Josher Bows

[carlt]

Roger Fuller is certainly better than most but I'd still say "josheresque" rather than "replica". Though you would be getting one of the best modern boats on the water.

 

Edited to say: Note the correct positioning of the fender, on Lupin, whilst underway.

Edited October 10, 2008 by carlt

[David Schweizer]

Your post illustrates very well what I wanted to say Carl. Whilst some builders can copy the shape correctly, I have yet to see one that actually mirrors the size of an "original" Josher. Despite the gracefull lines of Joshers, the bow is actually massive, as anyone who has moored in front of one can confirm.

[churchward]

Your post illustrates very well what I wanted to say Carl. Whilst some builders can copy the shape correctly, I have yet to see one that actually mirrors the size of an "original" Josher. Despite the gracefull lines of Joshers, the bow is actually massive, as anyone who has moored in front of one can confirm.

 

I agree. Grace is a smashing looking boat though.

 

I think it is true that most if not all replica "josher" bows I have seen are "in the styleof" rather than true faithful replica but some like NB Grace do look good. However, to my eye some (particularly the very pinched look) are bordering on the grotesque caricature and a few downright ugly. BUt if that is what folk want it is up to them.

Edited October 10, 2008 by churchward

[Chertsey]

This sounds like a stupid question even to me but I hope it isn't... How come it's so hard for modern boatbuilders to replicate the shape when Yarwoods et al could turn them out by the dozen a hundred years ago? It's not even as if they were all produced by one yard.

Supplementary question: were they all the same, or is the shape we think of now as quintessentially 'josher' associated with one particular builder or period?

[dove]

I agree. Grace is a smashing looking boat though.

 

I think it is true that most if not all replica "josher" bows I have seen are "in the styleof" rather than true faithful replica but some like NB Grace do look good. However, to my eye some (particularly the very pinched look) are bordering on the grotesque caricature and a few downright ugly. BUt if that is what folk want it is up to them.

 

You've also got to get the bottom bit correct too, to make it a proper Josher

 

 

Edited.... dont know what hapend to the pic

 

This sounds like a stupid question even to me but I hope it isn't... How come it's so hard for modern boatbuilders to replicate the shape when Yarwoods et al could turn them out by the dozen a hundred years ago? It's not even as if they were all produced by one yard.

Supplementary question: were they all the same, or is the shape we think of now as quintessentially 'josher' associated with one particular builder or period?

 

The plates they used were pressed to a template, if you look at my pic in the above post you can see the contruction.

 

Andrew

Edited October 10, 2008 by dove

[carlt]

This sounds like a stupid question even to me but I hope it isn't... How come it's so hard for modern boatbuilders to replicate the shape when Yarwoods et al could turn them out by the dozen a hundred years ago? It's not even as if they were all produced by one yard.

Supplementary question: were they all the same, or is the shape we think of now as quintessentially 'josher' associated with one particular builder or period?

It's hard because the majority of "boat builders" know nothing about boat building and are happy fabricating any steel tank, not just floating ones.

 

The boat builders that are capable of replicating a metal Josher bow are boat builders, like the originals, so why would you expect them not to add their distinctive touch, based on their talent?

 

As to the really nice Joshers (ie. the wooden ones) there are only 4 (maybe 5) builders, out there, capable of replicating one.

 

They weren't all the same but they were all built by FMC. Usk was built, by FMC, at uxbridge but is a different front end to, say, Clee.

 

The nicest bows were, of course, Nursers.

[magnetman]

I was told that they used a 50 ton press to get the double curves in the ironwork. don't know if that's true or if they were hand beaten, apparently some of the older boats (like the type 1 bantock for example) the iron plating was put in a fire then when red hot was beaten around a former, by hammers. but I believe the Joshers, being a bit later, were pressed. Don't know for sure though.

[David Schweizer]

This sounds like a stupid question even to me but I hope it isn't... How come it's so hard for modern boatbuilders to replicate the shape when Yarwoods et al could turn them out by the dozen a hundred years ago? It's not even as if they were all produced by one yard.

They could, but what most people don't realise is that there is a lot of boat under the waterline, and a recreational craft with a draught of nearly 4 ft would not sell well, so they have to compromise.. A few modern boats have been built to something approaching original Working Boat proportions, but the only two I am familiar with, were actually built for carrying.

