chagzuki

Hi, this is particularly interesting to me as I'm on the verge of buying a boat with no prior experience. . . and this sort of horror story may well scare me off the idea. Did you have a survey done before buying? Did you rely on a survey commissioned by someone else?

Are the techniques described the same regardless of boat length? Will a 63 foot boat be harder to single hand through locks than a smaller boat?

Looking at the interactive map again, there seem to be almost zero elsan points in east london but plenty from islington heading west. Can this be accurate?

Very good. Searching this forum I'm also detecting a general disdain for pump out toilets.

Yeah, but but it would seem that it might often be hard to find anywhere to moor near services, particularly elsan points. Water points appear to be more frequent. . . though not always? I have visions of having to regularly cycle a couple of miles with a huge container of liquid poo in the front basket of a bicycle. . . likely to end badly.

I'm looking at the interactive map on the crt website, trying to ascertain what sort of movements would be necessary as a cc'er in order to keep the boat facilities in order. I understand a pump out toilet makes more sense for a cc'er but I've spoken with people who prefer cassette toilets. Now I'm looking at the map, initially in and around London and there appear to be hardly any elsan points, so I don't see how one could make that system work, unless you constantly transport your cassette a few miles along the towpath. . . surely impossible in winter. So, are there more cassette disposal points than are indicated on the crt map; is there a workable solution or is a pump out toilet a necessity?

Is it commonplace to specify something like hull plus engine survey?

So when people talk of hull surveys vs 'full surveys' in fact there's any number of gradations between the two?

What was the nature of the work? Was it to do with the hull, or interior bits and pieces?

What specific issue was uncovered during your survey, and how old is the boat?

I don't have any knowledge about boats & internal fittings. I've been reading a full survey for another boat and it goes into such detail and makes so many recommendations that I'm really not sure what one would expect the seller to foot the bill for.

I'm quite close to making an offer on a boat. It's a private sale so I guess there's the uncertainty of the lack of a third party to ensure everything is handled properly, legally, etc., and as you can imagine I'm extremely apprehensive about the whole thing. If I choose to go for it I'll have to make a decision on the type of survey to have. Any advice in relation to this? Obviously the hull is the deal-breaker . . and I suppose some more information on the state of the engine is very important. I'm not sure how much I should be worrying about other things, the electrics etc., and the extent to which a valid safety certificate vouches for the integrity of that stuff? I'm aware that since it's a private sale the current owner could change his mind at any time before the deal is finalized and that he might glean some information from the survey I'd pay for. How long do surveys typically take? I've read that one should be there whilst it's carried out. Is it all completed within the space of a day or can it take longer/much longer?

When people talk of loss of thickness are they generally referring to pitting or a more uniform thinning that's probably the result of a combination of abrasion and corrosion? I'd imagine pitted surfaces would quickly lose thickness as a result of abrasion, e.g. on the port side side plates. The way the surveys I've read were worded it implied the thickness measurements were merely to confirm the original build specifications.

I've been reading old surveys for two narrowboats that I'm looking at. The hull thickness measurements indicate that there's no loss of thickness but there is pitting, on one boat to a depth of 0.5mm (at 3 years old, probably as a result of millscale issues). The second boat has pitting to a maximum depth of 1.9mm on the bottom plate at 10 years old. So I'm wondering whether pitting is the precursor of overall loss of thickness, and how seriously one ought to take pitting of 1.9mm, which sounds like a bad sign to me.

I'd imagine that most of what a survey uncovers is maintenance that'll need doing within a time-frame, but isn't absolutely immediately necessary. Is this a moment for pure bargaining over whether the seller should foot the bill for specific renovations? I guess that a decent broker might remove some of these uncertainties due to having a proper concept of market value. . . but I've just been reading about how certain brokers are the equivalent of the dodgiest used-car salesmen. Are there any conventions in terms of what renovations a seller will typically be expected to cover the cost of, post-survey?

Some forum posts I've read give the impression that engines have a fairly predicable lifespan, and that replacing an engine is one of the most expensive renovations one can carry out. Does a full survey cover the condition of the engine in depth, and what should one look out for in order to avoid a purchasing blunder? One of the boats I looked at has a BMC 1500, which I gather is easy to get spare parts for, and considered reliable.

I finally had a look at a couple of boats today and it was an interesting experience, one which now needs digesting. One of the boats I looked at has a BSC until 2015 but no recent hull survey. I'm confused as to the difference between an interior survey and the stuff that a safety certificate covers, i.e. is there any point in my getting a full survey done, or would it make sense to have just a hull survey (which presumably is a fair bit cheaper)?

Thanks, those threads are very useful indeed, Dekazer.

Aha, 'sacrificial anodes', I'd not encountered that term before. How often should one be replacing those?

There are so many factors to the overall cost, it's daunting. I'm leaning towards the idea of generating most of my electricity through solar panels. I wonder if the reason why I haven't noticed many boats in London with solar panels is that they inevitably get stolen. . . is that a realistic concern?

I imagine that over time I'd have to become adept at general maintenance. I like that idea, but I'm apprehensive due to having had no experience with engines. I love mechnical things and tinker with bicycles, sturmey archer hubs etc., incessantly, but engines are something else. I could probably handle a bit of plumbing. . . I'd have to read a lot about electrics. I'm sure the learning curve would be steep. Would it be reckless to expect to pick these things up on the job, as it were, having purchased a fairly cheap boat?

OK, thanks for clarifying that. I've probably got a load more questions; I'm not sure if it's tidier to start new threads or keep them here. I guess I'll keep this one running. The books I've just read on canal boats have left me with the impression that narrowboats are typically 6'10" wide. Sometimes when I'm looking at one from the outside I'm thinking that the living spaces looks rather too small for comfort and on other occasions a narrowboat will strike me as, well, not so narrow. Comparing a couple of boats side-by-side today I was sure that they were actually quite different in width, so now I'm wondering if they come in all manner of widths and that the 6'10" is simply a maximum size for what can be legally considered a 'narrowboat'?

So, given the multiple causes of hull thinning, the main issue is the speed at which the hull has thinned as this gives an indication of the quality, presumably of the metal itself? And is therefore a projection of it's future lifespan? Will all boats have a record of the original hull thickness?

I'd assumed that 'blacking' was a specific type of hull coating that would prevent the hull from corroding, and presumably hull thickness decreases through corrosion? Does that mean that hulls that have lost a significant amount of thickness have been kept in a state of disrepair, or does the blacking process itself gradually abrade the hull?

Hello all, I've been reading bits of the forums for a few days now in an attempt to get my head around the many issues pertaining to living on a narrowboat, which is something I'm seriously contemplating doing. Many questions are springing to mind as I wade through the information, so, to begin: to what extent the year a boat was made determines it's structural / mechanical integrity? I've read that a boat devalues with age in a way a car does . . . but at the same time it appears that every part of a boat is replaceable and therefore the current condition of a boat might have little to do with it's original state and it's age. Looking at adverts for narrowboats it seems that many that appear to be in a reasonable condition are far cheaper than others which to my untrained eye look very similar. . . and the cheaper boats tend to have been built in the 80s or 90s, suggesting that boats of this age are perhaps a liability in some way. . . ? On the other hand, if a boat has passed it's safety certificate and if it's in full working order then I'm not sure what could go wrong. What should I be looking out for?