Rushton's: To restore, preserve or leave alone?

B

brishen870

Enthusiastic about Wooden Canoes
IMG_9014.JPGcanoe.jpg

As some of you might know I recently inherited two Rushton's that have been in my family for some time. I am wondering what the most sensible options are for there future lives? I know that question has a lot of other questions that can come from it. So I am not really interested in giving the boats to a museum or selling them. I guess the options are...
1. Restore- A. Do it myself.
B. Pay a professional.
2. Preserve- A. Do it myself.
B. Pay a professional.
3. Leave them alone, store them and look at them.

I guess by 'preserve' I mean take off chipped or loose paint and/or varnish and repaint/varnish. Also replace the broken stem on the larger boat. Find oarlocks. Not really do much else. By 'restore' I mean attempt to make like 'original' and or good for show. I would love to hear peoples thoughts.
 
Peter's vote of confidence is appreciated, but I'm only going to tell you it is up to you. Ultimately, what you do is dependent on what you want to get out of them.

Were it me, I would probably restore and enjoy them. But, that depends on what their condition really is, which is hard to evaluate through these photos. The larger one will be an easier project - it looks like the smaller (green) one is smooth skin lapstrake, and whether it is restorable or not really depends on the condition of the feather laps. Some are ok, but many boats' laps are all split up.

If one or both are in restorable condition, then whether you do it yourself or hire someone depends on the ratio between your skills and how deep your pockets are. Many amateurs have done quality restorations on Rushton (and other) boats (some have butchered them). There are only a very few professionals I would consider.

If you want to enjoy looking at them, I would at least do a cosmetic restoration - who wants to look at a boat with flaking paint?

Preservation is noble, and warranted in many cases. In this case, there are plenty of Rushton pulling boats already held in captivity in museums, and they are well documented. Again, and this is speaking as a former boat museum curator, I would get them restored and enjoy them if possible.

Dan
 
I guess the #1 thing I would like to 'get out of them' is not to ruin the value or any historical value. That would be 100% accomplished by just stowing them away in a barn. On the other hand to have them go up in cash value or usefulness value would be nice. I have space and time plus lots of tools so I would be interested in doing the work myself. That way a butchery could be blamed on me alone(and maybe you guys for not talking me out of it). If I spent thousands of dollars and they were still butchered I might be upset more then if they were still stored away untouched. I guess by restore and preserve I kind of mean the same thing but differing levels of it. Preserved would be gotten into decent useable condition where I could take them out on the water. Restored might mean a superior fixing or finish. I guess I will have to reexamine the condition of the boats and take some more detailed photos to move further forward.
 
Practicing on a more common boat or two might not be the worst idea... you'll get a feel for the details & quirks of small boats, which could go a long way towards avoiding butchery.
 
I would encourage your to read the comments at http://forums.wcha.org/showthread.php?57 if the financial value is a concern. The short summary is that 'investing' in any repairs or restoration of an old canoe is not likely to generate the best return in dollars. However, if you like old canoes then the non-financial returns of a restoration can be tremendous.

Historical value can be a more difficult issue but Dan has indicated that these are not unique so that shouldn't be a major concern. My personal feeling is that the biggest risks to wooden canoes are from non-traditional repairs which can't easily be reversed and from gross neglect. Fiberglass is an example of a repair like that so I wouldn't recommend it. Practicing on another canoe first as Paul and Steve suggested is an excellent idea if you want to do the work yourself. Canoes that look good and can be used are much less likely to suffer from neglect so I would encourage you to clean them up and make them usable again if possible. Please keep us posted here on your progress and good luck,

Benson
 
I had read those comments on value. I guess the value is not super important to me. I figure the value/condition/historic value all are fairly linear. If I mess it up the value drops in many ways. Plus the real value of anything is only usefulness and enjoyment. I just wonder how rare these boats might be in another 50 years if I just left them in a corner of my barn? But I guess the point is if fixed correctly and used they can be in as good or better condition then untouched.
 
You couldn't ask for better advice than what these guys have to offer.

Personally, I love patina: dings, faded paint, discolorations and light scratches. It contributes to the character of a boat, and I wouldn't want to wipe away that history entirely.

Real damage, on the other hand: cracks, missing parts, or incorrect repairs done relatively recently - that doesn't work for me.

If I were in the enviable position of having two of these wonderful boats... I'd pick the one that's going to be more fun to handle (both in terms of paddling and just wrestling it to and from the lake). A cosmetic restoration would hopefully let you paddle it often, and not worry about scuffs here and there.

The other I'd either leave alone - or hire a professional to take to museum condition. That way you have the best of both worlds: untouched original (or untouchable perfection) ... and a middle ground that lets you build on your family's adventures. On that last point, I daresay that's what your great-grandpa Herbert would want, too!
 
