Jump to content

Should I consider a 36ft 1970s Springer for 14K - beautifully refurbished


Woodstock

Featured Posts

There are two sorts of people. Those who like things to look lovely, and those who like things to work well.

 

The owner of your boat sounds like the former. Get it out of the water, and check that hull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is it not possible to have something with a foot in both camps :blink:

 

It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic,

Of all things physical and metaphysical,

Of all things human and all things super-human,

Of all true manifestations of the head,

Of the heart, of the soul,

That the life is recognizable in its expression,

That form ever follows function. This is the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Up to a point, Lord Copper. You speak of compromise.

Life is about compromise and noone can escape compromise noone, it is byproduct of interaction with ones fellow earth dwellers, and we are all the richer for those encounters whatever the magnitude.

 

However seems a nice little boat just do it

 

 

Its at times like this where my fooling around at the back of the classroom begin to show :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you master,

 

 

Grasshopper

 

Your showing your age again... ;)

 

 

Oh and to the OP wot wotever (Tony) said...

Edited by MJG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic,

Of all things physical and metaphysical,

Of all things human and all things super-human,

Of all true manifestations of the head,

Of the heart, of the soul,

That the life is recognizable in its expression,

That form ever follows function. This is the law.

 

Is that Le Corbusier Carl?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

I've seen a 14K springer that is beautifully refurbished- Is it worth considering- price is open to offers. Its for weekend use

At this price- Do I need a survey

 

For £14k I'd say no if it were me buying it.

 

1) A survey is unlikely to tell me anything I can't see for myself.

 

2) Ok the hull 'may' be a bit thin in places but equally it may not, and for £14k I'd take it on the chin if it sank the day after I bought it. Chances are high that it won't though. The hull only needs to be thick enough to keep the water out. Does it REALLY matter if the surveyor's gadget says the 6mm plate is down to 3.8mm here and there?

 

3) People spend £14k on cars without getting them surveyed and expect to scrap them after a decade. Not that big a deal if my £14k boat sinks in ten years. It probably won't though especially if I haul it out and black it every other year.

 

4) While I was faffing about arranging a survey on a cheap-as-chips boat, someone like me might come along and buy it from under my nose without a survey ;)

 

Thing is though, it's not me buying it, it's you. How traumatic would you find it if you bought without a survey and found you'd bought a pup? The main argument in favour of having a survey is that it gives you ammunition to renegotiate the price. Most of what a survey says can be ignored. After all, the vendor lived with all the 'faults' the survey threw up didn't they?

 

Hope that helps.

 

Mike

 

 

(Edited to correct a nonsense sentence.)

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two sorts of people. Those who like things to look lovely, and those who like things to work well.

 

The owner of your boat sounds like the former. Get it out of the water, and check that hull.

I like to think my boat looks good and works well.

hungerford.jpg

35ft Springer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have the hull surveyed ultrasonically, something you cannot do by eye, and have engine checked over at the very least. Less than 4mm thick plate is an insurance issue.

 

 

Does the OP really need insurance on a £14k boat (other than third party to get a licence)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that Le Corbusier Carl?

No, it was an architect who believed that a building's shape should be designed solely with it's purpose in mind...but I've forgotten his name.

 

Off to Google I go....

 

 

Edited to add: It was American Architect Louis Sullivan.

Edited by carlt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it was an architect who believed that a building's shape should be designed solely with it's purpose in mind...but I've forgotten his name.

 

Off to Google I go....

 

 

Edited to add: It was American Architect Louis Sullivan.

 

Ah yes, remember him from my lectures, not that he lectured me obviously, but we had what would no be called a module "The Philosophy of Planning", and he, along with Le Corbusier and several others, featured. At the time I found it fascinating but thought it useless, it has actually proved to be the most useful bit of my degree.

 

Edited to add "To create architecture is to put in order. Put what in order? Function and objects." Le Corbusier

Edited by magpie patrick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.