Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
alan_fincher

Historic Boats for sale online

Featured Posts

I'd have thought (pace Athy, I can't find the original post to quote) there was more chance of selling a butty separately. People have a motor for a while and then go really mad and decide that a butty might be a good addition to it. As long as it stays a butty, there's always the possibility of reuniting it with a suitable motor (not necessarily the same one) at some point.

 

Off topic further (but related to the post directly above), someone told me at the weekend that Argo has been cut in half - is that true? Now if I had bought Bristol, I'd have been responsible for splitting them up...

 

That's a bit over sentimental. Bristol did not spend very long paired with Argo. I remember Bristol well when she was a converted ex Black Prince hire boat owned by Geoffrey Rogerson, and and moored for years on the K&A between Bradford on Avon and Bath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If it is the boat I am thinking of, Argo was not "cut in half" as such. The butty back end was cut off and a new motor back end welded on, and brilliant job done in my opinion. I also believe that the original back end end has subsequenty been used to form the bow of a new boat.

Sounds like a very similar fate to ACHILLES captain.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a very similar fate to ACHILLES captain.gif

Exactly the same fate, same yard same person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a bit over sentimental. Bristol did not spend very long paired with Argo. I remember Bristol well when she was a converted ex Black Prince hire boat owned by Geoffrey Rogerson, and and moored for years on the K&A between Bradford on Avon and Bath.

''Twas only a passing comment, I wasn't particularly upset about it. More so about the loss of a butty. Saw it being done but didn't know it was Argo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of people who get worked up about old butties being converted into motors, but hardly anyone wants them as butties. Would they rather the boats sink in the canal, and rot, or enjoy a renewed life as someones pride and joy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of people who get worked up about old butties being converted into motors, but hardly anyone wants them as butties. Would they rather the boats sink in the canal, and rot, or enjoy a renewed life as someones pride and joy?

 

 

The value of butties will begin to creep up again once the supply of them has shrunk to a level that matches the low demand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want a butty but im far too pick + i would have to convince myself that i could have either 2 wooden boats or that i could find the right steel butty that i would be happy. As it would have to have minmal added steel on the sides and still have a wooden bottom even then i would be pushed to convince myself its the right one and that 500 a year for having it was worth the extra licance costs to a single motor

There are lots of people who get worked up about old butties being converted into motors, but hardly anyone wants them as butties. Would they rather the boats sink in the canal, and rot, or enjoy a renewed life as someones pride and joy?

im all for it if as much as possible is saved from the butty. Squire is nice that they used the original metal to make most of the shape of the counter and swim so it was cut and bent into shape. I think this is more work but looks better as you dont need any extra steel and get to keep alot more of the old back end

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must say I thought so but Pete Harrison suggested further up the thread that Mountbatten was overplated while owned by Ivor Bachelor.

It turns out that MOUNTBATTEN has had considerable overplating - some quite old and some in 2014. Clearly this is disappointing even though I do not doubt the quality of the work done captain.gif

 

1798612_735100953225285_4866743078115796

 

10712771_734440569957990_441635978938118

 

1510036_734440823291298_1074921002853794

Edited by pete harrison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It turns out that MOUNTBATTEN has had considerable overplating - some quite old and some in 2014. Clearly this is disappointing even though I do not doubt the quality of the work done captain.gif

 

1798612_735100953225285_4866743078115796

 

10712771_734440569957990_441635978938118

 

 

1510036_734440823291298_1074921002853794

I never doubted you when you said she had been overplated and was a bit surprised that you thought you were wrong - but I think she previously had some proper cut out and replate work as well at some point.

 

Good pictures !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If it is the boat I am thinking of, Argo was not "cut in half" as such. The butty back end was cut off and a new motor back end welded on, and brilliant job done in my opinion. I also believe that the original back end end has subsequenty been used to form the bow of a new boat.

 

I assume you are just questioning the percentage of Argo that is in each resultant boat?

 

I think the tern of "cutting a butty in half" is regularly used to mean two motors have been constructed from it, even if each of those motors doesn't contain 50% of the butty.

Edited by alan_fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if the Hydrus has gone the same way yet?

 

It was still in one piece a week or two back.

 

What has been going on on that dock is adding a partial conversion to Thaxted/Widgeon, which from my understanding is one that has managed to avoid a conversion until now. (I'm sure Pete will correct that statement if I am wrong about it!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of people who get worked up about old butties being converted into motors, but hardly anyone wants them as butties. Would they rather the boats sink in the canal, and rot, or enjoy a renewed life as someones pride and joy?

 

Well of course part of the problem is that often they are worth more when cut that when left in one piece, so they are often at risk for this reason if someone wants to get as much as they can for them.

 

One thing that could help the survival and preservation of historic boats generally is if CRT were to accept that their numbers are so small, that they make very little from licensing them. How about the radical idea that if you have an unconverted motor butty pair, that the no charge is made for the butty licence? You can after all license a 70' x 14' wide beam at the same cost as a 70' x 7' narrow beam motor, so even if a butty were added to that motor, and moored breasted to it, it is taking up no more water space than said wide beam.

 

I realise many would say why should historic boats get any concession on costs, but as one sees at the many historic boat shows they are massively successful in bringing huge numbers of visitors, which now seems to one of CRT's prime drivers.

