Jump to content

What features drives boat prices


Mick in Bangkok

Featured Posts

10 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

I think that traditional engines with their polished brass and copper are wonderful to look at, and that the puffs of exhaust and that deep 'thump' 'thump' sound is also great. High torque low revving engines with huge propellers are great, but spending 6 or 7 hours a day just a few feet behind that vertical exhaust pipe just can't be good for you.

Modern car engines have legal limits for gasses and particulates with exhaust gas recycling etc, and although the exhaust they produce to the naked eye is absolutely clear, 'they' still want to ban modern diesel cars because of health concerns.

Not all perhaps, but with most of these vintage engines you can see and smell the pollution and I'll bet that they produce many times the particulates of modern engines that in cars are soon to be phased out.

It can be uncomfortable traveling several hundred yards behind a vintage engine in a tunnel because of the fumes and hazy visibility, so don't you guys worry about the lining of your lungs?

 

This is true only to an extent. Old diesel engines (of whatever make) undoubtedly produce a very "visible" exhaust which modern diesels usually do not.

However, most of the visible smoke is particulates, which on an old engine are large in size and hence visible. Thankfully mother nature protects humans from such things by our in-built air filter in our nose, and any particulates that get through this are too big to go far into the lungs, so old engines are fairly benign in this respect.

Not so with "dangerous" modern diesel engines. In the quest to make them more fuel-efficient and appear cleaner the designs have become much more refined, but the problem is that the particulates that they still emit are now so very much smaller in particle size. Not only does this make them less visible, but they are so small that they pass the nose and can lodge deep inside the lungs, and this is the big problem with them - and also manufacturers who cynically fiddle the computer to produce better test results!

So in the (hypothetical) shoot-out between a Gardner and a Volkswagen - for my lungs sake give me the Gardner please!

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dmr said:

With a roof mounted exhaust chimney most of the exhaust goes harmlessly skyward, standing on the back of a modern boat, or next to one, with the exhaust just behind me, wafting up past my face, is more concerning. As for following a boat through a tunnel, some of the smokiest boats i've ever seen have had the engines under the back deck, though I accept they are probably old engines.

Have spent the last few days on a boat with a Kelvin K2 and, except when accelerating hard, it has an exhaust cleaner than many modern engines.

All good points, but:

Often the upward exhaust is baffled and is diverted to either side, plus, most of the time the skipper will be downwind of the offending fumes, so one is very much in the 'firing line'.

Waterline exhausts are almost always behind the steerer and therefore downwind, so much safer for you, if not for the chap behind you in the tunnel.

Waterline exhausts may also be water cooled (mine is) so although the particulates still enter the environment, they are largely 'caught' by the sprayed water before being discharged, rather than by the lining of one's lungs.

Also, I wouldn't reassure myself too much by the fact that one's exhaust is clear, as the damaging particulates are invisible to the naked eye.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bargebuilder said:

All good points, but:

Often the upward exhaust is baffled and is diverted to either side, plus, most of the time the skipper will be downwind of the offending fumes, so one is very much in the 'firing line'.

Waterline exhausts are almost always behind the steerer and therefore downwind, so much safer for you, if not for the chap behind you in the tunnel.

Waterline exhausts may also be water cooled (mine is) so although the particulates still enter the environment, they are largely 'caught' by the sprayed water before being discharged, rather than by the lining of one's lungs.

Also, I wouldn't reassure myself too much by the fact that one's exhaust is clear, as the damaging particulates are invisible to the naked eye.

 

Are you sure about the clear exhaust and articulate size? Its an interesting idea. My engine has got quite smokey and I was going to clean the injectors? maybe its better for me to leave them dirty. :D

AS for your other points...

The "baffle" is called a splitter or cutter and should direct the exhaust to both sides rather than towards the steerer, but I do find it much better to have a totally open exhaust pipe.

Very few canal boats have wet exhausts.

