nb Beech

[J R ALSOP]

The Bukh 2G105 that Tim Leach marinised and fitted in Tay was a generator engine of a ship, it was in the early 80's.

There is a 3G105 that has just come from South Africa to Brentford in a boat but requires masses of expensive work done. There are no more inland, coastal maybe.

[dave moore]

Barry Stanton was the original owner, post Claytons, in those days. Did he have it fitted ? I may have a contact number still, I'll look later.

 

Dave

[Jrtm]

Barry wouldnt have put the in cold start in but may know what was fitted as claytons fitted the cold starts. As they only use bolinder semi would make sence for them to be 1051/2 as they would have the contacts and its the sort of time semis would have been well out of prodjuction

[BuckbyLocks]

There may be some confusion over which Pearl/Baron is being talked about here. The Pearl that Binkie Bush owned certainly had a 1053 in it at some time in his ownership in the early 70s. Saw it a number of times.

At the same time, Tay was owned by Tony Philips. I think it still had a hot bulb, but it was sold quite soon after we first met it in Gas St and went to Middlewich. Will try to find a pic.

 

[dave moore]

The Pearl here is the Thomas Clayton gas boat. When it lay in Gas St in 66/7 it had no motor. Tay certainly had the cold start newer Bolinder in when Tony had it, I boated with him for several years in those days. Hope this clears things.

 

Dave

[Jrtm]

There may be some confusion over which Pearl/Baron is being talked about here. The Pearl that Binkie Bush owned certainly had a 1053 in it at some time in his ownership in the early 70s. Saw it a number of times.

At the same time, Tay was owned by Tony Philips. I think it still had a hot bulb, but it was sold quite soon after we first met it in Gas St and went to Middlewich. Will try to find a pic.

 

Its the thomas clayton boats pearl and tay.

 

Tay 100% had the hot bulb bolinder removed in the late 50s pos early 60s as there is a pic of her in the claytons book with the exhaust on the opposite side when sold out of claytons this engine was still in it.

 

There is a late pic of pearl but cant see the exhaust but there was a pic around in the early 60s with the semi removed as again the exhaust was on the wrong side.

 

Claytons may have put diffrent engines in them. I have found no reference to what engines were put in only seen photos of them both in clayton days with diffrent engines due to the exhaust position. The only reference ive found except for pesronal accounts was that they had a twin cylinder engines (again in the claytons book but this could be wrong info too) as dave said tay had a single cold start. More than likley a 1051. (Im disagreeing with this i just wouldnt have thought this would be powerfull enough to pull a loaded butty as well which tay did but only photos are on her own)

 

Im just intrested in the history as there seams to be a lot of swapping engines just generally ive never understood it myself.

Edited April 10, 2016 by billybobbooth

[pete harrison]

My understanding is that 'Willow Wren' were the authorised supplier / distributor for the Bolinder 105- range of cold starting diesel engines as well as Seffle's, which is probably why several of their motors and pleasure boat conversions were fitted with them.

 

Having said the above I have not got a clue where I got this understanding from

[pete harrison]

Im just intrested in the history as there seams to be a lot of swapping engines just generally ive never understood it myself.

Thomas Clayton (Oldbury) Ltd. were not unique in modernising the engines in their motor boats. 'British Waterways' and 'Willow Wren' had been carrying out this task since the late 1950's with both their carrying and maintenance boats

 

edit = my records include engine changes right up to what is currently fitted, although this is far from complete.

Edited April 10, 2016 by pete harrison

[Jrtm]

Yer i have read about willow wren with 105s. As quite a few were fitted with 105s.

 

I wonder if anyone build a big 1 cylinder cold start. What about a rn/national. Although rn seamed to be more guccc as they had the supply contract for there boats.

 

As said i would have thought with the bolinder contacts they would have stuck with them.

[pete harrison]

There may be some confusion over which Pearl/Baron is being talked about here. The Pearl that Binkie Bush owned certainly had a 1053 in it at some time in his ownership in the early 70s. Saw it a number of times.

Nope, no confusion that I can see

 

As a point of interest the Bolinder 1053 that was / is fitted in PEARL / BARON was supplied new on 04 June 1956, and was originally fitted in W. Cresswell and Son's wooden tug CORONATION.

 

This thread is moving quite some way

[Jrtm]

That would put her in claytons time a 2 or 3 would make more sense. Another posable of a single 4 stroke would pos be a saab engine this

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tO9ZfxJXuUE

No starter motor but a cold start lump.

 

I cant see claytons putting a 3 cylinder in one then a single in the other though.

 

Sorry yes is getting a bit off topic from beech really

[pete harrison]

That would put her in claytons time a 2 or 3 would make more sense. Another posable of a single 4 stroke would pos be a saab engine this

The PEARL that had the Bolinder 1053 out of the tug CORONATION was not the Thomas Clayton (Oldbury) Ltd. PEARL.