 

Supplementary question: were they all the same, or is the shape we think of now as quintessentially 'josher' associated with one particular builder or period?

The boats known as Joshers were built for Fellows Morton and Clayton and named Joshers after Joshua Fellows. However a few other carriers had boats with a bow similar to Joshers, I am fairly sure that I have seen a Cowburn and Cowpar boat with Josher style bows, also from recollection, some of the Midland and Coast boats had similar lines. Carl will know.

Edited October 10, 2008 by David Schweizer

[blackrose]

I heard that some new build Josher style boats have a sliding bed that stows away under the bow deck where the coal bunker normally is.

 

Many Joshers have what seems to me to be a very low freeboard. Is the idea that they resemble loaded working boats? Nice idea but not very practical - I wouldn't want to be standing only a foot above the water on a tidal river.

[Phil Speight]

Your post illustrates very well what I wanted to say Carl. Whilst some builders can copy the shape correctly, I have yet to see one that actually mirrors the size of an "original" Josher. Despite the gracefull lines of Joshers, the bow is actually massive, as anyone who has moored in front of one can confirm.

Less apparently massive when loaded however . Most replica Josher for`ends ( from the handful of builders who actually make them ) are on relatively shallow draft boats but look convincing enough if the boat is ballasted sufficiently. They generally seem to appear about half-loaded! A simple test to begin a check on the validity of a claimed replica bow is to measure it from stem to deck-beam. A Josher is about 6`6" I believe. If it`s much less a replica it ain`t. Carl - I`m glad we agree about front fenders.

Cheers

Phil

 

I was told that they used a 50 ton press to get the double curves in the ironwork. don't know if that's true or if they were hand beaten, apparently some of the older boats (like the type 1 bantock for example) the iron plating was put in a fire then when red hot was beaten around a former, by hammers. but I believe the Joshers, being a bit later, were pressed. Don't know for sure though.

I have always understood that Joshers were pressed - which is why most ( but not all ) modern fabricators can`t replicate the shape properly . The original iron hulls took their shapes from their wooden forbears which is why the planking technique used by the best builders works so well in steel. Dave Harris , it is said , developed the first "planked" modern replica - a very convincing boat called "Duteous". That would be about 25 years ago I guess. There is more too it however - like the multi-curved for`deck for instance and the raised heart piece under the end of the stem bar. Only the very best of present day builders can do it properly.

Phil

[billh]

Roger Fuller is certainly better than most but I'd still say "josheresque" rather than "replica". Though you would be getting one of the best modern boats on the water.

 

Why is there a gorilla hanging off the side of that Josher?

Bill

[robkg]

Why is there a gorilla hanging off the side of that Josher?

Bill

Maybe he has mistaken it for a monkey boat

[Liam]

Another, fine example, of a Josher bow.. !

 

[magnetman]

Another, fine example, of a Josher bow.. !

 

[Chertsey]

Another, fine example, of a Josher bow.. !

 

Thought you were being ironic til I hit reply and saw (from the IMG code) that's what the makers actually call it on their own website. I think Magnetman definitely had a point....

 

You were being ironic, weren't you?

 

edited to add: Ah, once again MM puts it so much better.

Edited October 10, 2008 by WarriorWoman

[dave moore]

Hi all

Back again! Quality builders may well have to scale down the original bow slightly, depending on the height of the hull sides. Roger Fuller does a good job INHO and when Resolute was put together an original wasn't far away to inspire, tho' not copy slavishly. Most imitations fall short on foredeck length..at least 5'6" is needed forward of the deck beam...and the latest posted pictures make me prostrate with dismal if they are being claimed as Josher bows.

To me the problem is that newer comers to boating read the ads and assume the claims to be correct, having no knowledge to compare the product with.

It's good to note from earlier posts that all is not quite lost...there are still those out there who appreciate the finer points of the boatbuilder's art. Thanks folks!

Dave

[down the north]

All this stuff re 'josher bows' most interesting.

Myself and Keith Ball were trying this in the early 1980's experimenting on the best way to achieve the double planked effect. Most of the builders who describe their bows as josher style, basically only add this to con the punter that theyre about to get something special !!

One of the main contenders whose produced loads looslely described as above, is so far away from the original to be laughable, however the punters still arrive at the door and go away very pleased, however I have known the smile to dissapear after they saw a much better product from one of the 2 or 3 decent builders.