Going through a tunnel, especially Northwards in Harecastle, with a roof mounted exhaust can be unpleasant, but the exhaust from other boats is just as troublesome if they are in front.

................Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, D. W. Walker said:

However, most of the visible smoke is particulates, which on an old engine are large in size and hence visible. Thankfully mother nature protects humans from such things by our in-built air filter in our nose, and any particulates that get through this are too big to go far into the lungs, so old engines are fairly benign in this respect.

As I said, I am a huge fan of other people's vintage engines and often strike up conversations with their owners, but......

Noses might collect the soot from a smokey bonfire, but from a smokey exhaust? Perhaps your handkerchief is full of 'evidence'. If it is, I would really worry about what is getting through your nose and down to your lungs!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dmr said:
20 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

I wouldn't reassure myself too much by the fact that one's exhaust is clear, as the damaging particulates are invisible to the naked eye.

 

Are you sure about the clear exhaust and articulate size? Its an interesting idea. My engine has got quite smokey and I was going to clean the injectors? maybe its better for me to leave them dirty. :D

Perhaps so, but I wouldn't guarantee that the sooty particles are exactly good for you either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion this, personally I've always been envious of boaters with vertical exhausts as I think the main danger to health is sharing a lock with an idling engine with the exhaust a few feet below the steerer.   At least with an exhaust stack the fumes are heading skywards.  All the fuss about diesel engines in urban areas does make you think whether the continuous exposure to exhaust fumes on a narrowboat is a genuine hazard to health.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not always skywards...

I was told earlier about the common use of a thing called a 'splitter' that diverts the exhaust from many a vertical exhaust sideways. (Maybe this also stops rain from entering the system as well)

I am reminded of a recent consumer tv programme where the presenter smuggled a high tech particulate analyser onto a modern cruise ship. Now I know that whilst crossing oceans they burn 'rubbish' heavy oil that is more like treacle, but the purpose of the experiment was to see just how many pollutants found there way down from the impressively high smoke stack and onto the deck below where the happy holiday makers were sunbathing. The figures were worse than those recorded at a busy London intersection and if ashore would fail EU standards! 

The density or type of pollution is not relevant here, but the fact that there was no visible evidence or smell at deck level and that the levels were 'sky high', even though the smoke stack was around 60ft above deck level most certainly is. On narrowboats, we are talking at best of an exhaust that is a few feet upwind and possibly a bit above head level. Splitter or not, I wouldn't place money on the purity of the air where the 'helm' stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bargebuilder said:

Not always skywards...

I was told earlier about the common use of a thing called a 'splitter' that diverts the exhaust from many a vertical exhaust sideways. (Maybe this also stops rain from entering the system as well)

I am reminded of a recent consumer tv programme where the presenter smuggled a high tech particulate analyser onto a modern cruise ship. Now I know that whilst crossing oceans they burn 'rubbish' heavy oil that is more like treacle, but the purpose of the experiment was to see just how many pollutants found there way down from the impressively high smoke stack and onto the deck below where the happy holiday makers were sunbathing. The figures were worse than those recorded at a busy London intersection and if ashore would fail EU standards! 

The density or type of pollution is not relevant here, but the fact that there was no visible evidence or smell at deck level and that the levels were 'sky high', even though the smoke stack was around 60ft above deck level most certainly is. On narrowboats, we are talking at best of an exhaust that is a few feet upwind and possibly a bit above head level. Splitter or not, I wouldn't place money on the purity of the air where the 'helm' stands.

A splitter/cutter does not really stop the rain getting in. As I said earlier, it helps keep the smoke out of the steerers face, another purpose, and some would say the main purpose, is to stop the exhaust from hitting the roofs of tunnels and bringing down a load of crap....and yes, this is indeed a real problem :D

My boat has got somewhat smokey over the last year and so I have a pretty good idea of where the exhaust actually goes, and its relatively rare for it to go into my face. 

