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

[Tony Brooks]

3 hours ago, W+T said:

I have been trying to find tat out Tony. I like the look of the Aquafibre 44 but unable to see any pictures or info. so tanks for that. When i have a few weekends free ill go out  and look at a few on the dry if i can find some. O my struggle also at it seems not many around for my 10-15k budget.   

 

Had a Google for images and there seems to be at least two variations. A conventional back cabin version or one with a rear cockpit for open air sitting/boarding over the transom.  In both cases I expect the engine will be an inline unit under a raised centre cockpit floor, so a long prop shaft.

 

One way to make an informed guess as to where the prop is would be to look for the rudder stock inside the boat. The prop is likely to be (say) 6 to 12 inches in front of that. On the conventional version, I would expect it to be inside a centrally mounted cupboard against the rear bulkhead. I have no idea about the aft cockpit versions, but I would expect a raised cockpit floor with the rudder stock below it. This is all based on Broads practices with similar designs of wooden cruiser of yesteryear.

 

You may even find that the boat has a hollow, opened toped keel that the shaft runs in towards the stern. If it has, then where that keel ends gives a fair idea about where the prop will be. I doubt the GRP at the end of the keel will be more that about an inch thick and then there will be the back bearing housing maybe about 6" long. (This is based on the Caribbean from Wildes).

 

PS, I would not be surprised if at least some of those boats turned out to have a hydraulic drive to do away with the shaft and potentially allow a  lower back cabin floor.

Edited August 1, 2023 by Tony Brooks

[Bargebuilder]

2 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

I would not be surprised if at least some of those boats turned out to have a hydraulic drive to do away with the shaft

How much does fuel efficiency suffer with a hydraulic drive? It's a consideration with diesel prices as they have been and might return to in the future.

[Naughty Cal]

11 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

How much does fuel efficiency suffer with a hydraulic drive? It's a consideration with diesel prices as they have been and might return to in the future.

We hired boats with both traditional shafts and hydraulic drives and there was no discernible difference between the fuel economy for either. 

 

The benefit of the hydraulic drive being that the engine can be located further aft, often outside the living accommodation so noise levels are greatly reduced when cruising.

 

The engine on the sliding centre cockpit version of the Alphacraft 35 we like is beneath the helm which is raised up. The prop is just behind the keel. There was access to the shaft and gland beneath the saloon floor but no access to the prop which would have been a little further back and beneath the steel skeg.

 

Not the best pictures but they give an idea of the set up:

 

 

 

I don't think adding a weed hatch would be an option on this boat.

 

ETA:

 

Looks like a weed hatch on the Alphacraft Highliner we like would be even more difficult. The prop appears to be further back and beneath the rear section of superstructure.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Naughty Cal

[Tony Brooks]

12 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

How much does fuel efficiency suffer with a hydraulic drive? It's a consideration with diesel prices as they have been and might return to in the future.

 

It depends upon the drive components. Those using piston pumps and motors are the most efficient, whilst those using gear or vane pumps are the worst. You need hydraulic oil coolers in all cases, so that suggests less efficiency than a shaft drive (even those with hydraulic gearboxes because hydraulic gearboxes transmit the torque mechanically, not via the oil).

 

They are used because of their other attributes, like the freedom to mount the engine where you like and/or providing a power source for things like hydraulic bow thrusters. They also require no engine alignment and no prop thrust is transferred to the engine mounts.

 

I have never measured it, but I suspect between a loss of 5% efficiency for a new piston system and maybe 20% or 30% for an old and worn gear pump system. I think that we have at least one member with a hydraulic drive so maybe they can comment.

 

Edit: I have just seen Naughty Cal's post and would comment that they seemed to drive their own boat far faster than canal/Broads speeds so it depends upon what they are comparing the hydraulic drives boats with.

Edited August 1, 2023 by Tony Brooks

[peterboat]

On 30/07/2023 at 13:17, W+T said:

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

I had the bathtub it was fine up North, just make sure you insulate it properly. They hardly draw any water and the older ones are built like battle ships! Mine swam well better than any narrowboat or widebeam. 46 foot one wou6be nice

11 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

We hired boats with both traditional shafts and hydraulic drives and there was no discernible difference between the fuel economy for either. 