The idea of what looks beautiful, if it is carefully analysed, goes back to our roots and if you asked anyone to say 'why' one boat or another looks 'the best' most would struggle to describe the subtle points in design that achieves the 'perfect shape'.

 

Some people have an 'astists eye' and can readily identify a beautiful shape but having this skill in appreciating a quality shape, is something that many boatbuilders seek , but will never find, hence the 'stock' shape that comes out of the yard remains the same, and is never fine tuned towards the prototype shape.

When we look at all the original FM & C boats, it seems to me that the criteria set by Joshua Fellows? may have been 1, a 20ft swim from stem to widest part of the bottom, & 2, a profile of the 'top bend', then what went on in between was up to the individual boatbuilder.

Have a look at how the Braithwaite and Kirk boats were built ! ( Hampton, Ilford )single forged sheets from the stem going back towards the front bulkhead, but importantly including the tumbleholme, compare that with the saltley boats, with seperate tumbleholme sheets.

Amongst the saltley boats some were good ( really good) ex Empress ( ex steamer) but then look at Vienna, what I call a friday afternoon boat !

There are so many varieties of the genuine article, so anyone producing a bow that has upsweep, 'nice' curves, a tee stud in the right place could be forgiven for describing it as a 'josher' style.

However if you start measuring up the vital statistics, 2.5 inch guard as standard ( try getting that now ) stem bar constructed 2.5 inch wide with guard wrapped over it, a widened top guard over the deck area, and 'dummy rivets' hopefully in the right place.

On rivets, if there's enough of them, and theyre in the right place, then they do look good, but many builders seem to throw them at the forend, see what sticks, and that'll do, without any thought about what the rivets were there for in the first place.

Whats the point in putting rivets on a forend if they suddenly stop where the cabin starts.???

The concept of dummy rivets could be looked at in detail here, what we see on the outside of a boat should be the ring of a flat rivet, flush or perhaps slightly raised with the boat side, but 'underneath' it is countersunk into the sheet, and the pan head of the rivet on the other side.

I remember doing one boat where we chamfered off a load of 1 inch washers in the lathe to give that flush side appearance to the rivet head. What a game that was !!!

If I were to offer advise on a josher bow , go for the best builder you can or dont bother. If I wanted a decent forend I'd go to one of 3 builders. If I couldnt afford one of these , I wouldnt bother about a josher bow at all, because the people who 'know' would be looking at 'my' boat and saying to themselves, 'there goes another owner who was happy to (unwittingley)accept second best), or third, or fourth,,

I suppose I'm speaking as a purist, and its a personal thing; thats just how I feel about appreciation of quality engineering ,

but the original question is the first stage on a train of thought that is personal and inquisitive, and it is to be very welcomed as it shows a discerning approach to a purchase, something that so many dont consider, or just cant be bothered to enquire about,

best wishes on your search,

martin ( heres one of the three )

 

http://www.spurstow.com/rogerfuller/pages/new%20boats.htm

[Chertsey]

There's so much on this thread (esp from Dave, Phil and now Martin (Hi Martin!)) that I would have loved to have said on the 'If money were no object' thread, but held back for fear of looking arrogant or elitist. But it's true, there are matters of taste, but there is also good and bad, and right and wrong, and beautiful and ugly, and they aren't all the same thing.

[US Marines]

There's so much on this thread (esp from Dave, Phil and now Martin (Hi Martin!)) that I would have loved to have said on the 'If money were no object' thread, but held back for fear of looking arrogant or elitist. But it's true, there are matters of taste, but there is also good and bad, and right and wrong, and beautiful and ugly, and they aren't all the same thing.

Well said that woman !

 

Genuinely could NOT agree more !!!!

 

I have one suggestion to help you gain an eye for a good replica josher bow. If you take photo's of an original josher bow or alternatively of a replica built by a boatbuilder of proven ability then use these to compare with any boats you contemplate buying you will see more easily any shortcomings. To start you off I have included a picture of the bow of "Grace" which was built by Roger Fuller. Roger is widely accepted as amongst the best of the replica builders.

 

That's one INTERESTING boat you have there Rob.....

 

Dave Moore's friend's wife would be well pleased the evening after he first saw Grace !

