U-bolts vs pad-eyes for cockpit tether points?

[JohnV]

I need some tether clip-on points in my cockpit. But Wichard forged padeyes cost a lot, and cheap Chinese copies aren't reliable. So, I wonder about using u-bolts that have the same or higher load rating as conventional pad-eyes.
The u-bolts come with 4 nuts and 2 oblong trim plates. This means you sandwich the deck, plus an additional, larger backing plate, between the 2 trim plates and tighten each pair of nuts against each other. It seems to me that such a union has to be comparable in strength to a one-piece pad eye.
To limit risk of accidentlly opening an older tether carabiner, you could use a welded ring inside the u-bolt.
I'm interested in your collective wisdom on this, as it seems to offer a much less expensive solution than forged pad-eyes.
John V.

[benz]

If it's only an attachment point for a tether, any chinese padeye will do. Any force that can break even a bronze eyestrap with two #10 bolts will first have dismembered you within your harness. There are so many naturally occurring attachment points everywhere on most boats that adding something extra just makes more clutter. Find a handy place to put a loop of line that you can easily clip your tether shackle to and you'll be fine. You can put loops anyplace you think you'll want to clip in.
Ben

[JohnV]

Your response is unorthodox, benz, but makes sense. You should see the comments in the Sailnet list on the same topic. As Stumble observed on another post, people--myself included, I guess--read in a book somewhere that there's a way to do something, and it becomes the only way.
I have an aversion to cheap Chinese gear, but if I want to hook on where there's no convenient deck hardware, you've given support to my u-bolt plan.
Thanks for your reply.
John V.

[benz]

Hi John,
Happy to help. I worried after posting that you might misconstrue, and I'm glad you didn't. I think the U-bolt is perfectly sufficient.
Be safe!
Ben