reliable service if inspected, used correctly, and with proper maintenance in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations, and of course dependent upon any unusual operating conditions.
There's been times when I've inspected and then closed everything back up since all was intact and free from corrosion, evidence of water intrusion, uncontaminated lubricant, etc. My winch is over 10 years old and performs with some relative frequency. I know of other individuals models that are much older that have received only routine maintenance, or total rebuilds of salvaged models. Selecting a model that is a top-of-the-line or budget-priced unit has an entirely different list of selection criteria that's not addressed in this response but many points still apply.
Replacement should only be required under conditions of extreme wear or abuse, but most of the time quality, name-brand winches can be rebuilt. This is especially true when evaluating the manufacturer of a winch. Some companies use substandard or non-rated components to achieve a better price point for the volume of business they hope to achieve. Caveat emptor. A quality manufacturer, along with an established reputation of product support and ample logistic support should rate high among your criteria.
This might serve as a handy guide to develop a strategy for all your future modification...
Life cycle costing plays a big role when deciding whether to maintain and repair or to replace equipment. Rarely is it more economic to replace equipment ahead of its end of life unless it has failed or there is a requirement for additional capacity or capability. In most cases, it is more economic to maintain and repair to extend the life as long as possible. The criteria below are designed to help make sound repair versus replace decisions:
• An asset is near or beyond its expected life;
• The asset reliability and the consequences of failure poses an unacceptable risk;
• The repair/refurbishment costs exceed the life cycle cost of an asset replacement;
• The asset’s performance has been unacceptable and corrective maintenance measures will not lead to acceptable performance;
• Additional asset capability is required and the replacement equipment provides that additional capability while improving operations, reducing costs, and make it easier to maintain;
• The existing equipment is technologically obsolete, spare parts are expensive or hard to get, and skill requirements to properly repair and maintain are hard to find;
• The existing equipment poses an unacceptable security risk, health and safety risk, or environmental risk and the cost to mitigate the risk exceeds the asset life cycle replacement cost.