alan_fincher

This is not my experience on our elderly boat that had many cables just draped between the lower cabin linings and the polystyrene insulation. In every case where we exposed it, the cables had buried themselves well into the insulation, but if you pulled the cables clear there was no discernible degradation, and the cables themselves seemed in every way as good as new. I wouldn't profess to understand the chemistry or physics of this situation, but I am 100% certain that the cables were completely uncompromised.

Really? I don't think that @bargeeboy posts on CWDF any more, so I think he is unlikely to get the opportunity to give his side of events.

As I would expect that is much very sensible input from Tony. If the set-up has previously had 2 skin tanks but now has only one in use, that rings alarm bells to me that the single skin tank is insufficient to properly cool the engine, an that the original intention was to have both. Contrary to what many people often incorrectly say, you can't have too big a skin tank, as long as the right thermostat is present and working. With just the large skin tank the engine would likely be "over-cooled", but the thermostat will control flow to the skin tank, and will only allow hot water through when at skin tank temperature. We need to know dimensions of the skin tank that is in use. If any of the hose connections to it are in the "edge", it may be possible to push a rod in, and see if it comes up against anything solid - if it does there are probably at least some baffles. Baffles are usually horizontal, but can sometimes be vertical, so the "push a rod in" test only proves anything if it comes up against anything. Failure to do so doesn't necessarily mean "no baffles", as tghe rod and the baffles may be parallel to each other, with the rod passing between baffles, and not "finding" them. But let's have the dimensions first. Is there any possibility this boat was built by either Mike Heywood, or Evans and Son, as they have a reputation for boats with very inadequate skin tanks?

Tony's question could be highly relevant. If it has always overheated in your ownership thee is a possibility that the skin tank may be too small and/or poorly designed. A BMC 1800 with a power output of over 30HP needs a fairly large tank, and it is by no means uncommon to find skin tanks that are too small, or which lack internal baffles, or are too "thick" - they should only be about an inch between the inner sides. Please give dimensions, and say if you are able to determine whether there are baffles inside to prevent water taking a "short cut" from input to output.

I'm pretty certain this was summer 1973.....

About right, I think. There may also have been an element of retaining one paired lock, as they were a very identifiable feature of the Regents which someone felt should not be completely lost. I haven't been down that way in many years, so was unaware that a lock was chained out of use.

Why should the canal not have remained open? That is the last remaining example of two side-by-side locks on the Regents. Simply use the parallel lock, (unless that is buggered as well).

Agreed. But for boats not under the scope of the RCD, it may be relevant to who can, or can not, work on the boat.

AFIK "Beardshave's" boat pre-dates the RCD by many years, and is not a full time live-aboard. Thus, I think it should fall into the easiest category for trying to locate someone to do the install. That said, I have no suggestions to make, despite living very nearby. I am assuming he has asked the engineer based in the marina opposite where he moors - if not I'd certainly ask. That would however be likely to be quite a costly option, I think.

Yours?

I've actually just found I still have 4 permits - one for each member of the family. They didn't have an expiry or renewal date, nor do they indicate their original date of issue.

Indeed not only worked for BWB, but also actually lived in the cottage you mention. This was Cow Roast lock Don't forget the moleskin trousers!! Well people are wrong if they really do make such sweeping statements Some of it is river fed, but certainly not towards the start of the descent to London If there was sufficiently an abundance of water that you didn't need to worry about leakage, then there would not have been locks on the descent through Berkhamsted to Hemel Hemptstead which had side ponds in a bid to minimize water use. And yes, my association with the Grand Union goes far enough back to have regularly operated side ponds. Other than the K&A which did eventually create some kind of paid for permit, (at least in the Devizes area), I think that elsewhere in the country they were free. We had them, but were never once asked to show them.

l normal running I would expect the pressure on a BMC 1.8 in good order to be a fair bit higher than 20 psi - it could easily be twice that. So I can't see how that gauge can be right for this engine, if it only has indicated pressure up to 20 psi.

Well it most certainly isn't the front end of a Bantock.

Yes, definitely Daphne March. She was the aunt of Kathryn from Stoke Bruerne. There are lots of publicity photos featuring Daphne, often accompanied by her mother.

Looks to me like the spin vent is a non original modification. This is not unusual on these stoves.

Blimey, that really is hogged!

If that is correct, (and I'm not 100% certain that it is), then you would presumably need to be more cautious if you have an older or vintage engine, as I gather that rubber seals in these might be more prone to damage by biofuel.

Agreed. If you have a Smartgauge it is important to understand what its stated capabilities are, and not to assume it will do more than those. It is marketed as providing a fairly accurate estimate of state of charge, (as a percentage), irrespective of original size of bank and of any subsequent loss of capacity. It does not pretend it can ascertain the current usable capacity of the bank once sulphated to some degree.

I may be wrong, but don't think that is correct. It surely gives its estimate of state of charge based on voltage. If your battery bank is 50% degraded it will still come up with a state of charge - say 80% Replace it with a new battery bank, and it may also give an 80% state of charge. The difference is that the latter may represent 80% of 220Ah, whereas the former represents 80% of only 110Ah - i.e. what your batteries have degraded to. I'm sticking my neck out here, so wouldn't be surprised to hear I am wrong! If I am, I'm keen to see the corrected version! Correct.

Yes "cold cranking amps" (or "CCA") is what is most important for a starter battery. Amp Hours (or "Ah") is far less relevant. This is because you want it to supply very (very) big currents for a short period only, being quite different from a leisure battery which needs to be able only to supply very much smaller currents, but continuously over a number of hours. A starter battery ranging from (say) 700CCA to 900CCA should be far more than you need,