 

BW/CRT are generaly not very successful in keeping historic boats they own in good order, whereas private owners regularly turn out really well presented boats. Why not make it more attractive for owners with a motor to add a butty to them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a great idea and would extend it to unconverted motors as well to be honest. Obviously there would then be arguments about undercloth conversions etc but if a survey was carried out showing that the boat has a hold and not a cabin (other than back cabin and engine room) then it would be fairly easy to do I would have thought.

 

Would be nice to think CRT are interested in preservation of historic boats by private owners :)

The survey could be part of the BS scheme.

Edited by magnetman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a great idea and would extend it to unconverted motors as well to be honest. Obviously there would then be arguments about undercloth conversions etc but if a survey was carried out showing that the boat has a hold and not a cabin (other than back cabin and engine room) then it would be fairly easy to do I would have thought.

 

Would be nice to think CRT are interested in preservation of historic boats by private owners smile.png

The survey could be part of the BS scheme.

 

Yes I personally would support free licensing of historic boats in unconverted condition, including motors. Their numbers are sufficiently small as to hardly dent CRT's revenue stream if licences were waived, and it would be a useful incentive to those who own them.

 

However buttys in particular are again a very at risk minority of the whole, and numbers continue to dwindle. I know the HNBC has put forward thoughts on what could make butty ownership more attractive, (in fact it is a forum member that has written articles on this topic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to have a butty again and so would Mrs E but we gave up in 1996 because even around Warwickshire and Northants in those days we were finding trouble mooring and getting abuse, about going up narrow flights. That and the general canal behaviour put us off. As for meeting a semi controlled fat boat on a tree lined narrow stretch with your home on a bit of string.. No thanks. Suspect the cost is also prohibitive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 70's a butty was regarded as a 70ft canoe for licensing purposes on the Thames. Is this still the same today?

 

Did you have to work them over the boat rollers?

 

Richard

 

MORE: Ahh, perhaps not!

 

image006.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've taken quite a few different dinghies over the rollers at teddington Lock. Its amazing how heavy a boat becomes once you try to use those rollers. Perhaps in the past they were regularly greased but when I've used them (first time late eighties last time 2 years ago) they were a real pain.

 

I have quite heavy dinghies - two strong people to remove them from the water vertically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never doubted you when you said she had been overplated and was a bit surprised that you thought you were wrong - but I think she previously had some proper cut out and replate work as well at some point.

 

Good pictures !

When I spoke with the seller last week I asked specifically about the overplating of the boats bottom, which he said had not happened and MOUNTBATTEN was running its original bottom. He did go on to tell me that photographs of the work they had done in 2014 were available on FaceBook, and that as a consequence of this work the hulls of both boats had been signed off by their surveyor. No other overplating was mentioned during our conversation.

 

It is only on seeing the FaceBook photographs that evidence of the overplated footings became apparent, along with what looks like new overplating being applied in 2014. Although the boats were passed as sound in 2014 (and I am not questioning the standard of workmanship) this is enough to put me off, or at least without a considerable reduction in price to soften the cost of getting the replating done captain.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well of course part of the problem is that often they are worth more when cut that when left in one piece, so they are often at risk for this reason if someone wants to get as much as they can for them.

 

One thing that could help the survival and preservation of historic boats generally is if CRT were to accept that their numbers are so small, that they make very little from licensing them. How about the radical idea that if you have an unconverted motor butty pair, that the no charge is made for the butty licence? You can after all license a 70' x 14' wide beam at the same cost as a 70' x 7' narrow beam motor, so even if a butty were added to that motor, and moored breasted to it, it is taking up no more water space than said wide beam.

 

I realise many would say why should historic boats get any concession on costs, but as one sees at the many historic boat shows they are massively successful in bringing huge numbers of visitors, which now seems to one of CRT's prime drivers.

 

BW/CRT are generaly not very successful in keeping historic boats they own in good order, whereas private owners regularly turn out really well presented boats. Why not make it more attractive for owners with a motor to add a butty to them?

This is what stops me getting a butty i could aford to run 2 boats (maintenance wise) but the extra 500-1000 a year extra just for having it as well as maintenance puts it just out of my reach. If there was a decent concession for having an unpowered un converted boat (dosnt mean you cant get a uncoverted motor and remove the engine or dosnt just limit it to old craft) as a second boat that is registered with a powered craft then i would be trying to find a butty but 50% dosnt make it attractive enough to me not as livance fees are only going to go up in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I spoke with the seller last week I asked specifically about the overplating of the boats bottom, which he said had not happened and MOUNTBATTEN was running its original bottom. He did go on to tell me that photographs of the work they had done in 2014 were available on FaceBook, and that as a consequence of this work the hulls of both boats had been signed off by their surveyor. No other overplating was mentioned during our conversation.

 

It is only on seeing the FaceBook photographs that evidence of the overplated footings became apparent, along with what looks like new overplating being applied in 2014. Although the boats were passed as sound in 2014 (and I am not questioning the standard of workmanship) this is enough to put me off, or at least without a considerable reduction in price to soften the cost of getting the replating done captain.gif

Is my brain faded memory correct that they were built of 6mm Plate from new to keep the weight down or was that "an old boaters tale"

Share this post


Link to post
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.