Where would you start?

[CheekyMonkey84]

I've seen this http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/60ft-HISTORIC-1909-BANTOCK-CONVERSION-Narrowboat-Project-/131755956273?hash=item1ead445831:g:6TsAAOSwHgVW7ELiand wondered where you would consider starting with something like this? I'm not NB owner or prospective purchaser (OH is over 6ft and keen to stay landlocked, for now...) but I am a history buff and work in a museum so appreciate the need to protect our heritage. However, this is just a puzzle to me. It's had all of its guts ripped out and as a bare shell is it as historically important as it would've been left intact? I don't know, I'm just pondering.

I think this was briefly mentioned in the Historic boats for sale thread but at over 3000 posts it's a struggle to find anything.

 

If you were rich/mad enough where would you start?

 

Stephanie

[Delta9]

It hasn't had its guts ripped out, it just hasn't had any guts put in yet

[RLWP]

There is rather less historic boat there than you think. It will have started life like this:

 

 

Since then it has been cut in half, had the bottom and possibly some of the sides replaced and then had a new back end and cabin fitted

 

It's a nice boat, historically (if you are talking museum quality history) it's got more recent history than 1909 about it

 

Richard

[CheekyMonkey84]

Fair enough. To me (as an uninitiated dreamer) it seemed as though it was a fit out boat taken out. But there we are
Even so, I wonder what it'll look like finished (I found the bit in the other thread about the engine being in the wrong place so I wonder how it'll turn out)

 

Will go back to browsing and not commenting on things I don't fully understand

[RLWP]

Will go back to browsing and not commenting on things I don't fully understand

 

If you do that, you'll miss out on an opportunity to learn a lot. We don't mind people asking questions on here

 

And you six foot tall hubby won't have a problem in a narrowboat

 

Richard

[Tiggs]

If I had the time and money I would be tempted to buy this and fit it out. I would, of course, be very interested in the survey before I made an offer - like is it straight and exactly how wide is it. As others have said, it's not that historically important since there are similar boats in preservation.

 

I would probably start by painting the outside of the cabin so it does not go rusty while I am doing the inside. I hate grey / red primer coloured boats.

Edited March 28, 2016 by Tiggs

[Derek R.]

The thing is, if left as it was originally built - an open hold with no engine or cabin - of what use would it be in todays world? A great many such hulls have been saved from the scrapyard by having cabins, and engines fitted, which are now cruising the cut, still with a reasonable amount of their original structure in place and for all to see - namely the hull and fore end. Bantocks and Day boats are still with us, just in a modified form.

 

Comments always welcomed - how else is a mind enlightened?

[pete harrison]

Since then it has been cut in half, had the bottom and possibly some of the sides replaced and then had a new back end and cabin fitted

 

Richard

Twice, the first cabin constructed of wood in 1984 and the new steel version it currently has

[Peter X]

I'm no expert, but I don't think you'd have to be rich/mad to take on the boat linked to by the OP. It sounds like quite a lot of boat for the money, if it's as described and doesn't suffer from the potential width problems mentioned by Tiggs. You would have to know how to do a fit-out, or be prepared to pay someone to do it.

[RLWP]

Twice, the first cabin constructed of wood in 1984 and the new steel version it currently has

Thanks Pete.

 

Richard

[MtB]

This looks like the boat that was on the bank for a few months before xmas at Bell Weir Marine on the Thames, Staines.

 

It looked good out of the water. Very attractive boat in my opinion and a sensible price too.

[alan_fincher]

I like the look of this one a lot.

 

The "motor" conversion with new swim and counter at the back end is far nicer than many applied to boats of this type, (but it is done by Warwickshire Fly, so I would expect it to be well executed). The swim looks a good length and I would expect handling to be pretty good. Bow shape is to my eye one of the nicer BCN styles as well.

 

There is, of course no "right" cabin shape, as it would no originally had a full cabin, but what has been done looks pleasing to the eye.

