Considering wat liveaboard to go for...Broads cruiser i reckon ?

[W+T]

Hi all. 

 

Looks like in the not so sure future we will be going it full time afloat. Just planning ahead as i could be getting the boat in next year or so and doing it up to our spec over time. depending on the boat a shell will be fine. 

 

Anyway, not mad on narrow boats, wide beam yes but to costly  looking at wide beams and we have been looking at a few Broads cruisers. Not in the real but looking at prices and whats about. can get them at good prices.

 

Main question here is that we will be staying up north and CC`ing. I spoke to just a couple of folk many years ago who had them on the L&L, from Leigh to Blackburn, and said they were ok cruising etc etc just depth was shallow in places. Not a clue though on which boats they had though a sit was so long ago. 

 

 

Have many folk got experience of the northern region with broads cruisers and size. 

 

C Faffer

[Bargebuilder]

A friend of mine bought one for his daughter to live in down south. Her issue with it was, it was difficult and costly to keep warm. They struggled to fit sufficient insulation behind the panels and the windows were huge and single glazed and haemorrhaged heat. 

 

It wasn't comfortable to live in, because the poor insulation meant that at head level it was hot and stuffy, but you couldn't sit and relax without your legs and feet feeling cold. She didn't keep the boat for very long and now lives in a flat.

[blackrose]

That's the main thing. I reckon Broads cruisers would make pretty good liveaboards IF you take all the lining out and insulate behind with lots of Rockwool and vapour barrier. You'd need to do something about all those windows too like secondary double glazing using 3mm UV stabilised acrylic or perspex sheet, otherwise you'd have no end of condensation in winter.

[Tony Brooks]

I think much depends upon the design. I suspect it would be difficult to make a centre cockpit cruiser with the engine under a raised sliding roof really comfortable for winter. Whereas something like a flat floor Caribbean with its flat cabin sides would be far easier to insulate, but headroom may well limit what you can put in the roof. I suspect the only insulation in the roof is slabs of balsa wood inserted when it was laid up.

[Bargebuilder]

Given the lack of space behind the panels, maybe a multifoil material such as 'Superquilt' could be used, so long as each piece is sealed to the last and around the edges. 

 

Double glazing the windows would be difficult, because whatever material you use, you will need a 3/4" air gap to get a good degree of insulation. I had factory made double glazed sealed units on my barge, but the air gap was only 6mm and it didn't help much at all; still cold and with lots of condensation.

[Bacchus]

A friend of mine has lived on one of the single-level, Frank Wildes versions for years very comfortably. Mind you he is on a residential mooring with boats either side so he raised the roof by a foot for headroom and insulation, did away with all the side-windows, put a double-glazed panoramic window in the bow and stuck a double-glazed wheelhouse over the after-deck (with forward tilted windows, creating what he described as the world's first broads trawler 🤣) so probably not really relevant to a CCer, but I do see many live-aboard versions going up and down so it's do-able. I had a Bounty 44 which was very comfortable for cruising in winter, but not sure that I would like to have lived on it 24/7

[W+T]

I agree that would be a problem on a broads cruiser. I would rater get a  shell and rebuild it. therefore i would use PIR foam in either board where i can or spray. I can always if need be fit DG windows, block up a few even depending on design/set out of windows. I find PIR foam the best of all insulation when fitted properly that is. 

Engines i would rather an outdrive than shaft. saves space and easier when prop fouled. 

 

The bigger the project the sooner it will be bought aswell.  

 

[Bargebuilder]

2 minutes ago, W+T said:

Engines i would rather an outdrive than shaft. saves space and easier when prop fouled. 

Stern drives might allow the engine to be positioned further aft, but do they save any space? 

 

You can access a stern drive prop fairly easily, but it's very easy to clear a shaft drive propeller from a weed hatch. 

 

Stern drives stick out and can therefore be vulnerable to collision. They are made of an aluminium alloy that is vulnerable to corrosion.

They are often accused of being very expensive to repair or re-condition.

Stern drives are said to wear and or fail more readily than shaft drives.

 

Before you decide which is best for you, ask people who own both, lots of questions about servicing and reliability.

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

42 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

Stern drives might allow the engine to be positioned further aft, but do they save any space? 

 

You can access a stern drive prop fairly easily, but it's very easy to clear a shaft drive propeller from a weed hatch. 

 

Stern drives stick out and can therefore be vulnerable to collision. They are made of an aluminium alloy that is vulnerable to corrosion.

They are often accused of being very expensive to repair or re-condition.

Stern drives are said to wear and or fail more readily than shaft drives.

