Lionheart no2 for sale

[GoodGurl]

http://www.venetianmarina.co.uk/used-narrowboats/details/2817.aspx

 

is he selling up or is this not his boat.

[alan_fincher]

Yes, it's his boat.

 

Can't immediately find the thread, but would be surprised if it has not been on the market at least 6 months, and quite possibly a year or more.

[mark99]

Who are we talking about King Richard?

[BEngo]

Gibbo, late of this forum, aka Chris Gibson, designer of the Smartgauge, electrical guru and holder of firm opinions was (maybe is) the owner of this boat. Many on here profited from his knowledge. Others obtained their satisfaction by arguing with him.

 

N

[carlt]

Others obtained their satisfaction by arguing with him.

 

 

Gibbo was an able and willing participant in such discussions (rarely arguments).

To be honest I'm amazed it hasn't sold (or maybe it has and it is being sold again) but, reading through the ad, many of the typos are pretty unforgivable and demonstrate a lack of knowledge of basic boating terms ("pure sign", "Makuni diesel" for example).

 

If I were Gibbo I'd be changing my broker.

[Peter X]

Who are we talking about King Richard?

 

I doubt it, he was Richard the Lionheart and this is "Lionheart no. 2". Might refer to any of the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionheart

[bargemast]

Gibbo was an able and willing participant in such discussions (rarely arguments).

To be honest I'm amazed it hasn't sold (or maybe it has and it is being sold again) but, reading through the ad, many of the typos are pretty unforgivable and demonstrate a lack of knowledge of basic boating terms ("pure sign", "Makuni diesel" for example).

 

If I were Gibbo I'd be changing my broker.

 

You're right there, a broker that's unable to name things by their proper names doesn't look qualified enough to sell boats.

 

They also made the (often made) mistake of naming the lovely "GARDNER" Gardener, not very good at all.

 

Peter.

[Paul C]

If a boat's right for them, I don't think you'll find many people put off by a mis-spelling of something. After all, there's plenty of people on this forum who claim various problems with writing/grammar etc. Of course, its great to have a giggle atthe inaccuracies on a forum though.

[MtB]

If a boat's right for them, I don't think you'll find many people put off by a mis-spelling of something. After all, there's plenty of people on this forum who claim various problems with writing/grammar etc. Of course, its great to have a giggle atthe inaccuracies on a forum though.

 

True, but any broker so unprofessional as to make so many skoolboy errors would have me doubting the accuracy of all his other statements.

 

AND thinking I don't really want to buy a boat from a seller unfussy enough to engage such a broker.

 

 

MtB

[Guest]

If a boat's right for them, I don't think you'll find many people put off by a mis-spelling of something. After all, there's plenty of people on this forum who claim various problems with writing/grammar etc. Of course, its great to have a giggle atthe inaccuracies on a forum though.

The issue though is about presentation.

 

It's nothing about to do with people on here claiming or actually having problems with spelling or grammar. Most people on here are not earning a living from brokering boats...a good broker does, and pays attention to detail.

 

Ed to add

 

Lion heart 2.is a nice looking boat for the money.

Edited June 2, 2014 by The Dog House

[MtB]

Looks 'fully priced' to me given the old fashioned fit out and ridiculously oversized Gardner.

 

just my opinion.

 

MtB

[mark99]

 

I doubt it, he was Richard the Lionheart and this is "Lionheart no. 2". Might refer to any of the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionheart

Well blow me down. Fancy me mixing up which King Richards narrow boat Is which.

[matty40s]

The issue though is about presentation.

It's nothing about to do with people on here claiming or actually having problems with spelling or grammar. Most people on here are not earning a living from brokering boats...a good broker does, and pays attention to detail.

Ed to add

Lion heart 2.is a nice looking boat for the money.

Lionheart 2

[Guest]

matty40s, on 03 Jun 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

Lionheart 2

Ah but I'm not brokering it.....

[MtB]

Ah but I'm not brokering it.....

 

Good job too, with your spilling.

 

MtB

[NB Alnwick]

Gibbo was an able and willing participant in such discussions (rarely arguments).

To be honest I'm amazed it hasn't sold (or maybe it has and it is being sold again) but, reading through the ad, many of the typos are pretty unforgivable and demonstrate a lack of knowledge of basic boating terms ("pure sign", "Makuni diesel" for example).

 

If I were Gibbo I'd be changing my broker.

 

I agree - nevertheless it seems to be a good package for a reasonable price and the engine is hardly ever likely to be stressed.

 

It seems to me that there are plenty of good and reasonably priced pre-owned boats on the market at the moment which wasn't the case a few years back. Despite this, from the confident responses that I heard at Crick, there are still plenty of people buying new builds for as much as £200k . . .

[alan_fincher]

I think the large picture windows, and the corresponding "dropped" gunwale are likely to be a large part of the problem in selling a boat like this.

 

Whilst popular on some hire fleets I have several times been told that it heavily affects the ability to sell a private boat.

 

IMO the 4 cylinder Gardner is also highly inappropriate - this would be a much more sensible boat with half the number of cylinders.

 

I am aware of converted working boat potentially for sale with the same engine, and it is the sole reason we have not been to see a boat that might otherwise be suitable for us.

 

But I realise what one person would heavily avoid another may really like, so I guess "Lionheart 2" will eventually find some offers?

[NB Alnwick]

I think the large picture windows, and the corresponding "dropped" gunwale are likely to be a large part of the problem in selling a boat like this.

 

Whilst popular on some hire fleets I have several times been told that it heavily affects the ability to sell a private boat.

 

IMO the 4 cylinder Gardner is also highly inappropriate - this would be a much more sensible boat with half the number of cylinders.

