How much wear is 'normal' on the hull?

[alan_fincher]

Then along came a 1988 ex-hire (colecraft) boat with the 'right' interior (albeit overpriced in my inexperienced view!). However, the condition of the hull raises concerns and questions as to what could be expected as 'norm' for a 20 year old boat.

 

 

1. It has a wet bilge - concerns me considering the amount of wear 'reported'

 

I'm no expert, but this kind of rings alarm bells to me.

 

Were Colecraft really still building wet-bilge boatts in 1988 ?

 

Hopefully someone will know, but iot's not what I would expect.

 

If it's wet bilge, I think it could well be a lot older.

[paulcatchpole]

I'm no expert, but this kind of rings alarm bells to me.

 

Were Colecraft really still building wet-bilge boatts in 1988 ?

 

Hopefully someone will know, but iot's not what I would expect.

 

If it's wet bilge, I think it could well be a lot older.

 

Certainly sounds unusual doesn't it!

 

There are notable exceptions out there though - it seem Rugby Boats installed a water-tight bulkhead (around 350mm tall) between cabin and engine bilges, making it a dry bilge boat - even back in '74.

 

Our Harborough from '78/9 is wet bilge though!

 

Fair comment to the OP, if they've concerns then move on and be happy, but what's been said so far wouldn't stop me buying the boat...

 

PC

[Guest z1100r]

Many boats with 8mm bottoms end up getting overplated on the bottom, whilst others of a similar age, built thinner in the first place don't need it.

 

Well the only thing I can think of then is they were built from that awful quality steel that they made mid 80's cars like some Fiesta's and Mk3 escorts out of. There was a bit of a steel shortage around then wasn't there and we imported alot from I think Russia....wherever it came from it was crap and rotted like mad.

Edited September 19, 2009 by z1100r

[boots]

We are planning to go for another viewing on the boat - are there any easy ways to confirm wet or dry bilge - other than an inspection hatch in the cabin? - we don't know if it will be possible to inspect under the floor and was wondering if there are any other ways to confirm one way or another....

 

We are happy to walk away if our concerns are genuine, the problem we have as newbies is determining whether our concerns are founded and not just ignorance on our behalf.

 

At the moment, am feeling that the hull is 'OK' - though will do what we can to confirm the age.

 

all your comments have been extremely helpful,

 

regards,

 

martin

[alan_fincher]

We are planning to go for another viewing on the boat - are there any easy ways to confirm wet or dry bilge - other than an inspection hatch in the cabin? - we don't know if it will be possible to inspect under the floor and was wondering if there are any other ways to confirm one way or another....

 

There may be a problem with terminologies here.

 

A "wet bilged" narrow boat is one where it was accepted that water that collected in the front cockpit/ deck area fell in some way to the bottom of the boat, and ran back under the floors, to collect at the back, to be pumped out by the bilge pump.

 

Similarly no real attempt was made to stop water dropping through rear decks into the bilge area.

 

In the most extreme cases, because water was already allowed under the floors, when showers were first regularly put on older boats, they were sometimes just allowed to run out under the floors, again expecting the regular bilge pump to deal with the water.

 

But for many years now pleasure boats built new are generally made as "dry bilge", and arranged that any water that lands on (or in) bits of the outside of the boat should drain overboard, and not end up in it's bottom.

 

The most obvious change this resulted in was front decks/cockpits that had to be higher than the canal level, with the drain holes you see at the back end, to allow it to run overboard.

 

Wet bilged boats regularly had that area going down below canal level, so drainage into the cut without a pump was impossible.

 

It should be very easy to establish which this boat is intended to be. If it'ds decks and wells are designed to collect the water, and have holes and channels to put it overboard, it is a modern dry bilge approach. There should be nop way that water landing in any "hollow" bit at the front ends up under main cabin floors, and no holes it can get through.

 

A wet bilged boat will not have drain holes for water to go overboard, but if you search carefully enough you should find ways that water can pass under the cabin. Some possibly originally had pipes to get it from fron to back, although allegedly these can corrode through.

 

If the boat is of a "dry bilge" design, but there is evidence of water under cabin floors, then something is wrong, and something somewhere is leaking in to it. It couls be coming from a window, prthole, hatch ore door, or even chimney fitting or roof vent. However more typically a plumbing failure is to blame, like leaking pump, calorifier, radiator, or even just pipe or joint.