 

Before you decide which is best for you, ask people who own both, lots of questions about servicing and reliability.

 

 

 

I have owned both (On GRP cruisers)

 

The 1st was a Fairline Corniche with twin Volvo 6-litre engines and twin outdrives. 

We were Sea based and did 1000s of miles up the West coast around Scotland, over to Ireland etc etc and never had a single problem with the OutDrive - except once, half way to the IoM we picked up a plastic bag which wrapped itself around the leg and covered the water intake. As soon as we stopped and lifted the leg the bag fell off, and we carried on.

Outdrives are very much like an 'outboard' but with the engine separated from the drive.

The drive, and propellor sits below the bottom of the transom of the boat - not a problem at sea, but on shallow canals would not be very safe from damage.

 

I'd guess that any canal 'old' boat is unlikely to have modern Volvo out-drives and it will have a 'prehistoric' Enfield drive leg - spawn of the devil and awful to work on or find parts.

 

Bob Knowles is now manufacturing Enfield Z-drives, maybe the spares problems are over ?

Bob Knowles Marine – Manufacturer of the Enfield Z Drive

 

 

I'd not have a canal boat with outdrives.

 

It was the only boat (GRP or steel) that I've had with outdrives.

 

 

 

Shaft Drive :

 

I've had (I think) 17 boats with shaft drive, both steel and GRP.

Obviously the 'known technology' of the canals is a steel NB with a shaft drive and a 'skeg protected' prop.

 

 

I'd strongly suggest that with the continuing shift of the canal bottom to be nearer the top (plus all of the crap in the canals) a shaft drive is the only realistic drive method.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[Bacchus]

I wouldn't want outdrives on a canal boat for the reasons already cited. My Bounty had a weed-hatch, so some of them definitely come with that option.

 

Also - the sliding wheelhouses might be lovely in the summer (if they still work, a lot of them are quite old and knackered now) but the "big sunroof" versions will be easier to insulate

[Tony Brooks]

1 hour ago, W+T said:

I agree that would be a problem on a broads cruiser. I would rater get a  shell and rebuild it. therefore i would use PIR foam in either board where i can or spray. I can always if need be fit DG windows, block up a few even depending on design/set out of windows. I find PIR foam the best of all insulation when fitted properly that is. 

Engines i would rather an outdrive than shaft. saves space and easier when prop fouled. 

 

The bigger the project the sooner it will be bought aswell.  

 

 

Be aware that many of the Broads flat floor boats have transverse engines and hydraulic drives. I doubt an inline engine and outdrive would save on space, but would make prop clearing easier. I gave seen one retrofitted, but am sure it had a bit of an engine box in the back cabin.

[W+T]

I didnt know they had weed hatches. if the have weed hatches then that makes life more easier. as said canals are full or crap. canals i have been on we got prop fouling near every cruise we went out on. 

I get your points on outdrives. if i did go that way i would have refurbed fitted as in VP 270/280 etc. adaptors made to suit. Outdrives are as good as the maintenance given i reckon. 

If i found one on shaft then i would make a weed hatch if it was possible with the position the prop is in. 

 

trying to find the setup for the common type of drive set up. which as Tony Brooks says  is transverse engines and hydraulic drives.. just to see about weed hatch etc for prop fouling

[Naughty Cal]

We considered doing just this for a long time. It was only moving house that put a stop to the plans.

 

We had it pinned down to a choice of two boats both based on the Alphacraft 35ft hull. We hired both with a view to seeking out any major issues with converting to a liveaboard.

 

The first and cheaper option was the Alphacraft 35. It offers a huge amount of space for a 35ft boat. We prefer the later versions with the saloon aft and the second cabin midships. The galley is massive running along the starboard side and had plenty of room for domestic sized appliances. Downsides were the sliding roof which is always a source of draughts and the bow cabin getting surprisingly hot due to all the glass even in dull conditions on cool days. I suspect insulated screen covers would be necessary in the summer.

 

 

Option 2 was the Alphacraft 35 Highliner. A more expensive option but a much more modern boat and difficult to get hold of.

 

Based on the same hull as our other option (which is a cracking hull which is tried and tested) but with a different superstructure. 

 

The lack of sliding roof made this a much warmer boat but the more modern and sloping styling of the superstructure made the interior feel much smaller especially so in the bow cabin which in this boat becomes the second cabin. The aft cabin being much larger. The galley was a lot smaller but still usable. The interior driving position had limited visibility but was still OK.

 

We loved the outside space of this one.