 

The benefit of the hydraulic drive being that the engine can be located further aft, often outside the living accommodation so noise levels are greatly reduced when cruising.

 

The engine on the sliding centre cockpit version of the Alphacraft 35 we like is beneath the helm which is raised up. The prop is just behind the keel. There was access to the shaft and gland beneath the saloon floor but no access to the prop which would have been a little further back and beneath the steel skeg.

 

Not the best pictures but they give an idea of the set up:

 

 

 

I don't think adding a weed hatch would be an option on this boat.

 

ETA:

 

Looks like a weed hatch on the Alphacraft Highliner we like would be even more difficult. The prop appears to be further back and beneath the rear section of superstructure.

 

 

 

 

My .mate who has my old bathtub is putting a weed hatch in on the Alpacraft

[IanD]

2 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

It depends upon the drive components. Those using piston pumps and motors are the most efficient, whilst those using gear or vane pumps are the worst. You need hydraulic oil coolers in all cases, so that suggests less efficiency than a shaft drive (even those with hydraulic gearboxes because hydraulic gearboxes transmit the torque mechanically, not via the oil).

 

They are used because of their other attributes, like the freedom to mount the engine where you like and/or providing a power source for things like hydraulic bow thrusters. They also require no engine alignment and no prop thrust is transferred to the engine mounts.

 

I have never measured it, but I suspect between a loss of 5% efficiency for a new piston system and maybe 20% or 30% for an old and worn gear pump system. I think that we have at least one member with a hydraulic drive so maybe they can comment.

 

The loss of efficiency is bigger than than that, I looked at bent-axis piston hydraulic motors/pumps (e.g. Parker-Hannefin F11) some time ago and the efficiency of each one is typically 95% meaning 90% overall, plus there will be some additional losses due to pressure drops in the piping/oil cooler so maybe 85% is the best that can be expected, or maybe 80% if the piping runs are longer. They're also about £2000 each, so at least £5000 for a system including all the gubbins...

[Bargebuilder]

It's surprising how a weed hatch can be squeezed into the tightest of spaces if you try. The photo is of a narrowbeam grp canal cruiser with very little space between the cutless bearing and the rudder, but the hatch (circled in yellow) is plenty large enough to comfortably and safely remove weed and rubbish from the propeller from inside the aft cabin.

[Naughty Cal]

48 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

It depends upon the drive components. Those using piston pumps and motors are the most efficient, whilst those using gear or vane pumps are the worst. You need hydraulic oil coolers in all cases, so that suggests less efficiency than a shaft drive (even those with hydraulic gearboxes because hydraulic gearboxes transmit the torque mechanically, not via the oil).

 

They are used because of their other attributes, like the freedom to mount the engine where you like and/or providing a power source for things like hydraulic bow thrusters. They also require no engine alignment and no prop thrust is transferred to the engine mounts.

 

I have never measured it, but I suspect between a loss of 5% efficiency for a new piston system and maybe 20% or 30% for an old and worn gear pump system. I think that we have at least one member with a hydraulic drive so maybe they can comment.

 

Edit: I have just seen Naughty Cal's post and would comment that they seemed to drive their own boat far faster than canal/Broads speeds so it depends upon what they are comparing the hydraulic drives boats with.

I was comparing the boats we have hired. We hired Broads boats based on the same hull with both traditional shaft drive and hydraulic drive.

 

The fuel consumption was similar with both.

 

42 minutes ago, peterboat said:

I had the bathtub it was fine up North, just make sure you insulate it properly. They hardly draw any water and the older ones are built like battle ships! Mine swam well better than any narrowboat or widebeam. 46 foot one wou6be nice

My .mate who has my old bathtub is putting a weed hatch in on the Alpacraft

I would be interested to see the pictures of the finished article.

 

We certainly didn't think it would be an option. 

[peterboat]

10 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

I was comparing the boats we have hired. We hired Broads boats based on the same hull with both traditional shaft drive and hydraulic drive.

 

The fuel consumption was similar with both.

 

I would be interested to see the pictures of the finished article.

 

We certainly didn't think it would be an option. 

