Canal World

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


alan_fincher last won the day on February 17

alan_fincher had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,751 Excellent

About alan_fincher

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Building a very small fleet of ex working boats!

Previous Fields

  • Occupation
    Retired (from Computing)
  • Boat Name
    "Sickle" & "Flamingo" (both built 1936, by W.J. Yarwood and Sons)
  • Boat Location
    Grand Union (Southern)

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
  • Website URL

Recent Profile Visitors

39,394 profile views
  1. And they may well be the ones that only fit historic spindle sizes, and can't now usefully be used..... mind you at a couple of hundred quid, I'd not be brave enough to use one in anger!
  2. Well I haven't gone looking at individual models now, but that surprises me. Even a very small one we used on the boat, really only large enough for 2 person meals, was rated at (I think ) 120 watts. The big one occasionally used at home is more again. I've not seen one rated as low as 60 watts - that just sounds too low to me, but perhaps I'm wrong?
  3. To be fair we have owned a 2009 petrol Mazda 2 from new, and costs have been low compared to anything else we have owned from new.
  4. Point of order, sir! Paddles Up was certainly a doppleganger, but, (somewhat unusually), was not Chris Pink.
  5. Yes there hav4e definitely been a t least a handful about the OM 636 in narrowboats over the years on here. Not very common, but not completely rare. I think this may have been quite a popular engine for Malcolm Braine to have used at the time, when he wasn't making use of the BMC 1500, (which he even put into much remodelled former working boats). However reliable the engine, it is surely not a significant part of the justification for such a large price tag? I would have thought most people wanting to buy something with a traditional engine room with back cabin aft of it, would be looking for something not out of place in such an arrangement. It's highly unusual, i would have thought, to have a "traditional" engine room, then hide the engine in a soundproofing box.
  6. Are you looking for something, (irrespective of age) that was built as a leisure boat, or something originally built as a working boat? What is your maximum budget?
  7. This very sensible response seems to have been ignored in almost every post that has followed it. This is the key. If the upstanding sides of the lower part are shallow, (say an inch or less), then very heavy rain will bounce off the roof hard enough that it the gets up under the covering dome, and can fall down inside that upstand. This can happen even of the dome is screwed down so its bottom edge is lower than the top of the upstand, (although screwing it right down should limit the possibility considerably). A quality vent will not skimp on metal, and will have maybe 2" of upstand above the base. That is usually enough that even a very heavy downpour will not be hitting the roof hard enough for drops to bounce up high enough to get over the top edge. Many of the vents sold are not quality.
  8. I think I mist have taken this when Anduril was virtually new. I wonder why it appears to have been renumbered from "No 98" to "No 96"?
  9. It does indeed look very well looked after, but at the end of the day it is a 46 year old boat with a Masonite clad wooden top, and its engine hidden away in a sound insulated box. To me, however well presented, it seems staggeringly expensive, I'm afraid - certainly not a "cheap" live-aboard, surely?
  10. I'm sticking with CP - OB is just not even a challenge. I'm pretty certain Chris is still with us as well, so plus ca change!
  11. Assuming you have, (as we do), 3 liftable floors stretching between the engine room bulkhead (or door) and at to the back of the swim, (possibly under a coal box), would a variation on the "David Mack" method work? Measure the middle board exactly, and then find how many complete tiles of your preferred size it is long. Lets say it is 32", and your preference is a tile size of 3". You can get 10 full tiles on, but they would then fall 2" short of the full length of that panel. But if you increase your tile size to make 10 tiles measure 32", you could then cut tile squares of 3.2" from your 12" ones, (discarding he excess beyond the 9 small tiles it can source). This would fill your middle 34" floor panel. Then go forwards from there on the front panel, and backwards from there on the back panel, still using cut 3.2" squares, and introducing short pieces at the extreme forward and backward end if required. This way each of your two joins in the floor will exactly coincide with cut tiles, so you don't actually have visible part tiles in the middle of the floor. Maybe I'm over-thinking this, and need to "get a life"!.....
  12. Hopefully he has bought all the poorly calibrated ones as well, though!
  13. Having finally got around to enquiring they are out of stock at the moment.
  14. I think you have missed the bit of George's reply that you quoted which I have now highlighted above. I think George is suggesting cuttin up 12" tiles to make (say) 16 times 3" tiles, (or maybe 9 times 4" tiles) from each. I think 3" is probably right, 4" probably "close enough" but anything larger will look quite wrong.
  15. You been back a few days, I noticed. I think Martin has now returned from more flounces that I actually own boats!