 

 

Having a good poke around both boats we decided that both could be suitably insulated without much effort. 

 

The major downsides were tank sizes. They are all tiny with limited space to install bigger. The fuel tanks only hold a weeks worth of fuel about 60-70 litres. The water tanks a couple of days to three days worth and the holding tanks a weeks worth.

 

Working the ropes from the bow of any of these boats isn't ideal. They have big safe side decks but limited if any bow rails to keep you completely safe up there. A consideration when working through big river locks or on tidal waters. Although we decided this could be worked around.

 

Oh and they all have comedy handling. Absolutely no steering in reverse with prop walk that changes direction as and when it pleases (or as the water hits the keel I suspect) and the R Send is a little tail happy and swings out massively on bends. We found these traits quite endearing on both boats 🤣🤣🤣

 

Had things panned out differently we could easily have been living on one of these by now. We have not ruled out that at some point in the (distant) future we may have something similar for pleasure purposes.

38 minutes ago, W+T said:

I didnt know they had weed hatches. if the have weed hatches then that makes life more easier. as said canals are full or crap. canals i have been on we got prop fouling near every cruise we went out on. 

I get your points on outdrives. if i did go that way i would have refurbed fitted as in VP 270/280 etc. adaptors made to suit. Outdrives are as good as the maintenance given i reckon. 

If i found one on shaft then i would make a weed hatch if it was possible with the position the prop is in. 

 

trying to find the setup for the common type of drive set up. which as Tony Brooks says  is transverse engines and hydraulic drives.. just to see about weed hatch etc for prop fouling

We would never have outdrives again.

 

They are the work of the devil.

 

Expensive to maintain, expensive for parts, doing any work needs a lift out and hold at the least (bar changing props if you don't mind getting your hands wet) and they are fickle. So so fickle.

 

Any advantages are outweighed by the disadvantages many times over.

 

We spent more money on the drive than everything else on the boat put together!

[W+T]

just mooching and found this, almost prefect project for me. and price

 

https://www.rightboat.com/boats-for-sale/bourne/40-2dfdb695-19bf-43dd-9896-01a3474069be/rb477999

[Alan de Enfield]

31 minutes ago, W+T said:

just mooching and found this, almost prefect project for me. and price

 

https://www.rightboat.com/boats-for-sale/bourne/40-2dfdb695-19bf-43dd-9896-01a3474069be/rb477999

 

 

Looks ideal 

[Naughty Cal]

37 minutes ago, W+T said:

just mooching and found this, almost prefect project for me. and price

 

https://www.rightboat.com/boats-for-sale/bourne/40-2dfdb695-19bf-43dd-9896-01a3474069be/rb477999

Looks suspiciously cheap!

 

(Also claims to be for sale with NYA but doesn't appear on their website!)

Edited July 30, 2023 by Naughty Cal

[W+T]

8 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Looks ideal 

we would want min 40 footer. sliding top on that i would make fixed and extend to make a larger wheel house. 

 

Atleast there about when it comes. poss next year, depends on when we diced to start it. got this boat to finish and enjoy first. 

6 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

Looks suspiciously cheap!

see a couple that cheap, but only 35 footers. 

 

i get you though. still should get a shell for £10-£15k 

Like i do  

 

all this control is bad with shaft drive in reverse etc etc. but good on outdrives both ways just risky with outdrives

 

Maybe convert to outboard-inboard. So like some Dawncraft, Outboard fitted inside the transom. could do that easy enough. 

Edited July 30, 2023 by W+T

[Naughty Cal]

5 minutes ago, W+T said:

we would want min 40 footer. sliding top on that i would make fixed and extend to make a larger wheel house. 

 

Atleast there about when it comes. poss next year, depends on when we diced to start it. got this boat to finish and enjoy first. 

see a couple that cheap, but only 35 footers. 

 

i get you though. still should get a shell for £10-£15k 

Like i do  

 

all thsi contorll is bad wit saft drive in reverse etc etc. but good on outdrives both ways just risky with outdrives

 

Maybe convert to outboard-inboard. So like some Dawncraft, Outboard fitted inside the transom. could do that easy enough. 

Keep it simple. The drive system it has will have worked fine for the last 30-40 years. Don't change it.

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

Funny thing, only chatting to a guy with a broads cruiser yesterday, he said it was an issue not having a weed hatch and having to get into the canal to clear the prop every time was a pain.

Edited July 30, 2023 by BoatinglifeupNorth

[W+T]

5 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

Keep it simple. The drive system it has will have worked fine for the last 30-40 years. Don't change it.

