Overplating v replating

[jonk]

Hello,

There have been quite a few threads concerning overplating of hulls and there seems to be two camps - not unusual I suppose!

The one camp says that overplating gives you a 'new' boat, the other camp says that it is a short term fix which will only last for 5 - 10 years. I expect the truth lies between these? It also probably depends upon a number of connected things, like quality and thickness of the steel used, the quality of welding, how much is overplated and so on? There is also the question of cost! Is it cost-effective to replate? Is it even possible without removing the floor and ballast? Again opinions seem to differ.

Why am I interested? I have seen a narrowboat reduced by 10thousand because it needs over/re plating - is this a good buy, all other things being equal?

Thanks,

John

[bag 'o' bones]

Hello,

There have been quite a few threads concerning overplating of hulls and there seems to be two camps - not unusual I suppose!

The one camp says that overplating gives you a 'new' boat, the other camp says that it is a short term fix which will only last for 5 - 10 years. I expect the truth lies between these? It also probably depends upon a number of connected things, like quality and thickness of the steel used, the quality of welding, how much is overplated and so on? There is also the question of cost! Is it cost-effective to replate? Is it even possible without removing the floor and ballast? Again opinions seem to differ.

Why am I interested? I have seen a narrowboat reduced by 10thousand because it needs over/re plating - is this a good buy, all other things being equal?

Thanks,

John

 

Personally i think overplating rather than re-plating is a bit of a bodge. Bit like using coversills to repair a rusty sill on a car.

 

Thing is the boat you are looking at may only need a few repairs here and there therefore it would be better to cut out and replace - well in my opinion anyway.

[johnjo]

Hello,

There have been quite a few threads concerning overplating of hulls and there seems to be two camps - not unusual I suppose!

The one camp says that overplating gives you a 'new' boat, the other camp says that it is a short term fix which will only last for 5 - 10 years. I expect the truth lies between these? It also probably depends upon a number of connected things, like quality and thickness of the steel used, the quality of welding, how much is overplated and so on? There is also the question of cost! Is it cost-effective to replate? Is it even possible without removing the floor and ballast? Again opinions seem to differ.

Why am I interested? I have seen a narrowboat reduced by 10thousand because it needs over/re plating - is this a good buy, all other things being equal?

Thanks,

John

 

Reduced by 10k from what to what? and have you had a survey done to give you an accurate picture of what work is required & the costs and hassle involved?

[jonk]

Reduced by 10k from what to what? and have you had a survey done to give you an accurate picture of what work is required & the costs and hassle involved?

 

50ft 1978 from 27000 to 17000 was what I was looking at, but not seriously considering buying! I was just really wondering whether a narrowboat in need of overplating is worthy of consideration. I would assume that if it needs overplating in one area it would be sensible to have the whole hull replated at the same time, or is that a wrong assessment of how hulls corrode? If it were a very nice boat in all other respects would a newly overplated hull restore it to 'as new' condition, or would it be a fairly short-term solution? Presumably an overplate would return it to a pristine hull condition, but at what cost?

Thanks for the replies.

John

[Athy]

Where is this boat advertised?

[jonk]

Where is this boat advertised?

 

Hi,

Can't find the one I was referring to but a similar one is this

Dreamcapture

£14,995

57ft Stourport

1981 Tradtional Style Narrowboat,

requires overplating

Whilton

 

John

[Steve Priest]

O.K. , cutting out and replating is a far better job, but may not always be a practical proposition. The boat that you describe is a 31 year old boat, if the prognosis is that it requires plating from the waterline down, as the cost seems to reflect, cutting out would entail stripping out the fit out and cutting the hull at the waterline, and replacing from there down. This would cost more than a new cheaper range boat. If this were to be done, it would still be a repaired 31 year old boat, and it's sell on value would reflect this.

 

Considering overplating, the 10K that you suggest would finish the job and could be done whilst retaining the existing fit out, and I would hope would last longer than ten years, although twenty would probably be optimistic at the least .

