To give a further sense of how claptrap was used in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, I offer these instances as supplements to those given in choster's excellent answer. From a review of "Othello acted by gentlemen and ladies, &C." in The Scots Magazine (March 1751):
The gentlemen and ladies who acted, were sumptuously dressed and with great propriety. They were all extremely perfect in their parts, gracefully proper in their deportment, not in the least offensive in their action ; and, what is seldom observed by the best experienced actors, they were, through the play, constant in their attention, and characteristical in their manners. Their elocution was natural and easy ; free from the whine, the mouthing, the cant, the claptrap trick, and the false consequence, so often hackneyed upon stage.
And from Edmund Burke, Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents (1775):
The members [of a political party] seek by every just method to get their party into power so that their plans may be executed. Such rivalry is easily distinguishable from a mean, selfish struggle for place and emolument. The opponents of party frequently parade as a virtue that they support "not men but measures." This is the veriest claptrap—a device to get loose from honourable engagements ; as in the case of a man who deserts his party when it loses power, and avers that he is supporting measures.
In the first instance claptrap appears in its original sense as a trick to capture applause; in Burke's remarks, it appears in the figurative sense of verbal hogwash. The distance between claptrap in the sense of "balderdash" and claptrap in the sense of something inferior, half-baked, or shoddy may not seem very far, but the earliest instances of claptrap in the latter sense don't begin to appear in Google Books search results until the middle decades of the nineteenth century. From Dialogues of the [Railway] Gauges (1846):
NARROW GAUGE. Be that as it may, not one of the plans you [Broad Gauge] propose is possible. They all involve great delay, great expense in working, great outlay for stock, all the risks of temporary fastenings, and a degree of uniformity in the construction of carriages and waggons throughout the kingdom that is unattainable. In short, they are nothing but claptrap expedients to stave off the only effectual remedy—uniformity of gauge.
The claptrap expedients in the argument between railway gauges are not different in character from the claptrap vessels in the OP's question—poorly conceived, ill suited to their task, and likely to fail in their essential function.