 

Personally I'd no longer tough a genuinely "wet bilged" boat, as better choices are available. You face the problem that the hull can be more corroided from within, than by the canal, particularly if inappropriate ballast like gravel (which retains the water) has been used. On the other hand, water in a dry bilge doesn't have to be a disaster, but if it has started to rot floors or linings can start to get expensive (and hard work) to replace.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Alan

[paulcatchpole]

There may be a problem with terminologies here.

 

The most obvious change this resulted in was front decks/cockpits that had to be higher than the canal level, with the drain holes you see at the back end, to allow it to run overboard.

 

Wet bilged boats regularly had that area going down below canal level, so drainage into the cut without a pump was impossible.

 

It should be very easy to establish which this boat is intended to be. If it'ds decks and wells are designed to collect the water, and have holes and channels to put it overboard, it is a modern dry bilge approach. There should be nop way that water landing in any "hollow" bit at the front ends up under main cabin floors, and no holes it can get through.

Alan

 

Agreed Alan, so many variations on the design...

 

Just to add some more confusion to things, our Rugby project boat has a front deck below waterline, but is still a dry-bilged boat - the water drains down a steel tube, with a fairly significant fall on it, down the side of the hull inside, to emerge beyond the dividing bulkhead into the engine bay, to be pumped out with the main bilge pump...

 

I wonder if it may be worth inspecting the bulkhead between engine bay and main cabin - on the Harborough you can see two d-shaped holes which are the drain from central cabin bilge to engine bilge. On the Rugby, it's clearly a plain steel plate...

 

PC

[PhilR]

Agreed Alan, so many variations on the design...

 

Just to add some more confusion to things, our Rugby project boat has a front deck below waterline, but is still a dry-bilged boat - the water drains down a steel tube, with a fairly significant fall on it, down the side of the hull inside, to emerge beyond the dividing bulkhead into the engine bay, to be pumped out with the main bilge pump...

 

I wonder if it may be worth inspecting the bulkhead between engine bay and main cabin - on the Harborough you can see two d-shaped holes which are the drain from central cabin bilge to engine bilge. On the Rugby, it's clearly a plain steel plate...

 

PC

 

Another dry bilge variation is a vertical tube between the front well deck and bottom plate (obviously the well deck is a few inches above waterline!)

[Ray T]

Take your time in choosing a boat. We spent nearly 2 years searching and although you think you might be giving up on something which ticks the internal boxes on your list, if you let this one go another will invariably appear later on the market. Froggy is a 1997 Reeves hull and had lost only 0.1mm from the hull in 12 years, admittedly not a hire boat. A professional survey is a must - £700 now will save you a lot of heartache later if the surveyor finds more problems. Our surveyor told us Froggy was basically a good boat, albeit he did say to spend monies in a couple of areas, and he was right !

 

PM us if you want to know who did our survey.

 

Mrs T.

[RLWP]

Take your time in choosing a boat. We spent nearly 2 years searching and although you think you might be giving up on something which ticks the internal boxes on your list, if you let this one go another will invariably appear later on the market. Froggy is a 1997 Reeves hull and had lost only 0.1mm from the hull in 12 years, admittedly not a hire boat. A professional survey is a must - £700 now will save you a lot of heartache later if the surveyor finds more problems. Our surveyor told us Froggy was basically a good boat, albeit he did say to spend monies in a couple of areas, and he was right !

 

PM us if you want to know who did our survey.

 

Mrs T.

 

I'd agree with this post. We nearly bought completely the wrong boat for us because I got a bit blinkered.

 

This hull thickness business though. It isn't really clear from what I have read what the numbers mean. I would expect something like "it's lost 0.1mm over the surface with 1.5mm at the chines and with pitting up to 2.5mm deep" In other words, a generally thinning with details of local wear/corrosion. I don't remember seeing these kinds of words used about the boat in the OP.

 

Richard

 

Get a survey...

[Naughty Cal]

Well the only thing I can think of then is they were built from that awful quality steel that they made mid 80's cars like some Fiesta's and Mk3 escorts out of. There was a bit of a steel shortage around then wasn't there and we imported alot from I think Russia....wherever it came from it was crap and rotted like mad.

