Jump to content

Should A Broker Declare That A Boat IS Overplated?

alan_fincher

By alan_fincher
in General Boating

 Share

Featured Posts

magnetman Veteran II

magnetman

Posted
Posted

I am pretty sure Neil Hudson boats use ball bearings at the top of the rudder post. The op boat seems to have a traditional steel plain bearing in a large diameter 'elum tube. A few builders did that but by no means all even in '92

 

I think Steve Hudson has the latter with SH cast into it but I have an idea there is a ball bearing underneath and it is actually an imitation of the old way of doing it but without the disadvantage of a wobbly tiller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Indeed. I have had 3 anodes out of locks with the magnet over the years.[/quote

 

 

Are they magnetic?

 

Ian

 

I suspect the 'straps' used to weld them to the hull are, though happy to be corrected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sarahavfc Community Regular

sarahavfc

Posted
Posted

I suppose if there were no proof who built a 20 year old boat one could change the registration document to indicate a more 'upmarket' builder and maybe get more money for it :unsure:

 

Seems easy enough to me. Could even be done from new...

Very easy to do and I know of a boat which is registered as being built by us, but is very defenitly not one of ours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Proper Job Veteran

Proper Job

Posted
Posted

They can get knocked off by various underwater obstructions.

 

I guess they could be recessed but that would add to the complications of hull manufacture I suspect. Given they are accepted as not generally being required 'amidships' it's probably not deemed worth the extra effort and cost.

 

The performance of recessed anodes is questionable. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that anodes only protect about 8 - 10 feet in radius from their position and that it's line of sight. If they are in a recess, there's no/limited line of site.

 

Bow's and sterns are worth protecting. It's pratical to do it and they're more expensive/complicated to repair/replace. Slab sides of the hull are relitively easy to repair/replace

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Proper Job Veteran

Proper Job

Posted
Posted

The boat in the original OP.................

 

I wonder if this was wear rather than corrosion?

 

Corrosion is usually most prolific at the water line. The repaired sections are along the slab sides in the footing/chine area. The water line looks ok.

 

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
magnetman Veteran II

magnetman

Posted
Posted

1/4" base plate maybe? I had a good narrow boat which was supposedly built in 86 which had a 1/4" base plate but I think it was a bit unusual most were 3/8 or 10mm by thr 90s. It was built by Tony Gregory (aka GM engineering) 55ft trad with DM2 :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alan_fincher Veteran II

alan_fincher

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Was it both sides?

 

The Brinklow pictures just show a couple of starboard stern photos in a reasonably limited area

 

The base plate doesn't appear to be very thick so it could have been a chine repair

The pictures they put on Facebook seemed to indicate that much if not all of the bottom half of the total hull sides was over-plated on both sides.

 

That clearly does not align with a suggestion that it is all "wear" damage, though some may be, of course.

 

Looking back at a comment made by "Brinklow" when they were doing the work, they said.......

 

Fit out by SH. Think the steel work is Paul's.

 

Not sure what that means? Paul Barber, possibly, I don't know - I'm not clued up enough on builders in 1992 to know what other Pauls there were!

 

ABNB are selling it very definitely as early Steve Hudson - perhaps they have not been told the shell may be by someone else, and SMH only fitted it out?

 

Edited by alan_fincher
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nicknorman Veteran II

nicknormanDonate to Canal World

Posted
Posted

Does look like a Paul Barber shell so that's probably it.

 

If so, I think the deception or mis-information about the boat builder is a far more serious "offence" than failing to mention the over plating. The purchaser will be devastated when he finds that, whilst he thought he had bought into a living legend, in fact it was an also-ran.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alan_fincher Veteran II

alan_fincher

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'd prefer a Paul Barber to a Hudson, personally smile.png

 

I am not alone in that

For £50K I'd prefer even more a Paul Barber that had not required an over-plate!

 

The purchaser will be devastated when he finds that, whilst he thought he had bought into a living legend, in fact it was an also-ran.

 

Perhaps the current owner has only just found out, and can't offload it fast enough!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alan_fincher Veteran II

alan_fincher

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

Why does it need to be exclusive as no-one wants to join?!

 

 

Nonsense......

 

So many SMH boats are being massed produced these days that they'll soon be as commonplace as Springers or Liverpool Boats.

 

Clearly loads of people are very willing to join this exclusive club!

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 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.