I will take pictures, its on the Hard at Dronfield outside his unit. Think its going to be a prefabricated stainless steel box with flanges etc to do it

[Tony Brooks]

4 minutes ago, peterboat said:

I will take pictures, its on the Hard at Dronfield outside his unit. Think its going to be a prefabricated stainless steel box with flanges etc to do it

 

Well, if you bolt down with countersunk holes under the hull and glass over them, then GRP all around the bolts & flange I think that will be a strong as you need and it won't compromise the hull strength too much. I would bolt down onto a wooden pad with plenty of sealer before glassing it all in.

[ditchcrawler]

3 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

I have never measured it, but I suspect between a loss of 5% efficiency for a new piston system and maybe 20% or 30% for an old and worn gear pump system. I think that we have at least one member with a hydraulic drive so maybe they can comment.

 

 

 

I have no idea as I can't compare it to anything without removing it and fitting a gear box. I have ample power from the old BD3 to push the boat along so its not something I worry about

 

[Bargebuilder]

3 hours ago, IanD said:

 

The loss of efficiency is bigger than than that, I looked at bent-axis piston hydraulic motors/pumps (e.g. Parker-Hannefin F11) some time ago and the efficiency of each one is typically 95% meaning 90% overall, plus there will be some additional losses due to pressure drops in the piping/oil cooler so maybe 85% is the best that can be expected, or maybe 80% if the piping runs are longer. They're also about £2000 each, so at least £5000 for a system including all the gubbins...

Given a choice, when buying a second hand boat, perhaps more complicated, more expensive to look after and less efficient than a shaft drive then?

[IanD]

16 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

Given a choice, when buying a second hand boat, perhaps more complicated, more expensive to look after and less efficient than a shaft drive then?

Yes. But also allows much more freedom about where to put the engine (midships? bows?) without having a prop shaft, and can power a hydraulic bow thruster, so not all bad.

 

Having said that I hired a wideboat with a hydraulic bow thruster, and the engine had to be revved up to make it effective -- which is exactly what you often don't want to do. IMHO a modern electric one like the Vetus Pro series is a better solution -- variable speed not just on-off, quieter, and doesn't overheat rapidly like many old-school electrical ones.

Edited August 1, 2023 by IanD

[Bacchus]

Cheap Broads-style cruiser project on the Duck at the moment @W+T

 

https://www.apolloduck.co.uk/boat/dawncraft-dc30-for-sale/739251

 

I quite like the DC30s, they have a cute "face". And the hull must be one of the most versatile ever moulded, used in the (ubiquitous) Broom 30, Broom Skipper, and the Dawncraft/Aquafibre/Broom DC30. One of my neighbours has a 30 which has crossed the channel a number of times as a support boat with the ADSL and navigated a huge portion of the French Canals.

 

Don't know whether it has a weed-hatch though...

[W+T]

9 hours ago, Bacchus said:

Cheap Broads-style cruiser project on the Duck at the moment @W+T

 

https://www.apolloduck.co.uk/boat/dawncraft-dc30-for-sale/739251

 

I quite like the DC30s, they have a cute "face". And the hull must be one of the most versatile ever moulded, used in the (ubiquitous) Broom 30, Broom Skipper, and the Dawncraft/Aquafibre/Broom DC30. One of my neighbours has a 30 which has crossed the channel a number of times as a support boat with the ADSL and navigated a huge portion of the French Canals.

 

Don't know whether it has a weed-hatch though...

 

i would be getting atleast a 40 footer with 10 foot beam, preferable 12 foot, which i think all the 40-44 footer are 12 anyway. I am not into DC either and also all narrow beam. 

[Naughty Cal]

1 hour ago, W+T said:

 

i would be getting atleast a 40 footer with 10 foot beam, preferable 12 foot, which i think all the 40-44 footer are 12 anyway. I am not into DC either and also all narrow beam. 

Going for over 40ft will greatly reduce your choices.

[W+T]

3 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

Going for over 40ft will greatly reduce your choices.

its what is wanted though, no point going  second best. if we dont find a 40+ Aquafibre or similar broads cruiser then it will be another type of boat. 

[Tony Brooks]

2 hours ago, W+T said:

 

i would be getting atleast a 40 footer with 10 foot beam, preferable 12 foot, which i think all the 40-44 footer are 12 anyway. I am not into DC either and also all narrow beam. 

 

If you think DC stands for Dawncraft than I suspect the add is wrong. I don't know for sure but I am sure those boats that we had on the fleet had nothing to do with Dawncraft the canal cruiser builders. It seems it is a Broom hull, although Dawncraft might have bought the moulds.