Edited October 10, 2008 by US Marines

[robkg]

Edited to say: Note the correct positioning of the fender, on Lupin, whilst underway.

I am intrigued by this comment. I presume that you are saying that some/all working boats removed their bow fender when underway. Why did they do this? I can only surmise that it was either for aesthetic reasons or to reduce the overall length when locking (although this must increase the risk of damage to both the stem post and the lock gates substantially).

Or was there another reason?

Sorry, I have gone

 

Rob

Any of you tell me where the photo of Grace was taken? (sorry no prize)

Edited October 10, 2008 by robkg

[alan_fincher]

Another, fine example, of a Josher bow.. !

 

That one, believe it or not, is actually quite mild compared to some of their offerings.

 

If you don't believe me, take a cruise past their wharf and moorings, as many of the boats they build seem to end up based where they are built.

 

What I can't understand is that the punters are paying a very considerable premium for these boats over a Liverpool Boat, Aqualine, NBC, or whatever.

 

To my eye most of the mass produced boats are more aesthetically appealing that the caricature look that builders like this come up with. Strange indeed, very strange.....

 

Alan

[carlt]

Edited to say: Note the correct positioning of the fender, on Lupin, whilst underway.

 

I am intrigued by this comment. I presume that you are saying that some/all working boats removed their bow fender when underway. Why did they do this? I can only surmise that it was either for aesthetic reasons or to reduce the overall length when locking (although this must increase the risk of damage to both the stem post and the lock gates substantially).

Or was there another reason?

Sorry, I have gone

 

Rob

Any of you tell me where the photo of Grace was taken? (sorry no prize)

All boats should lift all fenders, until moored up. It is a peculiarity of leisure canal boats that the fenders are decorative, before functional.

 

Personally I don't see any need, or use, for a front fender, even when moored but they are a potential hazard, when under way and you can't leave your boat in gear, in a lock, with them down.

[Timleech]

All boats should lift all fenders, until moored up. It is a peculiarity of leisure canal boats that the fenders are decorative, before functional.

 

Tipcats/stern fenders to be lifted when under way?

 

Personally I don't see any need, or use, for a front fender, even when moored but they are a potential hazard, when under way and you can't leave your boat in gear, in a lock, with them down.

 

Stem fenders must be arranged so that they will lift off if they catch going downhill, and with 'fusible links' (bits of cord or strands of cotton line, usually) which will break if they snag going uphill.

I don't agree about 'no need or use' for stem fenders, but depending on the particular boat and particular lock flight there may be times when they're better kept on the deck when going downhill.

 

Tim

[NB Esk]

All boats should lift all fenders, until moored up. It is a peculiarity of leisure canal boats that the fenders are decorative, before functional.

 

Personally I don't see any need, or use, for a front fender, even when moored but they are a potential hazard, when under way and you can't leave your boat in gear, in a lock, with them down.

 

I wonder if this is why you sometimes see the front fender capped with a piece of inside-out tyre, to provide a non (less) snag surface?

 

Sorry if I'm off topic...

[dave moore]

Tipcats/stern fenders to be lifted when under way?

 

 

 

Stem fenders must be arranged so that they will lift off if they catch going downhill, and with 'fusible links' (bits of cord or strands of cotton line, usually) which will break if they snag going uphill.

I don't agree about 'no need or use' for stem fenders, but depending on the particular boat and particular lock flight there may be times when they're better kept on the deck when going downhill.

 

Tim

 

 

Thanks Tim

The "strapped down" bow fender has long been a niggle with me(and, as I'm on a good grump) the drooping set of starn end fenders too. It was always my understanding that a bow fender had a deliberate weak link so that if fouled it would fall away, but I see so many boats with arrangements that would assist a sinking in some circumstances. Drooping fenders are less dangerous, but equally unaesthetic...the further we get from working boat practices, the worse it gets!

An irrelevant aside...Roger and Martin....I was delighted to see Ilford towed with running blocks at Stone recently, something I'd not seen for years. Perhaps we should create a new thread devoted to almost lost working practices. Several years ago, working downhill single handed, I astounded a following boat by strapping in as I descended (I'll grant that lots of replacement gates no longer have a useable strapping post, more's the pity). What's wrong with efficient and time saving techniques? I know....Elf and Safety!

Cheers

Dave