 

The bottom line is purchase price 17K steelwork 10K total price, plated , 27k, expect say 15yrs trouble free use, against, well, what do you want to spend? What quality do you want?

 

Steve

[David Schweizer]

O.K. , cutting out and replating is a far better job, but may not always be a practical proposition. The boat that you describe is a 31 year old boat, if the prognosis is that it requires plating from the waterline down, as the cost seems to reflect, cutting out would entail stripping out the fit out and cutting the hull at the waterline, and replacing from there down. This would cost more than a new cheaper range boat. If this were to be done, it would still be a repaired 31 year old boat, and it's sell on value would reflect this.

 

Considering overplating, the 10K that you suggest would finish the job and could be done whilst retaining the existing fit out, and I would hope would last longer than ten years, although twenty would probably be optimistic at the least .

 

The bottom line is purchase price 17K steelwork 10K total price, plated , 27k, expect say 15yrs trouble free use, against, well, what do you want to spend? What quality do you want?

 

Steve

Being in the position where some overplating on my 25 year old Braunston Canal Services Narrowboat may be required within the next five years, I would be interested in your view. Two smallish areas of pitting were found during the last survey, with a number pits ranging from 1.5 to 1.8 mm, and one of 2.3mm. There were further far smaller pits along the hull, but most of the hull had only superficial corrosion.

 

Given your overplating predictions, would it be worth having the worst pits spot filled for the time being and wait until deterioration to worsen else where, or would you recommend overplating within the next few years? As a matter of interest, we conducted our own vernier probe tests two years after the survey and there had been no further degredation.

 

 

As an aside, one on your boats is currently resting on blocks in a Nursery Car Park near us in Wiltshire. Whenever we visit I spend more time oggling the boat than looking at plants. It was completely painted and decorated in Cowburn and Coupar livery earlier this year and looks beautiful. Envy is not one of my characteristics, but looking at that boat gets me near!!

Edited November 30, 2009 by David Schweizer

[Timleech]

Being in the position where some overplating on my 25 year old Braunston Canal Services Narrowboat may be required within the next five years, I would be interested in your view. Two smallish areas of pitting were found during the last survey, with a number pits ranging from 1.5 to 1.8 mm, and one of 2.3mm. There were further far smaller pits along the hull, but most of the hull had only superficial corrosion.

 

Given your overplating predictions, would it be worth having the worst pits spot filled for the time being and wait until deterioration to worsen else where, or would you recommend overplating within the next few years? As a matter of interest, we conducted our own vernier probe tests two years after the survey and there had been no further degredation.

 

I agree with all that Steve says. In your case, no-one can really judge properly without seeing the boat or at least a detailed report, but if it is relatively localised then cutting out and letting in might be a realistic option to consider.

 

Regarding the boat in the original post, it sounds remarkably similar to one which was booked on my dock for today, an earlier sale had fallen through because of a poor survey report and they wanted another opinion as well as overdue cleaning & blacking. They cheerfully told me on Thursday that the boat was sold after reducing the price by 10K and they wouldn't be coming. No hint of an apology, and they had obviously known for a little while before letting me know.

I don't ask for deposits, don't want the extra paperwork, this is usually very rare but the third time this year....

 

Tim

Edited November 30, 2009 by Timleech

[David Schweizer]

I agree with all that Steve says. In your case, no-one can really judge properly without seeing the boat or at least a detailed report, but if it is relatively localised then cutting out and letting in might be a realistic option to consider.

 

Regarding the boat in the original post, it sounds remarkably similar to one which was booked on my dock for today, an earlier sale had fallen through because of a poor survey report and they wanted another opinion as well as overdue cleaning & blacking. They cheerfully told me on Thursday that the boat was sold after reducing the price by 10K and they wouldn't be coming. No hint of an apology, and they had obviously known for a little while before letting me know.

I don't ask for deposits, don't want the extra paperwork, this is usually very rare but the third time this year....