 

So crap in fact that our Fiesta has lasted 30 years and Sierra 25 years

[Guest z1100r]

I have had both aswell...still would have both.if my son hadn't smashed up my Sierra. Depends which ones you had. Late German built ones shipped over here were fine and lasted forever. My Sierra had no rust at all.....it was a 1990 2liter DOHC...also had a 1989 V6 4x4 which was perfect until it got nicked. But You get a 1986/87/88 Belgian or Uk model (well you wont now cos they all rotted like hell and have long gone).

 

I can go into details if you like...composition of steel..the reason for the shortage...but I dont think you'll appreciate it somehow.

[Naughty Cal]

I have had both aswell...still would have both.if my son hadn't smashed up my Sierra. Depends which ones you had. Late German built ones shipped over here were fine and lasted forever. My Sierra had no rust at all.....it was a 1990 2liter DOHC...also had a 1989 V6 4x4 which was perfect until it got nicked. But You get a 1986/87/88 Belgian or Uk model (well you wont now cos they all rotted like hell and have long gone).

 

I can go into details if you like...composition of steel..the reason for the shortage...but I dont think you'll appreciate it somehow.

 

Our 1984 MK1 Sierra XR4i with the 2.8 V6 is one of the German ones, however our 1980 Fiesta was from the Spain factory which was supposed to be one of the worst for build quality.

 

The Fiesta is still pretty original with only the front wings having been replaced. It is however getting quite ropey in places now. Must get round to doing some work on it.

 

The Sierra has been restored a few years ago but until then was an original car with some racing predigree.

 

You can go into all the details you like. As the other half is a panel beater (working on classics and modern sh*t) i have probably heard it all before

[Guest z1100r]

I'm not going to get into an argument about bloody old bangers. I used the car analogy because I figured alot of people may of seen or heard of floors and sills dropping out of cars at an early age around that period. The reason was poor quality steel...there are obviously exceptions - manufacturers and stockholders were sourcing steel from anywhere they could.

 

So how do you explain 1/8" of steel disappearing on some boats and not others. In the same water with the same protection.....all built at roughly the same time.

Edited September 22, 2009 by z1100r

[Naughty Cal]

I'm not going to get into an argument about bloody old bangers. I used the car analogy because I figured alot of people may of seen or heard of floors and sills dropping out of cars at an early age around that period. The reason was poor quality steel...there are obviously exceptions - manufacturers were sourcing steel from anywhere they could.

 

So how do you explain 1/8" of steel disappearing on some boats and not others. In the same water with the same protection.....all built at roughly the same time.

 

Build quality and different useage. The boat in question was a hire boat. They have a very different useage pattern to boats which have been privately owned from new.

 

Oh and less of the old banger please

Edited September 22, 2009 by Phylis

[Guest z1100r]

No chance, and if anything the more used boat would survive longer. Build quality doesn't come into it...its a flat piece plate welded to other flatish pieces of plate. Being dank and wet under the floor would make a difference.....but we are talking 3mm 1/8" here....thats alot of steel..boat would probably need reballasting.

Edited September 22, 2009 by z1100r

[RLWP]

No chance, and if anything the more used boat would survive longer. Build quality doesn't come into it...its a flat piece plate welded to other flatish pieces of plate. Being dank and wet under the floor would make a difference.....but we are talking 3mm 1/8" here....thats alot of steel..boat would probably need reballasting.

But our heavily used boat lost more than 3mm of steel through wear not corrosion.

 

Richard

[Naughty Cal]

But our heavily used boat lost more than 3mm of steel through wear not corrosion.

 

Richard

 

No chance you must have made it up. (Well if you believe z1100r anyhow )

[RLWP]

No chance you must have made it up. (Well if you believe z1100r anyhow )

 

I didn't make it up! Perhaps the boatyard that had kittens when they saw the hull wear did, or the surveyor who measured it?

 

Richard

[Naughty Cal]

I didn't make it up! Perhaps the boatyard that had kittens when they saw the hull wear did, or the surveyor who measured it?