.............Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I followed a narrowboat about a month ago which had a vertical exhaust pipe with no splitter and an exhaust note that sounded like small explosions in a drain pipe. As it passed under trees it was agitating foliage quite violently some 15 feet above the boat, so knocking bits off of tunnel roofs sounds very likely to me. The gasses were 'fired' upwards and away from the steerer...... in theory anyway.

Clean or dirty, I still feel better being upwind of any exhaust gasses. 

Vintage engines also seem to be left running A LOT, even when not needed. I once noticed one being left running during an hours stopover for lunch! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Bargebuilder said:

Vintage engines also seem to be left running A LOT, even when not needed. I once noticed one being left running during an hours stopover for lunch! 

Perhaps because it might be difficult to start? Some are still hand start only!

Or with the hunger for electricity on boats today, the inevitable battery charging, for which owners of modern engines are just as guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, D. W. Walker said:

Or with the hunger for electricity on boats today, the inevitable battery charging, for which owners of modern engines are just as guilty.

How right you are. I am often surprised that after a day's cruising, whatever the age of the lump, within a couple of hours of mooring up, on goes the engine again.

We have the usual lights, fridge (on all the time), TV,  various chargers, pc, etc. and yet we can moor up for three or four days without running the batteries below 50% or even thinking about starting the engine: We do have a couple of small solar panels just in case the Sun shows its face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

How right you are. I am often surprised that after a day's cruising, whatever the age of the lump, within a couple of hours of mooring up, on goes the engine again.

We have the usual lights, fridge (on all the time), TV,  various chargers, pc, etc. and yet we can moor up for three or four days without running the batteries below 50% or even thinking about starting the engine: We do have a couple of small solar panels just in case the Sun shows its face.

But what about when you cook you evening meal in the microwave whilst your coffee machine is on and the electric blanket warming your bed up :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/08/2017 at 08:27, Alan de Enfield said:

Interesting that the advert claims it to be a 1989 boat, but the registration number quoted (45207) is issued in the 1988 'block'.

1989 numbers started at 45506

 

 

I am unaware of the situation nearly thirty years ago but you can currently pre register a new build to get an index number. if this is done at an early stage of the build and it was subsequently finished in the following year.

 

would this of applied back then? or is my ignorance getting in the way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, thebfg said:

I am unaware of the situation nearly thirty years ago but you can currently pre register a new build to get an index number. if this is done at an early stage of the build and it was subsequently finished in the following year.

 

would this of applied back then? or is my ignorance getting in the way?

Nor am I aware of the practices of 30 years ago, but would work on the principle that a manufacturer (Boat, car, washing machine or whatever) is unlikely to want to have a one year old boat sat around that would be sold as a new boat.

Would you buy a '16' registered car in 2017 ? at 'full price'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Nor am I aware of the practices of 30 years ago, but would work on the principle that a manufacturer (Boat, car, washing machine or whatever) is unlikely to want to have a one year old boat sat around that would be sold as a new boat.

Would you buy a '16' registered car in 2017 ? at 'full price'.

that's a little different, we once brought a pre registered car saved a fortune. 10k for a brand new focus.

however with a boat it would be the buyer of the boat who pre registers it to get an index number not the builder. 

Edited by thebfg
to add some text.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/08/2017 at 08:27, Alan de Enfield said:

Interesting that the advert claims it to be a 1989 boat, but the registration number quoted (45207) is issued in the 1988 'block'.

1989 numbers started at 45506

Heard that when BW started to give out numbers they had a batch made,  these were given out randomly depending on what number they pulled out of the box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Robbo said:

Heard that when BW started to give out numbers they had a batch made,  these were given out randomly depending on what number they pulled out of the box.

Maybe in 1980/1 when they first started issuing numbers, but by 1989/9 I would have expected even BWB / BW to have emptied the 1st box and be on an 'even keel'

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
  • 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.