High ballast to displacement ratios
I am not sure waht I think about that. 17,600 lbs is not that heavy for a 38 foot cruising boat. Achieving that kind of ballast ratio with proper structural design in a moderate weight cruiser is just not that easy. Stripped out racers like America''s Cup boats bearly achieve 50% ballast ratios. Even though the 38''s were cored I would be quite suspicious of that ratio.
Most cruising yachts have a ballast ratio in the 30% to 40% with many very respected cruising boats having ratios as low as a 30% or so. Even though Johann Valentijn, the designer of the 38 was a senior designer with Sparkman and Stephens and had worked on America''s Cup campaigns, I question whether even he could achieve proper structure, and adequate capacities with that kind of ballast ratio in a cruiser.
I saw that there is a couple 38''s on Yachtworld that do show 8600 lbs of ballast with a displacement of 17600 lbs. Obviously that is 49% ratio. While I am not sure that the 8600 lbs, (I have an piece of Endeavour literature that shows 7600 lbs ballast but I am not sure that it is for the 38 in question. 7600 lbs would result in a ratio of 43% which is still a pretty respectibly high ratio. That is in the range of heavily ballasted and pretty Spartan interior race boats of that era.)
All of that aside, if the 38 does have a 50% ratio it should be reasonably stable and offer a reasonable motion comfort. Both will be compromised a little by the shoal draft of the Endeavour 38. Endeavour used low density ballasts on their earlier boats but I do not know what type of ballast was used on the 38. With the 38''s very shallow draft of 4''-11" on a 38 footer a large ballast ratio, even if it is in low density ballast, would be very welcome.
My experience with Endeavours suggests that by the mid 1980''s the build quality of these boats had gotten substantially better as had the Valentijn and Kelly designed hulls and rigs.
That''s about it for me.