I'm willing the bet the only real reason most say a BL is weaker than a SL is due to it being "the poor man's lift." Yes, a SL is stronger, that's obvious, but a BL would not be sold if it cannot perform as advertised. Thinking about it from a scientific perspective, the only real risk you have from a BL is shearing the new body bolts, which is extremely unlikely. I don't know this for fact, but I'm assuming the bolts are Grade 8 (or at least Grade 5), so you need a stupid amount of force to shear the bolts (we're talking thousands of pounds here). The nylon pucks are advertised at a 50000lb rating, which I believe in (they would be sued to death if they claimed this and someone died from it not being truth), so there's no issues there, whatsoever. Having done this lift myself, as well as examining all that goes into the lift, there is
absolutely no reason for anyone to believe a BL is weak. In closing, the only risks you take are bolt shearing (highly unlikely) and/or puck breaking/cracking (even more unlikely). It all boils down to people believing the more you spend, the more you get. Perfect analogy: A mustang is a poor man's sport car (or so most believe). The reason for this: It's cheaper than other 'muscle' cars, so it must be ****. Human logic has been jaded by the belief that if it's cheap (in cost), it must be cheap (in product). This is not always the case, so those who think BLs are **** and they can't be safe/reliable/work are not looking at them from a scientific standpoint, therefore, they are just plain wrong. I'll be awaiting an argumentative point, because I know it's coming...