Does that include the engine survey or is that a separate charge?About $10-15/ft.
David
Hmmm 10, 15, and 20 a foot. So will 20 a foot give me a survey for the engines too. If not what do you figure double the cost? I want a good survey before I shell out some money for a boat.
... take a look at my Sample Surveys to see what you get for your money.
All SAMS surveyors follow the same content requirement so what you see covered in my reports should be typical for any SAMS surveyor.
I hope not ...
While it is not my intent to start another "whack the toyboat surveyor" war, that "missing thruster hub cover" photo sure looks like it might show a Sidepower 100/185 (not identified in the survey for some reason) with one of its props missing. Since power was available on the boat, a buyer might be interested in knowing if the thing worked or not and maybe even if a prop, drive pin, shaft nut, and zinc are available.
Call me picky picky if you like but if I were paying to have a boat surveyed I would like to know the seller's version of why some piece of machinery is partially disassembled. And just for grins, what piece of machinery it is so I can find out what parts and service might cost me.
http://www.pcmarinesurveys.com/SAMPLE%20POWER%20CARVER%20%20%2050.0%20.pdf
Not sure I get your point. The issue is clearly identified in the report.
It is unwise to run a thruster out of water (against manufacturer's instructions)
...and as the prop is obviously missing it would be foolish for a surveyor to power it up without knowing why it was missing.
One would hope that a paid observer knew what he was observing.Remember it is a report of what is observed, not a "how-to guide".
Very much to the point is that the missing prop and it associated parts were clearly misidentified as being a "hub cover" - whatever in the world that is. The thruster make and model are not identified, and the unit was not tested to demonstrate functionality and continuity of controls.
Most little thrusters use a series wound DC motor. That type of motor has no inherent speed control when operated with no load. That is why they are placarded against running out of water. "Bumping" the control in each direction to prove functionality is not "running" by any manufacturer's definition and is the normal and routine method of testing operation before the boat is launched.
To quote Sidepower's manual, "With the boat on land, only run the thruster for a fraction of a second, as without resistance it will accelerate very fast to a damaging rpm. Also, while the thruster is in air, make sure that the propellers have come to a complete stop before performing a direction change of the thruster, as it might cause damage to the thruster."
The instructions quoted above refer to the normal process used to determine that the controls work in the proper direction per the installation and user manual. It is commonly known as "bumping" the motor.
It must not have been all that obvious to the observer since it was not mentioned in the survey report. The fact that it was not "observed" or documented and the fact that an observation of a missing "hub" was erroneously included begs several questions.
One would hope that a paid observer knew what he was observing.
I give that "survey" a failing grade.
I have learned my lesson ... only a fool argues with an idiot.
Calling me a fool...
I see what you did there Rick.