prospective new boaters

[coldor]

Hi all, Doreen & Colin here, recently put our holiday home (static 38 x 12 caravan in Kent) so we can buy a narrowboat to live aboard. We had a 2 week holiday on the Oxford a long time ago but are essentially brand newbies to the culture/way of life.

We're reading up on as much canal & narrowboat info as we can and we're wondering about the different plating specs we keep seeing. It seems clear that 10/6/4 is the best but what are the pros & cons and does it make a difference to insurance companies?

Thanks for all replies, coldor

[Athy]

Welcome!

The majority of modern narrowboats will be built to that specification. Until some 15 years ago, many boats had thinner plating. Most of these are still afloat, so form your own conclusions!

Importantly, have the boat surveyed out of the water before you commit to buying it; the surveyor will test the hull as part of the job, ans should warn you off the boat if the hull is unsound.

[RLWP]

The numbers, like your 10/6/4, refer to the thicknesses of the baseplate, hull sides and cabin roof in millimetres

 

Sometimes you get four numbers for the baseplate, hull side, cabin side and roof

 

Richard

 

If it had had a published spec, I guess our boat would have been 3/8" / 5/16" / 5/32" or something like that

Edited September 27, 2012 by RLWP

[Ray T]

You will possibly find the older the boat the thinner the base plate.

 

Over the years fashions alter, whilst early springers were built to 6mm, our boat, built 1998 has a 8mm base plate. The fad recently for thicker base plates hes been accelerating, 10mm most common, whilst some new builds have 12mm or 15mm base plates.

 

The figures used here are general and mainly apertain to leisure craft. My knowlege is scant on ex working boats.

[David Mack]

You will possibly find the older the boat the thinner the base plate.

 

Over the years fashions alter, whilst early springers were built to 6mm, our boat, built 1998 has a 8mm base plate. The fad recently for thicker base plates hes been accelerating, 10mm most common, whilst some new builds have 12mm or 15mm base plates.

 

The figures used here are general and mainly apertain to leisure craft. My knowlege is scant on ex working boats.

 

Large Northwich drawings show 5/16" bottom, 1/4" sides, 1/8" cabin , so pretty much the same as leisure boats were 15 years ago!

[coldor]

Thanks to all who replied to my query. Are the thinner plating specs ok with insurers?

[bottle]

Yes, usually but they may require a survey because of the boats age (it will vary but I think in the range of 25 to 30 years old), older boats as mentioned above were made of thinner steel.

[BargeeSpud]

No doubt someone will put me right, but I don't believe insurance companies care about the hull specs. They're more concerned with the age of the boat than its specified plate thicknesses. When you think about it, why would they? After all, a 10/6/4 shell won't still be 10/6/4 after 10 years will it? They'll still want an full hull survey every year on a boat over 20 years of age.

 

And yes, I do know that they'll ask anyway, but that doesn't directly affect the premium you will pay.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Spuds

[RLWP]

Thanks to all who replied to my query. Are the thinner plating specs ok with insurers?

 

Well, we get our boat insured

 

There are a great many boats out there that don't follow modern fashions in hull thicknesses

 

Richard

[coldor]

Many thanks again for your help all of you, that has cleared up one of our main concerns.

[Teadaemon]

No doubt someone will put me right, but I don't believe insurance companies care about the hull specs. They're more concerned with the age of the boat than its specified plate thicknesses. When you think about it, why would they? After all, a 10/6/4 shell won't still be 10/6/4 after 10 years will it? They'll still want an full hull survey every year on a boat over 20 years of age.

 

And yes, I do know that they'll ask anyway, but that doesn't directly affect the premium you will pay.

 

Well I've surveyed a boat that was nominally 15/6/4, but after 17 years the vast majority of the hull sides were still 6.1mm, with isolated spots at 6.2mm. (Both well within the usual tolerances for 6mm plate, so probably the original thickness). I've also done a 1970s Springer that was consistently 3.2mm pretty much everywhere I checked (again, it was so consistent - above the waterline, below the waterline, cabin sides, roof, etc, that I had to assume it was the original plate thickness).

 

It's highly unlikely an insurer would want a full out of the water survey every year, even the MCA don't require that for coded seagoing boats. Every four or five years would be a more realistic.

[MtB]

If it had had a published spec, I guess our boat would have been 3/8" / 5/16" / 5/32" or something like that

 

Wouldn't your boat's hull thickness have been originally specified in cubits?

 

 

Mike

[BargeeSpud]

 

 

It's highly unlikely an insurer would want a full out of the water survey every year, even the MCA don't require that for coded seagoing boats. Every four or five years would be a more realistic.

Thanks for the clarification. Did seem a bit over the top to have a full, out of the water hull survey every year. Do they still want an annual hull survey anyway without taking the boat out & whats the actual age of the boat when this requirement, if it is one, kicks in?

[Grace and Favour]

 

 

If it had had a published spec, I guess our boat would have been 3/8" / 5/16" / 5/32" or something like that

Wouldn't your boat's hull thickness have been originally specified in cubits?

 

 

Mike

 

Are you suggesting our Richard is (a) square?

[BargeeSpud]

Are you suggesting our Richard is (a) square?

Or maybe he thinks Richard's boat is a bit "boxy"!

 

Sometimes you just never get the Rub(ic) of the green.

[RLWP]

Wouldn't your boat's hull thickness have been originally specified in cubits?

 

 

Mike

 

Is that why it says Noah on the builder's plate?

 

Cheeky bugger

 

Richard

[Teadaemon]

Thanks for the clarification. Did seem a bit over the top to have a full, out of the water hull survey every year. Do they still want an annual hull survey anyway without taking the boat out & whats the actual age of the boat when this requirement, if it is one, kicks in?

 

It depends on the insurer, but I don't know of any that require in-water surveys (though there may be a requirement to have a valid BSS certificate). Some insurers start asking for surveys on 20 year old boats, some it's 25 or 30 years, with others they ask for a survey if the boat is new to them, but may then not be too bothered after that.

[bizzard]

Be very cautious of any boat advertised as 4-6-10 though, it might roll over! and be difficult to insure.

[BargeeSpud]

It depends on the insurer, but I don't know of any that require in-water surveys (though there may be a requirement to have a valid BSS certificate). Some insurers start asking for surveys on 20 year old boats, some it's 25 or 30 years, with others they ask for a survey if the boat is new to them, but may then not be too bothered after that.

Cheers for that. So its typical insurance industry then, each to their own & they make it up as they go along.

[Starcoaster]

My boat is now 25 years old, and had a survey upon purchase a year ago which covers me for the next seven years.

My insurer asks for a hull survey (not a full survery) every seven years after the boat is 25 for fully comp insurance.

Third party only would require no survey.

[Theo]

No doubt someone will put me right, but I don't believe insurance companies care about the hull specs. They're more concerned with the age of the boat than its specified plate thicknesses. When you think about it, why would they? After all, a 10/6/4 shell won't still be 10/6/4 after 10 years will it? They'll still want an full hull survey every year on a boat over 20 years of age.

 

And yes, I do know that they'll ask anyway, but that doesn't directly affect the premium you will pay.

 

Nav and Gen ask for a thickness survey every 4 years for our 1983 Colecraft.

 

N

[coldor]

What a very helpful site this is, these postings have been very educational for me, thank you all for your contributions, I can see I'll be visiting this forum for a long time to come!