 

So how is prop fouling sorted  

 

Main thing for me to keep and inboard is power for charging and calorifier.  

 

I am just talking about wat pops in my head lol. all sorts, it scares me still haha 

 

2 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

Funny thing, only chatting to a guy with a broads cruiser yesterday., he said it was an issue not having a weed hatch and having to get into the canal to clear the prop every time was a pain.

 

I would defo add one if i got one tat needed it. 

[Naughty Cal]

13 minutes ago, W+T said:

 

So how is prop fouling sorted  

 

Main thing for me to keep and inboard is power for charging and calorifier.  

 

I am just talking about wat pops in my head lol. all sorts, it scares me still haha 

 

 

I would defo add one if i got one tat needed it. 

A quick dip in the water or hiring the services of the local dive centre.

 

We never thought that would be such a problem if I'm honest.

[W+T]

7 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

A quick dip in the water or hiring the services of the local dive centre.

 

We never thought that would be such a problem if I'm honest.

 

for the cost tough to get somebody to come out to remove a plastic bag seems daft wen you can do it yourself with a weed hatch. and amount of time we have had prop fouled is ridiculous.  thats on the L&L and Lancaster. 

[Naughty Cal]

You were perhaps unlucky.

 

Of course we had some prop fouls but nothing that couldn't have been sorted without a quick dip if we couldn't sort it from the stern.

 

In fact even with the sterndrive there were several times Liam had to go for a dip. 

 

If all else fails a tow to the nearest slipway and drag it R Send up the slipway so you can work in shallow water. 

 

Prop fouls were never one of our worries!

[Bargebuilder]

I've been on waterways where I've needed to use the weed hatch several times a day.

 

If it's a GRP boat, then adding a weed hatch wouldn't be that difficult for a competent DIYer.

Epoxy resin and biaxial cloth is simplicity itself to use. The first experience I had using it was installing a bow thruster, and I'd happily undertake building weed hatch.

[ditchcrawler]

2 hours ago, Naughty Cal said:

We considered doing just this for a long time. It was only moving house that put a stop to the plans.

 

We had it pinned down to a choice of two boats both based on the Alphacraft 35ft hull. We hired both with a view to seeking out any major issues with converting to a liveaboard.

 

The first and cheaper option was the Alphacraft 35. It offers a huge amount of space for a 35ft boat. We prefer the later versions with the saloon aft and the second cabin midships. The galley is massive running along the starboard side and had plenty of room for domestic sized appliances. Downsides were the sliding roof which is always a source of draughts and the bow cabin getting surprisingly hot due to all the glass even in dull conditions on cool days. I suspect insulated screen covers would be necessary in the summer.

 

 

Option 2 was the Alphacraft 35 Highliner. A more expensive option but a much more modern boat and difficult to get hold of.

 

Based on the same hull as our other option (which is a cracking hull which is tried and tested) but with a different superstructure. 

 

The lack of sliding roof made this a much warmer boat but the more modern and sloping styling of the superstructure made the interior feel much smaller especially so in the bow cabin which in this boat becomes the second cabin. The aft cabin being much larger. The galley was a lot smaller but still usable. The interior driving position had limited visibility but was still OK.

 

We loved the outside space of this one.

 

 

Having a good poke around both boats we decided that both could be suitably insulated without much effort. 

 

The major downsides were tank sizes. They are all tiny with limited space to install bigger. The fuel tanks only hold a weeks worth of fuel about 60-70 litres. The water tanks a couple of days to three days worth and the holding tanks a weeks worth.

 

Working the ropes from the bow of any of these boats isn't ideal. They have big safe side decks but limited if any bow rails to keep you completely safe up there. A consideration when working through big river locks or on tidal waters. Although we decided this could be worked around.

 

Oh and they all have comedy handling. Absolutely no steering in reverse with prop walk that changes direction as and when it pleases (or as the water hits the keel I suspect) and the R Send is a little tail happy and swings out massively on bends. We found these traits quite endearing on both boats 🤣🤣🤣

 

Had things panned out differently we could easily have been living on one of these by now. We have not ruled out that at some point in the (distant) future we may have something similar for pleasure purposes.

We would never have outdrives again.

 

They are the work of the devil.

 

Expensive to maintain, expensive for parts, doing any work needs a lift out and hold at the least (bar changing props if you don't mind getting your hands wet) and they are fickle. So so fickle.

 

Any advantages are outweighed by the disadvantages many times over.

 

We spent more money on the drive than everything else on the boat put together!

But most people don't maintain them like you did, they run them until they fall apart