Brad, I like your idea. Maybe start by fixing the Faber to learn on and then work on whichever Rushton will be more fun. Dan Miller seems to think the larger pulling Rushton might be easier because of the lap strake vs. feathered strips and potential condition of those joints. And Peter Mueller points out getting all that green paint off could be difficult. So if using some of there criteria as well as some of yours I would be fixing the big one which would not be as easy to get loaded up and down to the rivers. Plus I don't know how much I would enjoy rowing around backwards? I guess it could be left without oarlocks like it currently is and be used as a 3 seat canoe. I do know my family would enjoy going out on it and we would not all fit in the Rushton Vaux. Plus I am 100% sure it was the one passed down from my great grandfather. The green Vaux on the other may have been something my father got latter. Not sure on that however. I think that facing forward and paddling with a double kayak style paddle would be more fun so the Vaux wins over a pulling boat in that respect. And it would be easy for me to load up and bring out. I think for trips out on the water by myself the Vaux makes much more sense. Perfect size in fact. So I guess they both have uses and down falls which makes me think maybe I should restore both? That way I would have one for solo as well as one for the family. Maybe the green Vaux will be more cosmetic and the pulling Rushton more complete? Thanks
 
You might do well to have these boats evaluated in person by someone who is familiar with Rushton boats and restoration work.
 
I have been restoring canoes for 25 years. Of the 2 Rushtons I have, one will take skills I feel I have. The other, I will NOT touch until I have been able to take a class from someone who knows lapstrake planking, inside and out. (there is a class at the WoodenBoat school, at the end of August. It conflicts with my university classes, but I think I might be able to coordinate with the U. It is taught by Geoff Burke, who is REALLY good, both as a builder, and as an instructor. The subject of the build just happens to be a Rushton lapstrake pulling boat!)

I am with Dan, get them looked at by a knowledgeable builder/restorer. You also just happen to be in Geoffs neck of the woods. (by western standards...)
 
Last edited:
I vote for no. 4 which is give them to me, just kidding, maybe you can get a someone to help you on 1 and then do the second yourself. i think they have been in your family and used by your family and SHOULD stay that way, being used that is , but in a well cared for way. It is cool that they are still with the original family, that is almost as cool as being rushtons.
 
Taking a class has an appeal to me. Especially if the teacher comes well recommended and has done these boats before. Maybe one of mine could even be the subject boat for the class...maybe. I hear the chapter of WCHA in my area is active. I also hear chapters do such things as re-canvasing boats. Do they often get together to do other repairs? Or would it be better left to an expert? I would imagine 'experts' are involved in WCHA and are in these groups. The more I think about it the more I would like to see these boats in the water again.
 
If you want to hone your skills on another boat before taking on the Rushton I would recommend working on something similar in construction. Recanvassing your canoe will not really give you the foundation of skills you need for the Rushton. Instead of pursuing a class where others are working on your Rushton, you might consider finding a builder who is willing to take you in and restore the boat with you (private class).

Yes, there are experts of all types at the WCHA. Expert builders, restorers, historians, collectors, etc, etc. Take a look at the builders directory. There are certainly some builders/restorers listed who are more than qualified to work on Rushtons. http://www.wcha.org/buildsupply/
 
Dylan,
How long would you estimate it would take to properly restore a boat like one of these? I know that is hard to guesstimate without seeing the boats. Just wondering if I would have to rent an apartment near a teacher or if it could be done in a few days.
Thanks, Brishen
 
For sure. I was giving the two extremes sort of. If going that route I might have to find someone near Delaware and the pros all seem to be up north. Or just pay up and put it in someone else's hands for a while.
 
It depends what you want to accomplish in the class. You could complete a full (or close to) restoration or you may just want to spend a few days doing some of the more complicated areas with a builder/teacher. Much could be accomplished in a 7-10 day private class (this does not include any finish varnish/paint work). Whatever work does not get completed could be finished in a follow up class or you may just have the knowledge at that point to do the rest at home.

As Dan suggested, you may want to start by getting the boats evaluated in person. Most of us do this at no cost. At this time the builder should be able to provide you with all the details of either paying them to do the restoration, doing a class, or a combination of both. I think once you get the boats evaluated in person you will have a much better idea of what direction you will want to pursue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
To restore or not to restore?
Replies
6
Views
2K
David McDaniel
David McDaniel
bredlo
Restoration: Leaving stuff alone
Replies
2
Views
2K
magicanoe
magicanoe
T
Fix or repair 2.0
Replies
8
Views
2K
Tellico
T
chris pearson
why do we do this to ourselves?
Replies
3
Views
1K
greenvilleguy
G
mark turley
New canoe
Replies
0
Views
869
mark turley
mark turley
Back
Top