Same year model. 1988. How do they compare?
Its a C&C 38 MK III, not a landfall. Its the same boat I've been looking at for months. There's a CS in Florida that looks extremely similar. I've looked at a CS 33 here, and was very impressed.Is it a C&C 38 or a C&C 38 Landfall...the boats aren't the same thing. For one, the galley is to starboard on the C&C 38, and to port on the Landfall.
I've sailed on a C&C 38 a fair bit, and happen to like the boat a lot. Handles fairly well, maneuvers well under power and sail, etc. Draft is an issue with it, since it draws 6' or so, but not a deal killer, depending on where you're going to be sailing.
The CS boats generally had very good build quality. I don't know the Merlin though... so can't comment on her specifically.
The CS has more electronics. The C&C has more sail inventory. The CS has much greater tankage. The biggest knock on the CS equipment wise is a lack of (I know this will make some cringe) A/C. Living aboard in Texas (for me anyway) requires A/C. The CS is more than $10k cheaper, but is several states away (Florida). I really like the C&C, but it has been sitting neglected, with portlights that leak like a siv for months now. I'm investigating the condition of the CS but I don't have any reliable data yet, just the yachtworld listing. There's also the fact that the brokerage that has the C&C has given me a few reasons to not trust them at all.Both C&C, at the time, and CS were high quality builders with decent construction techniques and materials. If it is a C&C 38 Mk III, I believe it's got rod rigging, unless it was replaced, and is probably overdue for new standing rigging. Rod rigging can be tricky to inspect and can fail without much warning, unlike wire rigging.
Both should be pretty good boats and fairly comparable in many ways. The C&C is going to be a bit faster, as it is a larger boat with a greater SA/D IIRC. It will also have a bit more room. I like the C&C 38 Mk III a lot as monohulls go...
How are the two boats equipped? How are the prices??
George disagreesYou may well be right for the 36s, the 38s the 41s etc. I am not sure of any of them but the MK 1 and Mk II 35s had solid glass hulls and cored decks. No ifs ands or butts about it.
The 35 MK III is a much different boat and had a cored hull.
What facts prove that? The CS's are very, very well put together. As one who initially wanted a C&C, and looked at lots of them from Maine to Florida, and who has surveyed, worked on and raced on many I can assure you that they are great boats but not built to the level of a CS, as Boatpoker has pointed out.Again I DO challenge you statement that the CS is the best Canadian Boat. I beleive they are equal with the C&C being a faster boat in general. Facts seem to prove that.
Exactly why I said... (see quote below ) I would always try and buy the best maintained boat you can find regardless of construction details unless those details were big detractors.And some of that build quality translates through the years to longeveity of the boat, but when buying a 20-30 year old boat it all depends on how the boat was taken care of. The CS I looked at certainly did not look like yours under the sole. It was a wreck. As many have posted on here before you need to get a good surveyor...and a thorough survey.
All that being said the C&C is a great high quality boat, as is the Merlin, so I would base any assessment on current condition & maintenance.
I really like the Baltics.We are currently undergoing the same analysis as we are looking for our final boat as retirement is comming in 5 years and we want to cruise to the Bahamas regularly. Speed is no longer the driving force it was 15 years ago, but I dont want a total barge either. We have narrowed our short list down to late 80s early 90s 45.5 Baltic, 44 Hylas, Tayana 42 and 43 Hans Christian Christina. We have looked at some already, but are looking for one which is in as good a condition as the C&C we bought 15 years ago.
That is really the deternmining factor, once you narrow it down to 3 or 4 designs.
Dave
I would consider the Baltic or the Hylas; eliminate the Tayana and HC unless you want a boat that is much heavier displacement and not nearly as nimble as your C&C.chef2sail said:We have narrowed our short list down to late 80s early 90s 45.5 Baltic, 44 Hylas, Tayana 42 and 43 Hans Christian Christina.
- We own and use an Electrophysics GRP 33 Marine Moisture meter.
We probably will not use it on the bottom of the boat during a standard pre-purchase survey (unless it is a dry-stored boat). They are useful to assess moisture intrusion into cored decks, or in wood cored transoms or stringers. Most people, including many surveyors, do not understand the workings of moisture meters or the constraints necessary to achieve a reliable reading on a boats hull. - Moisture meters for use on fiberglass hulls are essentially radio transmitters/receivers.
The measurement actually being made is dielectric constant or AC conductivity, which is affected by type and thickness of bottom paint, trapped water in the paint, thickness of gel coat, thickness of laminate, resin/glass ratio, as well as absorbed water. - The "Code of Practice for the Measurement and Analysis of the Wetness of FRP Hulls"* specifies the methods necessary.
These include:
- The hull surface must carefully cleaned.
- A large number of random 4" x 4" areas of the hull must have paint or other coating removed down to the gel coat.
- The vessel should be out of the water at least 24 hours.
- Minimum number of measurements must be = approx. one per sq. meter (3.3 feet) or 50-100 on the average 35-40 foot boat.
* International Institute of Marine Surveyors (1998) Witherby & Co., London, 17p.