SailNet Community - View Single Post - C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2
View Single Post
  #14  
Old 01-28-2013
Sanduskysailor Sanduskysailor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 316
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 7
Sanduskysailor is on a distinguished road
Re: C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

FDR, not to start a fight, but here are some things to ponder. The waterline for the 29-1 is: 23.58', the 29-2 is 22.33. Of course the heeled waterline length is longer on both boats because of the overhangs. The I dimensions are the same for both boats. The -1 has a foot and a half bigger J and the E is a 1/2 foot shorter compared to the -2. The headsails and foredeck work is easier to handle on the -2.

Here is a direct quote on the 29-1 from Hank Evans, former C&C sales manager about the 29-1
"The 29 MK I (and the 26) reflected the design thinking of the time which was to take some volume out of the underbody and put it in the topsides thus reducing wetted surface. 29 was distinctly flattened on the bottom adjacent to the keel. This flat was anticipated to provide some lift or planning effect when the boat was sailed relatively flat off the wind, thus further reducing wetted surface. This volume was placed above the water line in rather extreme topsides flair. This produced a "tender" boat at the dock and initially under sail. As the boat healed the flare became immersed and the boat stiffened markedly. The more flair immersed the stiffer it became and it is actually hard to get the the windows of a MK I wet. An additional benefit of this thinking was a very beamy and roomy interior above the water line where the space could be used for living and storage and indeed that part of the concept worked nicely. Unfortunately, as the boat healed and mimersed all that topsides flair it started to slow down. The greater the angle of heel the more more the flair was immersed and the slower the boat went. Not literally, but relatively. The immersed flair created increased drag and had the unwanted consequence of providing a large surface for the water flow to tend to push the bow to windward. That combined with the rudder becoming less effective at greater angles of heel and the natural tendency of a sailboat to round up made the 29 MK I difficult to keep going straight at high angles of heel.

Every 29 MK I owner has had unintentional and undesired round ups into the wind where the combination of the immersed hull shape and rudder made it impossible to prevent unless you had someone very quick on the sheets and sometimes even that didn't help. Holding the 29 off the wind at high angles of heel requires excessive rudder and that adds dramatically to drag. That is up to the point where the rudder stalls and you round up quickly. Sometimes so quickly, the boat will actually tack itself and that can create some very hairy situations on the race course. This design thinking was pretty short lived with 29 and 26 being the prime examples. They were getting pretty far away from it with 34 . Obviously, this design thinking wasn't the best idea C&C ever came up with. About the only solution is to sail the boat relatively flat (15 to 17 degrees) and keep that flair from immersing very far, much like you would sail a dingy. People racing MK I's will ease the traveller down, carry a luff in the main and when it really blows may carry the main almost fully aback while driving the boat on the jib. Sometimes you even have to feather the jib to keep it on its feet. Whatever it takes to keep the boat upright. Don't misunderstand, you can drive a MK I with the rail in the water and its as much fun as sailing any other C&C that way. You just have to accept the fact that the 29 next to you that's at 15 degrees with the main luffing is going to kick your tail.

For the record, I looked very hard at the -1 when looking to purchase one 3 years ago. After talking to a couple of owners of both boats the -2 won out. The market price for a good not pristine condition freshwater -2 was 18K 2 years ago. The -1 were in the 12-15 k range for boats that were were 5-7 years older than the -2. So far, the Yanmar has been very good and properly sized for this boat. I like it. I had an A4 on my last boat. Pretty bullet proof no doubt. I'd be concerned about a raw water cooled one that has been in saltwater though. Fresh water cooled A4s are all aftermarket modified AFAIK.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook