Jump to content

Rivets?


frahkn

Featured Posts

At the moment I am moored between two boats.

One is a Hudson, a nice, clean, attractive boat but with those rivets which I hear are not the thing.

The other is a R W Davis Northwich Trader, a gorgeous boat (almost as nice as mine:)) but with rivets, in fact many more rivets than the Hudson.

I don't recall very many comments on here about Davis rivets but loads about those on Hudsons - why is this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will find comments on threads that decry mock rivets as faux irrespective of the hull builder.

I think the answer to the question of RW Davis vs SM Hudson rivets may simply lie in the fact SMH boats are more common and probably better known than RWD. Also the Josher bow thing was perhaps over played by SMH whereas the RWD Northwich Trader wears its historic inspiration more naturally.

Having said that Hudson boats are high quality and the bow and stern designs are disctinctive in their own right and do not look out of place on a boat irrespective of whether they are a personal taste. Taken in isolation the bows are fine and achieved the objective of being a distinctive recognisable design. 

When out and about I tend to register that I have seen a Hudson when I see one but I can often recall where and when and which boat is was with an RWD Northwich Trader. I believe there are only about 30 of them.

Hudson's seem to have become the flag bearer for the 'shiny boater' tag and whereas doubtless there are folk who choose a boat they see as a status symbol (same happens with cars and houses) the whole Hudson thing is becoming divisive. A boat is an inanimate object; it can't offend anyone.

Let's be honest most people would be glad of owning either make of boat along with a handful of other top end builders.

JP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have come badly unstuck on here in the past for comments made about R W Davies boats, but not for some time.  I suppose my case wasn't helped at the time by the fact that a forum moderator owned one!

I'm not a great fan of faked rivets on any boats, (however, see below!), but the harsh reality is that most builders that attempt to mimic rivets do it in a far too heavy handed way.  If you study what they are attempting to fake, the real thing is often a very subtle thing often raised very little from the metalwork it is holding together.  On some Josher and Grand Union boats, the hull rivets are barely visible on much of the hull.

Neither Hudson's fakes nor RWD's are very subtle, by comparison, (though neither are half as bad as some of what you see!).  I personally think the fake riveting on the accommodation cabins of RWD boats is completely OTT, and I have never understood the introduction of the narrowed bit between the engine room and the main cabin.  Barry Hawkins and some Mel Davies boats often do this as well, (particularly if they have coined words like "Northwich" or "Trader" as well!)

Having discussed fake rivets, by far the bigger issue to me with any of these makes relate to actual hull shapes, their appearance, and particularly claims made about them.

The exaggerated "squashed between lock gates" look of a Hudson bow has always been made a selling point by Hudsons, claiming "Josher" ancestry, but has never looked anything like any Josher.  I think it looks more than faintly ridiculous, but many who buy the boats clearly love them.  I freely acknowledge they no doubt find the bluff bows of my GUCCCo Yarwoods boats as unattractive as I find the bows of a Hudson - we all have different tastes.

The shape of an RWD Davies hull is a whole lot better by comparison, (to my yes of course), but I really dislike the claims made by RWD that " All external lines to Yarwoods of Northwich 1930's design. Entrance and exit swims built to exact dimensions giving positive handling and absence of excess wash. "   At least they have dropped the bit about using 1930s Yarwoods plans.  No 1930s Yarwoods built boat ever had the hull shape of a modern RWD boat, and whilst RWD boats have long rear swims, that is all they have - they have none of the detailed and intricate shaping that a genuine Yarwoods boat of that period has.

The only boats to genuinely replicate the true lines of an FMC "Josher" or a GUCCCo "Star" are built by specialist outfits at Brinklow Boat Services, Stockton Dry Dock or Roger Fuller, Dave Harris, etc, (although I'm sure some of these are not now building new).   Somehow, (to me), well faked rivets on these sit rather better than any ever do on boats by Hudson, RWH, Barry Hawkins, Mel Davies, Wilson/Tyler etc.

I would be far happier, (and far less likely to have a rant!),  if Hudson and RWD had never made claims about the heritage or inspiration of the boats they built, and had simply admitted they were their own bespoke designs.  (I don't imagine it will be long before someone is making Hudson replicas!)
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take on it would be that most RW Davis boats are presented in a far more traditional manner than most Hudsons are in terms of paintwork and general appearance, plus RWD have a working boat inspired engine room and back cabin. Unlike Alan I actually like the recess between engine room and main cabin and generally I can spot an RWD or Barry Hawkins boat but see nowhere near the same number as I do Hudsons. Personally I am not a fan of Hudson lines but having moored on the Gloucester Sharpness for a couple of years the RWD lines have grown on me.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

I have come badly unstuck on here in the past for comments made about R W Davies boats, but not for some time.  I suppose my case wasn't helped at the time by the fact that a forum moderator owned one!

I would be far happier, (and far less likely to have a rant!),  if Hudson and RWD had never made claims about the heritage or inspiration of the boats they built, and had simply admitted they were their own bespoke designs.  (I don't imagine it will be long before someone is making Hudson replicas!)
 

I was never in the market for a new Hudson or RWD so have not read their published claims. I am a little disappointed that my own maker, Orion (where I believe mine is one of only 11 surviving 70' boats) seem to have made no claims whatever. Despite searching, I have found out little about the history of my boat nor of the manufacturer generally.

With non-historic boats, I wonder if even somewhat specious stories are better than none at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alan_fincher said:

I have come badly unstuck on here in the past for comments made about R W Davies boats, but not for some time.  I suppose my case wasn't helped at the time by the fact that a forum moderator owned one!

I'm not a great fan of faked rivets on any boats, (however, see below!), but the harsh reality is that most builders that attempt to mimic rivets do it in a far too heavy handed way.  If you study what they are attempting to fake, the real thing is often a very subtle thing often raised very little from the metalwork it is holding together.  On some Josher and Grand Union boats, the hull rivets are barely visible on much of the hull.

Neither Hudson's fakes nor RWD's are very subtle, by comparison, (though neither are half as bad as some of what you see!).  I personally think the fake riveting on the accommodation cabins of RWD boats is completely OTT, and I have never understood the introduction of the narrowed bit between the engine room and the main cabin.  Barry Hawkins and some Mel Davies boats often do this as well, (particularly if they have coined words like "Northwich" or "Trader" as well!)

Having discussed fake rivets, by far the bigger issue to me with any of these makes relate to actual hull shapes, their appearance, and particularly claims made about them.

The exaggerated "squashed between lock gates" look of a Hudson bow has always been made a selling point by Hudsons, claiming "Josher" ancestry, but has never looked anything like any Josher.  I think it looks more than faintly ridiculous, but many who buy the boats clearly love them.  I freely acknowledge they no doubt find the bluff bows of my GUCCCo Yarwoods boats as unattractive as I find the bows of a Hudson - we all have different tastes.

The shape of an RWD Davies hull is a whole lot better by comparison, (to my yes of course), but I really dislike the claims made by RWD that " All external lines to Yarwoods of Northwich 1930's design. Entrance and exit swims built to exact dimensions giving positive handling and absence of excess wash. "   At least they have dropped the bit about using 1930s Yarwoods plans.  No 1930s Yarwoods built boat ever had the hull shape of a modern RWD boat, and whilst RWD boats have long rear swims, that is all they have - they have none of the detailed and intricate shaping that a genuine Yarwoods boat of that period has.

The only boats to genuinely replicate the true lines of an FMC "Josher" or a GUCCCo "Star" are built by specialist outfits at Brinklow Boat Services, Stockton Dry Dock or Roger Fuller, Dave Harris, etc, (although I'm sure some of these are not now building new).   Somehow, (to me), well faked rivets on these sit rather better than any ever do on boats by Hudson, RWH, Barry Hawkins, Mel Davies, Wilson/Tyler etc.

I would be far happier, (and far less likely to have a rant!),  if Hudson and RWD had never made claims about the heritage or inspiration of the boats they built, and had simply admitted they were their own bespoke designs.  (I don't imagine it will be long before someone is making Hudson replicas!)
 

As far as I know the only "claim" Steve made was that it was a "Josher-style bow". I'm not even sure what that means, but it certainly doesn't mean it is pretending to be a replica of a FMC "Josher" historic boat. If it was such a replica I wouldn't have bought it. Who wants a leisure boat with a tiny back cabin and an enormous open hold? Maybe "Josher-style" should be taken in a similar vein to "Gangnam-style"?

Only those who are envious and therefore seeking a justification to dis the boats, make the claim that it's supposed to be a replica bow. Quite sad, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why there is so much emotion over the shape of a boat or who it was manufactured by. My boat is a one off and I don't care if anybody likes it or not. Why do people find themselves slagging off other peoples possessions. Who really cares if an individual does not like something either because it has too many, not enough rivets, the wrong shaped bow etc.

If we all liked the same things then life would be very boring. If you don't particularly like something then don't buy it but please don't keep telling us all that you don't like it because that is also very boring!!

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alan_fincher said:


The only boats to genuinely replicate the true lines of an FMC "Josher" or a GUCCCo "Star" are built by specialist outfits at Brinklow Boat Services, Stockton Dry Dock or Roger Fuller, Dave Harris, etc, (although I'm sure some of these are not now building new).   Somehow, (to me), well faked rivets on these sit rather better than any ever do on boats by Hudson, RWH, Barry Hawkins, Mel Davies, Wilson/Tyler etc.

I would be far happier, (and far less likely to have a rant!),  if Hudson and RWD had never made claims about the heritage or inspiration of the boats they built, and had simply admitted they were their own bespoke designs.  (I don't imagine it will be long before someone is making Hudson replicas!)
 

Sooo, you like some rivets and your fondness for rivets is proportional to the cost of the boat :D

I really like the Northwich Trader, I also actually like rivets, or even washers, as long as they are done well, the token ten on the front and ten on the back is a bit daft.

As more and more boats are floating caravan in style I think anything that makes a boat look a bit more boaty and a bit more in keeping with our historic canals has to be a good thing.

The Northwich (and Barry Hawkins) inset between back end and main cabin is a nice idea. For most of us a full length cabin is a necessity (even one of your historic boats has one :D) and the inset nicely marks the boundary between the proper traditional back end and the modern full length cabin.

I've even seen a couple of Hudsons that I quite like. In fact whatever you might think of Hudson, I reckon he put more boaty boats on the cut than any other builder.

but then again I live in a Colecraft so what do I know

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, dmr said:

In fact whatever you might think of Hudson, I reckon he put more boaty boats on the cut than any other builder.

What on earth is a boaty boat?

Clearly Springer or Liverpool Boats put more boats on the cut than SMH, so what makes one a boaty boat, but not the others.

19 minutes ago, dmr said:

but then again I live in a Colecraft so what do I know

That you actually know what a sensible and fairly well proportioned leisure narrow boat looks like, and you have made I good choice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

What on earth is a boaty boat?

Clearly Springer or Liverpool Boats put more boats on the cut than SMH, so what makes one a boaty boat, but not the others.

That you actually know what a sensible and fairly well proportioned leisure narrow boat looks like, and you have made I good choice?

Yes, I should have said "in recent times", Springer did build some rather nice boats.

A boaty boat? One that could turn up at a historic boat rally and it would take more than a second to work out it didn't belong there???   Went past a quite faded and grubby Hudson last year and I had to look for quite a while to work out what is was, quite a pleasing boat.

but I do wish Colecraft had put some rivets on :D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dmr said:

but I do wish Colecraft had put some rivets on :D.

Have they never?

(Genuine question - I don't know).

My favourite is the addition of fake rivets to bits of the boat that would actually have been "wooden" on a real boat - on the raised coamings around the front deck is most popular.  This always makes me smile, but my favourite boats are those where the owner is so prod of them they have picked them out in a contrasting colour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nicknorman said:

As far as I know the only "claim" Steve made was that it was a "Josher-style bow". I'm not even sure what that means, but it certainly doesn't mean it is pretending to be a replica of a FMC "Josher" historic boat. If it was such a replica I wouldn't have bought it. Who wants a leisure boat with a tiny back cabin and an enormous open hold? Maybe "Josher-style" should be taken in a similar vein to "Gangnam-style"?

Only those who are envious and therefore seeking a justification to dis the boats, make the claim that it's supposed to be a replica bow. Quite sad, really.

Many years ago, I sold Steve Hudson a JP3 engine which I came across in my local scrap yard, and which my wife refused to have in our front garden-hence the sale. Steve came to collect it from my house, and we spent a couple of hours at my kitchen table, drinking tea and discussing all things boating. Before long the conversation  came round to his own particular boats. I mentioned the Josher-style bows, whereupon he vehemently denied that they were Josher copies or Josher anything else, nor were they advertised as such. I had to tactfully explain that, in my opinion, his bow design had taken its inspiration from Joshers, but what he was producing were individual boats which took elements of their design from the working boat era. He accepted that fact.

Not long afterwards, in one of the waterways magazines, I saw a new advertisement for S M Hudson boatbuilders, saying that they incorporated a "Josher-style" bow in their design.

I often wonder if the conversation at my kitchen table sowed the seeds. Sadly, we'll never be able to find out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alan_fincher said:

What on earth is a boaty boat?

Clearly Springer or Liverpool Boats put more boats on the cut than SMH, so what makes one a boaty boat, but not the others.

That you actually know what a sensible and fairly well proportioned leisure narrow boat looks like, and you have made I good choice?

STeve Hudson built boats of superb quality, I bought mine off a forum member who had the sense to specify NO RIVETS so it had the same build quality without the silliness. I am at present living on my second colecraft which is actualy nicer to live on than my Hudson was due to the layout. Boat snobbery is stupid I have owned Hudson, Colecrafts, Harborough, Pinder, Swan line, Horsley quenet ( most of you have never even heard of them ) and they have all had fors and againsts. Old boats appeal to some people but I wouldn't have one for all the tea in China but hey they are all boats innitt. :)

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

Have they never?

(Genuine question - I don't know).

My favourite is the addition of fake rivets to bits of the boat that would actually have been "wooden" on a real boat - on the raised coamings around the front deck is most popular.  This always makes me smile, but my favourite boats are those where the owner is so prod of them they have picked them out in a contrasting colour.

I have seen them bright silver on a shiny black background.  I don't know if the helmsman had a red face though as the boat was moored.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always liked the RW Davies boats.

Was admiring a B Hawk. NT at the weekend. The "waist" like the RWD was one of the standout looks for me.

 

As regards Josher Bow/replica:

1) Strictly speaking which Josher builder is it representing exactly? as there were many (L Hogg was correct) or is a "Josher style" double or compound curved generic term

2) If you took a Saltley Josher for instance (and I was admiring the lines of "Hare" at the weekend too) not too many modern owners really wants I guess the depth/draft so the bow (and rest of boat) is "scaled down" It's in that scaling that things (proportions etc) can be lost.

As regards GU boats, I think they look best when quite or fully loaded. Fully empty  they can appear like a wallowing dustbin!

 

 

Edited by mark99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dmr said:

 

but I do wish Colecraft had put some rivets on :D.

Well, as you know, I have made some plaster casts of my rivets, with the idea to sell them to the likes of you. It's a £1per rivet or £5 for 3.  They can be blue tacked on, nailed, or hung down on string ( for removal when entering locks, so you dont damage them). 

These are genuine casts from 19th century rivets.

I can also cast rope marks just to add that extra authenticity. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have some of these rivets, we didn't pay £5 for them, some bloke gave them to us when he was very drunk. Trouble is, people like to take the pee out of Hudsons with rivets and we don't want people to take the pee out of us, and although your rivets are genuine a lot of people might think they are fake, especially on a Colecraft.

We have an ingenious solution, we have fitted the rivets on the inside of the boat so that only we know that we have real rivets.

I also suspect that the rivets were cast from a mould taken from the inside of your boat so it is historically correct to put them inside the boat.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct, they were cast from the inside. I think they look more 'theatrical' from the inside, stronger and more prominent. 

But the more subtle result can be obtained at a slightly higher price. 

I thought I was sober when I gave them to you. But I can't remember, so ..maybe I was drunk. But that'll be your fault. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

I'm not a great fan of faked rivets on any boats, (however, see below!), but the harsh reality is that most builders that attempt to mimic rivets do it in a far too heavy handed way.  If you study what they are attempting to fake, the real thing is often a very subtle thing often raised very little from the metalwork it is holding together.  On some Josher and Grand Union boats, the hull rivets are barely visible on much of the hull.

Agree.

They are barely visible because all you can see is waste material in the riveting process. The rivets are countersunk so the lumpy bit (rivet head) is on the inside of the hull or whatever they are holding together.

With blacking on top, very many rivets on this boat can't be seen at all.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, mark99 said:

...

As regards GU boats, I think they look best when quite or fully loaded. Fully empty  they can appear like a wallowing dustbin!

 

There are some good reasons not to fully load a GU boat.

1. You wouldn't see many of those delightful genuine rivets.

2. It wouldn't get anywhere on most canals, it'd be aground all the time. Many canal pubs have photos or paintings on the walls of fully loaded boats under way, but I think they're all old, dating from when there was more depth. When did anyone last take a fully loaded GU boat the length of the GU I wonder?

3. Having spent the last two weeks helping to move a quite loaded pair of GU boats, mostly steering the butty on a snubber, I think it must have been quite tricky going around the tighter bends fully loaded. It would handle even more like a giant brick, and accurate steering would be really important. But in the old days they had less moored boats to worry about, and probably everyone on the canals had plenty of experience.

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.