Narrowboat from the 1950's -advice?

[pebble77]

Hello!

 

I am looking to get a little advice about the possible purchase of a narrowboat dated from 1953. It is cheap, had a survey 3 years ago, work completed (and I would have another one if I move forward and think about buying) but am interested in knowing if a boat of this age might be considered best avoided?

 

The hull has had extensive overplating and is now around 9.8mm thick, but the sides are around 3mm, which I know is on the low side. Everything else works well.

 

What are peoples thoughts? This would be my first boat/home, so I am keen to learn as much as I can. 

 

Thanks in advance!

 

[pebble77]

also- it was blacked last year!

[Alan de Enfield]

25 minutes ago, pebble77 said:

The hull has had extensive overplating and is now around 9.8mm thick,

 

It is extremely unlikely to be 9.8mm thick.

 

If it was originally (say) 5mm and has been overplated with (say) 5mm plate it is rated as having a thickness of 5mm NOT 10mm

[Arthur Marshall]

10 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It is extremely unlikely to be 9.8mm thick.

 

If it was originally (say) 5mm and has been overplated with (say) 5mm plate it is rated as having a thickness of 5mm NOT 10mm

It might be rated as 5mm, but it's still mostly 10mm. All depends on how you look at it. Mine's been replated twice, so god only knows how thick it is in most places, but reckon it's fairly safe for a few years yet.

[alan_fincher]

Steel narrow boats built in 1953 are, I would suggest, a very very rare item.

 

Boats purpose built for leisure cruising or living aboard hadn't, on the whole, started to appear by then.

 

Most boats built for commercial carrying are actually significantly older, although a few of welded construction were still produced up to about 1960.

 

It is very hard to comment based on just the information you have given.  Do you believe this to be a purpose built leisure boat, or is it a converted carrying boat?

If the latter, was it originally of riveted or welded construction?  Did it originally have a metal bottom, or was it of composite, (metal sides, wooden bottom), construction?

 

A picture (or several pictures!) would make it far easier to give sensible advice.

[pebble77]

Thank you for the replies!

 

here are some phots/info

 

i have some interior ones too if that helps?

 

[pebble77]

[MtB]

1 hour ago, pebble77 said:

but am interested in knowing if a boat of this age might be considered best avoided?

 

 

Well yes, this boat IS best avoided. Far better to buy a new one.

 

Yes very trite but to expand on this, a more considered answer HAS to depend on the price being asked, along with both your personal circumstances and your practical abilities.

 

It looks to me like a recipe for trouble but if it is cheap, say £5k or maybe £10k tops and you are very handy, resourceful and resilient, it could be a worthwhile buy for you.

 

When you say "This would be my first boat/home", are you planning to be a continuous cruiser or moor up on a paid-for permanent mooring? 

[Graham Davis]

That looks remarkably like an early Springer.

[alan_fincher]

Thanks for posting all that.

I'm afraid I don't recognise the boat manufacturer or type at all.  Let us hope that somebody with more knowledge than me can.

 

Clearly it is purpose built as a leisure boat, and not a conversion of something older.

 

A measured thickness of 3mm just above water line of 3mm is probably fine, but I suspect sufficiently thin that you might not be able to secure comprehensive insurance.  If that matters to you, I would make enquiries of some of the firms specialising in narrow boat insurance.

[pebble77]

The owners have excepted an offer for £6000, subject to a survey etc. This is all I can afford right now. I would love to buy a new one!! but beggars can't be choosers as they say, and I am really really keen to have my own space, although obviously not if it will be biting off more than I can chew.

 

It is currently moored in a marina which I would continue with until the interior/aesthetic work is completed.

I'm pretty handy and willing to learn, but I am a novice.

 

When the work is completed I would want to be a continuous cruiser.

 

Thank you for your input!

[pebble77]

I have rang a couple of insurers and been offered a quote, so it seems okay in that department for now.

Can you overplate on 3mm or can that be considered too thin do you know?

 

thanks again!

9 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

Thanks for posting all that.

I'm afraid I don't recognise the boat manufacturer or type at all.  Let us hope that somebody with more knowledge than me can.

 

Clearly it is purpose built as a leisure boat, and not a conversion of something older.

 

A measured thickness of 3mm just above water line of 3mm is probably fine, but I suspect sufficiently thin that you might not be able to secure comprehensive insurance.  If that matters to you, I would make enquiries of some of the firms specialising in narrow boat insurance.

 

[MtB]

3 minutes ago, pebble77 said:

The owners have excepted an offer for £6000, subject to a survey etc. This is all I can afford right now. I would love to buy a new one!! but beggars can't be choosers as they say, and I am really really keen to have my own space, although obviously not if it will be biting off more than I can chew.

 

 

Well this is obviously impossible for any of us here to know, but for £6k it's hard to see it going too badly wrong. About the worst tht can happen is your £6k turns out to have been wasted. Could you cope with that or would it be an utter disaster, personally? £6k is less than a year's rent on a one bed house in the south or midlands, I'd have thought. 

 

 

[zenataomm]

When Sam Springer started in the 70s I recall he made a DIY version.  It arrived at your chosen address as a stack of pre cut rusty steel sheet.