Edited August 2, 2023 by Tony Brooks

[CIEL]

These Sancerres are very popular on the River Great Ouse - understand they were originally built for the Broads.

https://www.jonesboatyard.co.uk/boat-sales/sancerre-33-boat-for-sale-7430.html 

You may well find a "project" one at the boatyard at Roxton under the A1 trunk road bridge - Kelpie Marine.

It seems to have been sitting there for years gradually deteriorating. The name "Starting Ova" comes to mind.

11ft beam and relatively low air draught for 33 ft length.  Hydraulic drive.

Chris

[Bacchus]

1 hour ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

If you think DC stands for Dawncraft than I suspect the add is wrong. I don't know for sure but I am sure those boats that we had on the fleet had nothing to do with Dawncraft the canal cruiser builders. It seems it is a Broom hull, although Dawncraft might have bought the moulds.

 

It's Dawncraft of Wroxham - a completely different company from Dawncraft the narrow GRP builders, and the DC30 is certainly not a narrow-beam. Yes, Broom hull, and a very excellent one too - the DCs were fitted by Broom, Dawncraft, and Aquafibre, probably amongst the best of the single-level cruisers but the OP seems to know better.

[W+T]

10 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

If you think DC stands for Dawncraft than I suspect the add is wrong. I don't know for sure but I am sure those boats that we had on the fleet had nothing to do with Dawncraft the canal cruiser builders. It seems it is a Broom hull, although Dawncraft might have bought the moulds.

Yes i was talking of DC as in NB cruisers. 

 

9 hours ago, CIEL said:

These Sancerres are very popular on the River Great Ouse - understand they were originally built for the Broads.

https://www.jonesboatyard.co.uk/boat-sales/sancerre-33-boat-for-sale-7430.html 

You may well find a "project" one at the boatyard at Roxton under the A1 trunk road bridge - Kelpie Marine.

It seems to have been sitting there for years gradually deteriorating. The name "Starting Ova" comes to mind.

11ft beam and relatively low air draught for 33 ft length.  Hydraulic drive.

Chris

 

still not long enough, nice boats though  there are plenty out there to look for. i always keep and eye open on my travels when working out and about the yards and marinas

 

9 hours ago, Bacchus said:

 

It's Dawncraft of Wroxham - a completely different company from Dawncraft the narrow GRP builders, and the DC30 is certainly not a narrow-beam. Yes, Broom hull, and a very excellent one too - the DCs were fitted by Broom, Dawncraft, and Aquafibre, probably amongst the best of the single-level cruisers but the OP seems to know better.

  

 ?????

 

[Naughty Cal]

Have you been on a 35ft x 12ft Broads boat?

 

They are absolutely cavernous.

 

You will have more choice in the sub 40ft length bracket that the 40ft plus length bracket.

 

An example of what they can fit into a sub 40ft hull. This one is 33ft x 12ft. Has 3 cabins, 2 en-suite, decent galley and decent saloon as well as internal helm and external helm on the flybridge.

 

https://www.boatshed.com/faircraft_33_hydroflow-boat-324364.html#boatmedia-65

Edited August 3, 2023 by Naughty Cal

[W+T]

4 hours ago, Naughty Cal said:

Have you been on a 35ft x 12ft Broads boat?

 

They are absolutely cavernous.

 

You will have more choice in the sub 40ft length bracket that the 40ft plus length bracket.

 

An example of what they can fit into a sub 40ft hull. This one is 33ft x 12ft. Has 3 cabins, 2 en-suite, decent galley and decent saloon as well as internal helm and external helm on the flybridge.

 

https://www.boatshed.com/faircraft_33_hydroflow-boat-324364.html#boatmedia-65

 

I wouldnt fancy that as a liveaboard Rach. for that money aswell i could find more suitable boats for a livaboard. 

[Naughty Cal]

55 minutes ago, W+T said:

 

I wouldnt fancy that as a liveaboard Rach. for that money aswell i could find more suitable boats for a livaboard. 

We actually had a good poke around one when it was on hire and decided it wouldn't make a bad liveaboard with the third cabin turned into a utility room.

 

Bit not saying that's what you should get just that you shouldn't rule out shorter boats, especially with such a limited budget.