 

I am aware of converted working boat potentially for sale with the same engine, and it is the sole reason we have not been to see a boat that might otherwise be suitable for us.

 

But I realise what one person would heavily avoid another may really like, so I guess "Lionheart 2" will eventually find some offers?

 

I am not sure why the Gardner would be "highly inappropriate" - it may be more than adequate but probably fits the bill even if it doesn't sound quite as nice as the three cylinder engines from that great British institution. A large engine running slowly can be as economical (and far more satisfying) as many of the modern multi-cylindered high speed diesels imported from the East that are far too common these days

 

As a matter of interest Steve Hudson has just fitted a four cylinder vintage engine to one of his latest £200k boats - I think it is a Lister/Blackstone JP4 - we admired the boat at Crick and it passed us after the show - gliding through the water very nicely ...

[alan_fincher]

Well its a personal view, of course, but in my view it is simply overkill....

 

Whether you are talking about a Gardner, an RN or a JP, (or even an HA or HR), the 2 cylinder version is in each case more than equivalent to what has pushed heavily loaded motor / butty pairs around perfectly satisfactorily for years, so why on earth is it necessary to put something twice as powerful into a leisure boat.

 

It may indeed run economically, and it may even be possible to tame it enough that you can always pass moored boats at sensible speeds, but even things like regular oil changes will be needlessly more expensive because of the much higher sump capacities.

It will also give you more space in the engine room, (or allow the engine room to be more compact!).

My guess is that more people would be interested in the boat with a "twin", although I still think the "dropped" gunwales are the worst thing going against it. I can't immediately think of any other modern boat using the "back cabin, proper engine room and old engine" formula that has them.

[NB Alnwick]

Well its a personal view, of course, but in my view it is simply overkill....

 

Whether you are talking about a Gardner, an RN or a JP, (or even an HA or HR), the 2 cylinder version is in each case more than equivalent to what has pushed heavily loaded motor / butty pairs around perfectly satisfactorily for years, so why on earth is it necessary to put something twice as powerful into a leisure boat.

 

It may indeed run economically, and it may even be possible to tame it enough that you can always pass moored boats at sensible speeds, but even things like regular oil changes will be needlessly more expensive because of the much higher sump capacities.

 

It will also give you more space in the engine room, (or allow the engine room to be more compact!).

 

My guess is that more people would be interested in the boat with a "twin", although I still think the "dropped" gunwales are the worst thing going against it. I can't immediately think of any other modern boat using the "back cabin, proper engine room and old engine" formula that has them.

 

I think the historical engine choices were determined by cost and this ruled out the luxury of more powerful or robust alternatives. Although not used on traditional working boats, the Gardner would be a selling point imo and if correctly set up, it would have sufficient power and torque to do its job easily and economically. Maintenance needn't be any more expensive - our Kelvin K3 for example requires only two gallons of oil for a complete engine oil change and the basic SAE 30 oil is a lot cheaper than the high-tech stuff that modern engines demand.

 

Having said that I do agree about the windows but the boat does seem very reasonably priced for all that - and I would wager that the electrical system is all very efficient!

[matty40s]

Painting a boat with those dropped gunnels is a pain, when going along sanding or painting the handrails, you always forget the drop and your foot steps on air.......

Edited June 3, 2014 by matty40s

[Timleech]

 

I think the historical engine choices were determined by cost and this ruled out the luxury of more powerful or robust alternatives. Although not used on traditional working boats, the Gardner would be a selling point imo and if correctly set up, it would have sufficient power and torque to do its job easily and economically. Maintenance needn't be any more expensive - our Kelvin K3 for example requires only two gallons of oil for a complete engine oil change and the basic SAE 30 oil is a lot cheaper than the high-tech stuff that modern engines demand.

 

Having said that I do agree about the windows but the boat does seem very reasonably priced for all that - and I would wager that the electrical system is all very efficient!

 

Over sized engines do tend to smoke more, especially if they never get a chance to get fully opened up. Also there is more risk of bore glazing (I haven't seen that mentioned on here for a month or so ).

That said, the 4LW in what I'm pretty sure is the boat that Alan alludes to does have a pretty clean exhaust from what I've seen.

 

Tim

[alan_fincher]

 

Maintenance needn't be any more expensive - our Kelvin K3 for example requires only two gallons of oil for a complete engine oil change and the basic SAE 30 oil is a lot cheaper than the high-tech stuff that modern engines demand.

Presumably a K2 would use significantly less oil though!

 

At about 44HP (from memory) a K2 is already more than double what was used to power pairs of loaded 70 foot boats, so even that I would argue, whilst it is engineering probably second to none, is still more than any leisure boat can possibly need.

 

It is hard to imagine that any modern leisure boat that has a "vintage" engine needs more than about 20HP, if the hull design is reasonable, and the gearbox and prop are appropriate. Just occasionally by not having too much, it might get to do some proper work!

[MtB]

and the basic SAE 30 oil is a lot cheaper than the high-tech stuff that modern engines demand.

 

May I pick up on this comment of yours please?

 

When I changed the oil recently in my K1 I ended up paying about £20 a gallon for Comma SAE30 oil for vintage engines, much the same price as the 10W 40 oil widely used in modern engines IIRC.

 

What oil are are you buying that is 'a lot' cheaper?

 

Thanks,

MtB

[MtB]

Painting a boat with those dropped gunnels is a pain, when going along sanding or painting the handrails, you always forget the drop and your foot steps on air.......

 

That dropped gunwale HAS to be the problem. Anyone picky enough about their engines to buy a boat with a vintage Gardner in it, let alone a 4LW, is highly likely to consider a dropped gunwale anathema and a definite deal breaker.

 

I bet whoever buys this boat gets it for a song and goes on the have the dropped gunwales restored to normal shape.

 

 

MtB