 

Tim

The report is insufficiently detailed, but my own observations are that areas on both sides are comapratively small - a couple of feet on each side just below the water line. As they are at opposite ends of the boat, I am convinced the corrosion is a consequence of galvanic corrosion, having being moored either way round against a single steel post for the first twelve years of the boat's life, with 240 v power on site.

 

I spoke to Roger Farrington at the time who went through the alternatives, but we did not reach any conclusion as he did not think it was serious enough to worry about yet. The other problem is that the surveyor was clearly so frightened of being sued (again!), he erred on the side of cautiion with all his recommendations, so anything he wrote has to be taken with a pinch of salt. I had an uphill battle with him to correct several errors in his report due to stating worst case scenario, rarther than reality. I only learnt of his reputaion within the trade afterwards, and would never use him again. He even tried to recommend a company to shotblast and epoxy my hull for several thousand pounds, I was not impressed. Unfortunately my regular surveyor was not available because the Dry dock changed their dates! but we all learn.

 

Sorry to hear about your let down, it must be very annoying when it is your livelyhood. Believe me, If it was my boat, I would be there the day before and have the cash/cheque ready for you before I departed.

Edited November 30, 2009 by David Schweizer

[RLWP]

The report is insufficiently detailed, but my own observations are that areas on both sides are comapratively small - a couple of feet on each side just below the water line. As they are at opposite ends of the boat, I am convinced the corrosion is a consequence of galvanic corrosion, having being moored either way round against a single steel post for the first twelve years of the boat's life, with 240 v power on site.

 

I spoke to Roger Farrington at the time who went through the alternatives, but we did not reach any conclusion as he did not think it was serious enough to worry about yet. <snip>

 

 

Hi David.

 

Our first ever survey, six years ago, highlighted pitting very similar to what you describe. We discussed plating and spot-welding with our surveyor and his opinion was to black over the pits and keep an eye on them. Six years later they haven't recurred in a survey because they are full of blacking, and we are still keeping an eye on them...

 

Richard

[Timleech]

Sorry to hear about your let down, it must be very annoying when it is your livelyhood. Believe me, If it was my boat, I would be there the day before and have the cash/cheque ready for you before I departed.

 

Most people do, which is why it's been OK for the last 20 years to not bother with the fuss of deposits.

This year has made me start to wonder, though

 

Tim

[Steve Priest]

Being in the position where some overplating on my 25 year old Braunston Canal Services Narrowboat may be required within the next five years, I would be interested in your view. Two smallish areas of pitting were found during the last survey, with a number pits ranging from 1.5 to 1.8 mm, and one of 2.3mm. There were further far smaller pits along the hull, but most of the hull had only superficial corrosion.

 

Given your overplating predictions, would it be worth having the worst pits spot filled for the time being and wait until deterioration to worsen else where, or would you recommend overplating within the next few years? As a matter of interest, we conducted our own vernier probe tests two years after the survey and there had been no further degredation.

 

 

As an aside, one on your boats is currently resting on blocks in a Nursery Car Park near us in Wiltshire. Whenever we visit I spend more time oggling the boat than looking at plants. It was completely painted and decorated in Cowburn and Coupar livery earlier this year and looks beautiful. Envy is not one of my characteristics, but looking at that boat gets me near!!

 

Firstly, my I say that I am sorry to read your recent news, I wish you all the best.

 

Thank you for the comments about the new boat, but I can't personally take the credit for that one, Simon Wain built it.

 

Regarding your own overplating problems, most of the boats that we do this work to were built with 6mm bottoms, I suspect that your boat has a 10mm bottom, which I would doubt will give you any problems for a good while yet. If the areas that concern you are indeed that small, presumably on the footings, the options would seem to be to clean the area thoroughly, black it well and keep an eye on it, (use an epoxy black to be even more sure), weld up the worst of the pits, then black, or to plate, either overplate or cut out and replace. My own feeling is that I would black it, and if I was happy that it was not deteriorating further, leave it until the surveyor picks up on it. I can't imagine that you would need to plate large areas in the immediate future. The problem with cutting out and replating is access to the inside, if you decided to plate it I would probably suggest overplating these two areas, but it is impossible to say for sure without seeing the survey

 

 

Steve

[David Schweizer]

Firstly, my I say that I am sorry to read your recent news, I wish you all the best.