I'm doubting the 50s claim for this boat and wondering if it might have been a Springer kit.

[MtB]

8 minutes ago, pebble77 said:

Can you overplate on 3mm or can that be considered too thin do you know?

 

 

I wouldn't worry about that on. £6k boat. There is just SO MUCH ol' tosh written on the net about overplating. Yes perhaps you should consider it on a boat costing say £35k but on a £6k boat? Nah. Just use it until it rusts through and sinks. In reality you'll prolly die before that happens. 

 

 

4 minutes ago, zenataomm said:

I'm doubting the 50s claim for this boat and wondering if it might have been a Springer kit.

 

 

 

I wondered that too but it looks wrong for a Springer. I don't think Sam was building that early anyway, let alone flogging his kits.

 

I reckon it really is a home-brew which cost perhaps £150 to build originally.

 

Have to say like you I doubt the 1953 date though - 1973 seems more likely. 

Edited October 17, 2022 by MtB

[Arthur Marshall]

When mine was overplated last the steel in some places was so thin you could see through it. They had to plate higher up the sides than usual to find steel good enough to weld to. The water had been held out by the blacking. The full plate job, bottom and sides on a 40 foot cost nine grand and gave me a boat that will last another twenty years  which is longer than I will.

Just put enough aside so that when the time comes you can get it done and you'll have a boat for a lifetime - mine was a wreck when I bought it, because it was all I could afford, and thirty years later I've still got it.

Edited October 17, 2022 by Arthur Marshall

[RB-T]

The moustache on the bow makes you think it's a Springer, but it doesn't look quite right, unless it's been messed about with. I agree it looks like a 70's boat. Is it a V-shaped hull? I was in the market for one years ago that needed overplating, and when I called around some boatyards they said they don't touch Springers because the metal has to be shaped and they don't want that kind of work. If it's been overplated though you're good, but that issue is something to think about for the future. 

[matty40s]

If it's a flat bottom, it's a home build, niche builder type. If it's got a slight V then it resembles early water bug styles...early 1970s.

The hull has been overplated and if sound as survey suggests, will have quite a few years left before it gets risky again. 

For that price, have a survey done, (yourself), and weigh up the pros and cons of an old boat that has had a rebuild done already.

£6k is scrappage price nowadays, some brokerages are selling similar provenance for £12-18k

[ditchcrawler]

10 minutes ago, matty40s said:

If it's a flat bottom, it's a home build, niche builder type. If it's got a slight V then it resembles early water bug styles...early 1970s.

The hull has been overplated and if sound as survey suggests, will have quite a few years left before it gets risky again. 

For that price, have a survey done, (yourself), and weigh up the pros and cons of an old boat that has had a rebuild done already.

£6k is scrappage price nowadays, some brokerages are selling similar provenance for £12-18k

It looks a very rounder bow for a Springer

[pebble77]

All interesting points! thanks everyone.

 

I am inclined to hedge my bets with it if the survey is okay then. As Mtb said, its roughly what I'd be paying in rent for a flat and whatever happens in the years to come I am sure I would learn a lot! So for 6k its probably worth it.

 

I think its a flat bottom...

39 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

I wouldn't worry about that on. £6k boat. There is just SO MUCH ol' tosh written on the net about overplating. Yes perhaps you should consider it on a boat costing say £35k but on a £6k boat? Nah. Just use it until it rusts through and sinks. In reality you'll prolly die before that happens. 

 

 

 

 

 

I wondered that too but it looks wrong for a Springer. I don't think Sam was building that early anyway, let alone flogging his kits.

 

I reckon it really is a home-brew which cost perhaps £150 to build originally.

 

Have to say like you I doubt the 1953 date though - 1973 seems more likely. 

its weird if it is from the 70's, I wonder why they would get that wrong?

[zenataomm]

3 minutes ago, pebble77 said:

its weird if it is from the 70's, I wonder why they would get that wrong?

 

Chinese whispers, with no official paperwork to refer to.  It only takes one person to get something wrong or transpose something and history gets re-written.  It suggests in the blurb that The Lister engine may be original.  Well, the engine can be accurately dated to the year it was made by the serial number.

[merline]

Seems strange they would pick such an unlikely year...

Awful lot of estimation going on in what I assume is brokers blurb? 

[pebble77]

Great idea! I will definitely look the engine up

Just now, merline said:

Seems strange they would pick such an unlikely year...

Awful lot of estimation going on in what I assume is brokers blurb? 

and in the facebook marketplace ad it says 1947?!

 

[MtB]

24 minutes ago, pebble77 said:

I think its a flat bottom...

its weird if it is from the 70's, I wonder why they would get that wrong?

 

Deffly not a Springer then.

 

They would get it wrong from guessing, because there is no written evidence and they know you can't demonstrate otherwise. 

 

If you decide to press the point, ask them for evidence it is 1953. I predict they won't be able to produce any, other than waffle and blathering. But it doesn't matter anyway what the exact date is, once you get beyond about 25 years. 

 

[matty40s]

41 minutes ago, MtB said:

 But it doesn't matter anyway what the exact date is, once you get beyond about 25 years. 

 

Unless you look at post number 5...

.

.

.

.

.