 

If there is a recent survey, provided it is by one of the surveyors known to specialise in historic boats, I would be reasonably happy to rely on it, without necessarily paying for another.

[MtB]

I agree with Alan, but getting picky, its a crying shame the (classic FR3) engine is right in the back under the steerer's feet rather than in a proper engine room forward of a back cabin.

[Speedwheel]

wondered where you would consider starting with something like this

 

At about half the price they are currently asking for it it where I would start.

[Bee]

I think its a pretty good price, it could make a really special boat. Where to start? really, lots of drawings, window holes, water / fuel/ tanks, battens, sprayfoam, line it out, carry on and on till you've finished Oh, that tip about painting it is a good one. Then stand back and admire a really special boat that is just what I would like to own.

[mark99]

Certainty a wow bow.

[roland elsdon]

Suspect if it was done by wfbco they would have tried to minimise the width but given its likely Bcn history it's not likely to have been over fat when new ( depends how much rivet overplate) have considered as a cabin boat for our final years but it's a long way to come for a look.. I'd start with a tape measure...

[pete harrison]

Suspect if it was done by wfbco they would have tried to minimise the width but given its likely Bcn history it's not likely to have been over fat when new ( depends how much rivet overplate) have considered as a cabin boat for our final years but it's a long way to come for a look.. I'd start with a tape measure...

When this boat was B.C.N. gauged its beam was recorded as 7'0''

[roland elsdon]

So correct width for a narrowboat then...

[alan_fincher]

So correct width for a narrowboat then...

 

Well half an inch narrow, actually!

[MtB]

 

Well half an inch narrow, actually!

 

 

Are we alighting on the difference between a narrow boat (one notionally 7ft 1/2in wide) and a narrowboat (one notionally 6ft 10in wide)?

[X Alan W]

I agree with Alan, but getting picky, its a crying shame the (classic FR3) engine is right in the back under the steerer's feet rather than in a proper engine room forward of a back cabin.

Wasn't " Emerald " also a Bantock subjected to musical engines with it's JP. I remember in 1988 it was rebottomed & a steel bottom strake at Langley Mill & the engine was in the "Proper " place & at later time the engine seemed to be fitted in the back cabin. Correct me if wrong

[pete harrison]

So correct width for a narrowboat then...

 

 

 

Well half an inch narrow, actually!

The only documented beam I have ever come across for a narrow boat is in the Canal Boat Act 1877. This Act is all about protecting the interests of a boats inhabitants, but there were slightly different rules for narrow boats and wide boats.

 

The change over point is quoted as 7'6''

[BuckbyLocks]

Wasn't " Emerald " also a Bantock subjected to musical engines with it's JP. I remember in 1988 it was rebottomed & a steel bottom strake at Langley Mill & the engine was in the "Proper " place & at later time the engine seemed to be fitted in the back cabin. Correct me if wrong

 

Very possibly, but the wooden strakes were plated internally in Gas Street in the early 70s by careening Emerald and welding direct to the steel. I held the plates for Brian to tack weld them in place before full welding so I think it must already have had a steel bottom. The engine at that time, pre Colin fitting the JP, was certainly not under your feet, Too damn big! A Foster or Fowler comes to mind, but it was a long time ago.

[pete harrison]

The engine at that time, pre Colin fitting the JP, was certainly not under your feet, Too damn big! A Foster or Fowler comes to mind, but it was a long time ago.

When EMERALD was advertised for sale in Waterways World April 1978 page 80 it reportedly had a Ruston diesel engine of 37.5hp @ 1000rpm. My records suggest this was a Ruston Hornsby 3VRH, and this engine was advertised for sale on the back cover of the Narrow Boat Owners Club NEWSLETTER Winter 1982 as it had recently been replaced by the current engine

 

edit = when advertised for sale in Waterways World April 1978 page 80 it was stated that EMERALD had a 'traditional boatmans cabin'. My memories of EMERALD back then was that it was a very attractive looking tug, but in more recent times much of that attractiveness has been lost (in my opinion).

Edited April 1, 2016 by pete harrison