 

Thank you for the comments about the new boat, but I can't personally take the credit for that one, Simon Wain built it.

 

Regarding your own overplating problems, most of the boats that we do this work to were built with 6mm bottoms, I suspect that your boat has a 10mm bottom, which I would doubt will give you any problems for a good while yet. If the areas that concern you are indeed that small, presumably on the footings, the options would seem to be to clean the area thoroughly, black it well and keep an eye on it, (use an epoxy black to be even more sure), weld up the worst of the pits, then black, or to plate, either overplate or cut out and replace. My own feeling is that I would black it, and if I was happy that it was not deteriorating further, leave it until the surveyor picks up on it. I can't imagine that you would need to plate large areas in the immediate future. The problem with cutting out and replating is access to the inside, if you decided to plate it I would probably suggest overplating these two areas, but it is impossible to say for sure without seeing the survey

 

 

Steve

Thanks for the good wishes, I continue to be heartened by people's kind concerns.

 

With regards to the plating, it is the 6mm hull sides which have the small areas of pitting not the 10mm base plate, which is still in remarkably good condition, would the same advice apply? The worst pit means that the side has been reduced to just over 3.5 mm, but weren't some early steel boat sides not that much thicker when new? ( he asked optimisticly) It would certainly be a lot easier to get to the sides to undertake some filling or even patching, and it would be comparatively easy to gain access to the sides and remove some interior panels without destroying the interior. I did have two redundant waste outlets plated (level) some years ago and there was no problem. The interior insulation is Rock wool so presumably less prone to combustion.

 

I am certain that the young lady decorating the boat at the Nursery stated that it had been built by you, but she must have got it wrong, it is certainly a very attractive vessel. Simon's brother Rex, who I believe also works with you had a hand in the original fitout of my boat when he worked for Balliol - small world. The hull was of course fabrictaed by Rogher Farrington and Dave Thomas, and is a very heavy and solid affair.

[Steve Priest]

My understanding is that most insurance companies want to see a minimum plate thickness of 4mm to accept the boat as being in an insurable condition, and that surveyors, therefore, will condemn any areas that they find with a thickness of less than 4mm, your deepest pits will obviously reduce the plate thickness to less than this. However, they will be less cocerned about the odd pit than a large area of substantially thinner plate, if, indeed they find it in the first place. Welding these deeper pits up would be feasable and an acceptable option as long as there aren't too many of them.

 

 

If you accept that sooner or later that these areas will need plating, and access to the inside would not cause too much disruption, then cutting out and replacing would be viable, but access to weld the plate internally would be needed to make a good job of it. If this much access is not easily possible then overplating would be perfectly ok, remember that you could always have the overplate cut off and replaced in the future if it was needed.

[Timleech]

My understanding is that most insurance companies want to see a minimum plate thickness of 4mm to accept the boat as being in an insurable condition, and that surveyors, therefore, will condemn any areas that they find with a thickness of less than 4mm, your deepest pits will obviously reduce the plate thickness to less than this. However, they will be less cocerned about the odd pit than a large area of substantially thinner plate, if, indeed they find it in the first place. Welding these deeper pits up would be feasable and an acceptable option as long as there aren't too many of them.

 

This 4mm figure seems to me to be a fairly spurious and recent adoption by some insurers or underwriters, some are more concerned about it than others.