 

I knew this would get confusing if both PEARL's got involved

[Guest]

That would put her in claytons time a 2 or 3 would make more sense. Another posable of a single 4 stroke would pos be a saab engine this

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tO9ZfxJXuUE

No starter motor but a cold start lump.

 

 

That's a real beauty!

 

Sorry, tangential newbie questions - variable pitch prop, did any of the working boats ever use this arrangement? 10hp, but sufficient to comfortably power an 18 tonnes narrowboat? Would there have been a reduction/reversing gearbox?

[Jrtm]

It would be enough to move a loaded motor but as fmc found a 9hp bolinder couldnt pull a loaded butty too.

It has a gearbox this engine but no idea of the setup.

 

I knew this would get confusing if both PEARL's got involved

Decided there should only be aloud 1 name of boat if its already used you should have to come up with something diffrent

[Guest]

..... but as fmc found a 9hp bolinder couldnt pull a loaded butty too.

 

 

I feared as much - though I doubt I'll ever be towing a butty I'd prefer to have a little in reserve for days when the Trent is running... the displacement of a 62' (fine) hull may prove to be too big a task for a single in all waters, but it would be great in a "chopped" tug... I loved how the hull of nb Swan danced to her cylinder's beat

[Jrtm]

To bring it back to beech. Anyone know what happened to the bolinder ken bought to put into it?

[Jrtm]

BEECH is also recorded at Hillmorton during this period and 18020 is recorded as its engine, clearly receiving it directly out of GREYHOUND sometime around autumn 1960. BEECH was tendered for sale (closing date ?? June 1962) and is now recorded as still being at Hillmorton Depot but "without engine", and this is supported by an 'enthusiast' observation dated 07 April 1962 when it was lying below Hillmorton.

 

I take it beech only ever had a bolinder fitted the even in bw days?

 

Be kind of nice if they fitted a jp or ha would make replicating history easyer but i guess at the same time all the bow and stern work would have to be redone (like the likes too much as they are)

 

[Jrtm]

Unfortunately beech needs far too much work. Its in fairly good condition but is right on that edge. The cabin inside is semi compleated and what has been done is really high quality looks good its unfortunately the hull that has stopped me buying it i jave the budget to buy the boat and do some of the work but not enough that i could start the work as the hull work needs all the bits doing at the same time if was just the odd bit the another odd bit i could have done it but 1 bit that needs doing needs the other doing at the same time or its just waisted money as you would have to do some again or i have the budget to do all the work but then not enough to buy the boat. Im really gutted as its actually a really nice boat and its a little scruffy on the outside but my god its nice on the inside

[Jrtm]

If you rubbed the cabin down re painted it in just the base waterways coulours to save on tins of paint and tidied up the top clothes (bottom clothes are like new) the boat would look far better. If its still for sale at a later date if i could get more funds together its still on the cards but it would depend if the work that needs doing gets more

[pete harrison]

Unfortunately beech needs far too much work. Its in fairly good condition but is right on that edge.

I am not sure what you expected of a full length wooden motor with a relatively low asking price of £15000, and has been for sale for quite a while

 

If its still for sale at a later date if i could get more funds together its still on the cards but it would depend if the work that needs doing gets more

As a wooden boat there is only ever going to be more work required, unless of course somebody gives it the full restoration then the price will increase accordingly. Surely with your history and involvement with wooden narrow boats this must be obvious

[Jrtm]

I knew it would need work that wasnt the issue i wasnt expecting it to needs 20k just to get her water tight if it was a few bottoms and a plank 5-10k not a problem but 16 foot of bottoms and the chime planks and one 30 foot plank wasnt expecting that. The cabin work yes needs doing but a few £100 for the cabin skin on the engine room some paint and 3 hand rails wasnt an issue. It was the extent of the floor that caused the biggest issues. Like said 5-10k on the hold to get her water tight i would have bought it. Yes there are other planks but they are ok at mo and yes 3 years time needed replacing thats fine funds for that would be there as a rented house is paying for the project so constant money wasnt an issue its the first get the boat and get her water tight.

[stagedamager]

Is that costed with you doing the work or at a yard?

[Jrtm]

The yard, i can do cabin work,slides doors running gear but i have no idea where to start on that kind of work yes i can do it im sure with some time i did speak to jem bates about doing it diy which yes i can bring the cost right down, but i would much rather pay to get it done right as i wouldnt be confident + if i do it wrong it would have to all be ripped apart.

It is about 5-7k in wood. I only get every other weekend off. If was the fitting out i could make bits at home but for me to diy the hull i would need to be there

[stagedamager]

Fair enough. Have you asked a couple of yards for quotations or just the one??

[Jrtm]

Ives asked 3, 1 of which was ade who saw the boat in sept 15 they all quoted between 15-20k and around 18-20 days just for the work to get it water tight around and below the water line. So that dosnt take into account any problems once the wood is removed or being removed