 

Richard

 

Must have. It cant possibly happen (according to z1100r)

 

Although for the record i do believe you

[Guest z1100r]

Do you know how long it would take you with a file to rub off 3mm from a plate that size...now thats with a file and deliberaterly trying to remove material. The boat would have to be dragging an extremely abrasive bottom all of the time.....which of course its not....its in soft slimey silty mud ..or ordinary water. The majority of the time its in ordinary water.

 

I know you can get wear on extremities...but find a piece of concrete and rub an 8mm thick square bar up and down it...and imagine how long its gonna take you to get 3mm off - and thats rubbing it non stop..not just occaionally when you catch something.

 

I'm only buying corrosion as the main plate thickness reducer. With corrosion 3mm can fall off just like that if its really set in.....however if corrosion is that bad its very very noticeable.

 

These are just my views...I'm not saying I'm dead on right and everyone else is wrong...but I'm finding it real hard to get my head around some boats doing it and others not in exactly the same environment. I can only see material as the cause of that. Unlesss some freak electrical leakage has turned the boat into a giant anode or something.

[Naughty Cal]

Richard, you must be lying

 

z1100r, dont forget these boat have been hired out for many years to novice boaters who probably dont realise how shallow the edges of a canal are and have dragged the bottom many many times. Hire boats to earn their keep are out on hire for the majority of the year, every week, day in day out. The average leisure boater will never clock up the amount of use a hire boat does whilst hired out.

[RLWP]

Do you know how long it would take you with a file to rub off 3mm from a plate that size...now thats with a file and deliberaterly trying to remove material. The boat would have to be dragging an extremely abrasive bottom all of the time.....which of course its not....its in soft slimey silty mud ..or ordinary water. The majority of the time its in ordinary water.

 

I know you can get wear on extremities...but find a piece of concrete and rub an 8mm thick square bar up and down it...and imagine how long its gonna take you to get 3mm off - and thats rubbing it non stop..not just occaionally when you catch something.

 

I'm only buying corrosion as the main plate thickness reducer. With corrosion 3mm can fall off just like that if its really set in.....however if corrosion is that bad its very very noticeable.

 

These are just my views...I'm not saying I'm dead on right and everyone else is wrong...but I'm finding it real hard to get my head around some boats doing it and others not in exactly the same environment. I can only see material as the cause of that. Unlesss some freak electrical leakage has turned the boat into a giant anode or something.

 

At a rough guess, I'd say it would take sixteen years of being used over forty weeks a year at up to ten hours a day cruising. That's what Tawny Owl's life was before we bought her.

 

Richard

[alan_fincher]

I have no doubt that Richard's version of events is correct, and that "z1100r" doesn't appreciate that boats that are repetitively dragged over the bottom or against edges can wear very significantly.

 

It is by no means uncommon, as I understand it, for ex-hire boats that have been a long while in a fleet to need to have just the "edges" at the chine repaired.

 

Don't forget that some hire boats have done the miles to have "used up" several engines before they are sold on. Some do some seriously high mileages, and are operated by crews less experienced than us at knowing which bits of the cut you can float in, and which you can not.

 

Or are surveyors and boatyards in collusion to tell owners of former hire boats they have a problem that they do not really, and to extract money for them for inappropriate "repairs". I don't think there are that many unscrupulous types operating in there capacities, TBH.

[Guest z1100r]

Hang on a minute... ..you've slinked all this round to being just wear on the rubbing edge of side and bottom....I agree it wears there...OP was talking about all over plate thickness loss of the entire boat. Including cabin top.

You lot have become obsessed with a bit of edge wear and a lot of "he's a pratt, he dont know what he's talking about". Probably down to my bluntness...I dont mess about with all this hairy fairy pussy footing around people stuff..straight to the point.

[Naughty Cal]

Hang on a minute... ..you've slinked all this round to being just wear on the rubbing edge of side and bottom....I agree it wears there...OP was talking about all over plate thickness loss of the entire boat. Including cabin top.

You lot have become obsessed with a bit of edge wear and a lot of "he's a pratt, he dont know what he's talking about". Probably down to my bluntness...I dont mess about with all this hairy fairy pussy footing around people stuff..straight to the point.

 

I think you may want to re read the OP. There is no mention of wear on the cabin top.