A surveyor, not one I know, was 'doing' a small Springer on my dock last year, the boat was actually very tidy for its age but he was tut-tutting the whole time and then told the owners that the whole thing needed replating because all his ultrasonic readings were 4mm or less. I suggested to the owners that he check the original thickness, not something he had done, it turned out to be..........4mm, so the resultswere scarcely surprising. I was asked to look at another Springer just a few weeks ago, the owner reckoned it was just over 20 years old but the style suggested to me that it was older. I checked the hull plating thickness, it was 3.2mm (1/8"). OK, that boat may have been getting near the end of it's life but it has given good use for, my guess, about 30 years and it's never been anywhere near 4mm thick, anywhere.

 

Tim

[David Schweizer]

Thanks for the advice Gentlemen. I think I will have another chat with Roger Farrington next year and try and sort out some sort of resolution based on yiour suggestions.

[Miracle]

I had a very good experience purchasing my first springer (the one I am on) where the boat had very little corrosion to her hull. This may have been becuase the owner took regular care of her and took the time to surround the mooring metal with wood.

 

I'm contemplating a second Springer (1989) because the price is right - and at 34ft the size is good, for me. I've spoken to the seller and he's the second owner and had her 20 of her 23 years. She's been on a mooring and used at weekends for cruising. He says he has all the documentation covering her for the 23 years, which i am keen to read.

 

I'm looking everywhere for some indication of how hulls hold up on moorings ie if the deterioration would be worse or less. I know its worse if the mooring is metal and I certainly would never buy without a survey..just trying to prepare myself for what could be lurking under the water.

 

Any suggestions?

[Teadaemon]

I had a very good experience purchasing my first springer (the one I am on) where the boat had very little corrosion to her hull. This may have been becuase the owner took regular care of her and took the time to surround the mooring metal with wood.

 

I'm contemplating a second Springer (1989) because the price is right - and at 34ft the size is good, for me. I've spoken to the seller and he's the second owner and had her 20 of her 23 years. She's been on a mooring and used at weekends for cruising. He says he has all the documentation covering her for the 23 years, which i am keen to read.

 

I'm looking everywhere for some indication of how hulls hold up on moorings ie if the deterioration would be worse or less. I know its worse if the mooring is metal and I certainly would never buy without a survey..just trying to prepare myself for what could be lurking under the water.

 

Any suggestions?

 

To be honest, there are so many variables that really the only way to find out is to have a survey and see what it says. Where abouts is the boat? Do you have a surveyor lined up already?

[Chris Pink]

Do you think aggressively punting for work on an internet forum damages or enhances your reputation?

 

website anybody? Nice little brochure?

[George94]

I should be most interested to know why it is suggested that over-plating might not last as long as re-plating. Seems to me that two hulls are better than one.

[RLWP]

I should be most interested to know why it is suggested that over-plating might not last as long as re-plating. Seems to me that two hulls are better than one.

 

Two hulls with rust and water trapped between them?

 

Richard

[luctor et emergo]

Overplating a small area is no problem, as the heat of the welding will dry out any moisture between the two plates.

Overplating larger areas is a different kettle of haddock.

[onionbargee]

Hello,

There have been quite a few threads concerning overplating of hulls and there seems to be two camps - not unusual I suppose!

The one camp says that overplating gives you a 'new' boat, the other camp says that it is a short term fix which will only last for 5 - 10 years. I expect the truth lies between these? It also probably depends upon a number of connected things, like quality and thickness of the steel used, the quality of welding, how much is overplated and so on? There is also the question of cost! Is it cost-effective to replate? Is it even possible without removing the floor and ballast? Again opinions seem to differ.

Why am I interested? I have seen a narrowboat reduced by 10thousand because it needs over/re plating - is this a good buy, all other things being equal?

Thanks,

John

 

 

 

 

can it rust any further after all the oxygen is used up, and converted to iron oxide in the space between the plates ?

Edited June 6, 2012 by onionbargee

[RLWP]

 

can it rust any further after all the oxygen is used up, and converted to iron oxide in the space between the plates ?

 

How well has the welding been done, especially is it porous? So many imponderables...

 

I'm comfortable with overplating though

 

Richard