Help identify this Cal

[smp]

Hi, being from Canada we don't have that many Cals up here so I haven't really done a lot of research on them. This ad came up today and I did a bit of reading and searching and I don't think this is a Cal 30. To my untrained eye it looks more like a Cal 2-29 or maybe a Cal 2-30 but the Cal 2-30 seems to have more of a slope to the transom.

On a side note, everything I've read about these boats has been really good and I am now very interested in Cals in general. My main interests thus far have been the C&C 27 and C&C 30 with the CS 27 in the running as well. My intention is to cruise with my girlfriend around Lake Ontario as well as some club races and maybe a regatta or two.... maybe even the Lake Ontario 300. Cals in the states seem a good value and I don't mind making a trip to get one when we're ready to buy.

Any idea about the above linked boat?
Thanks all.

[JimsCAL]

Definitely something wrong with the listing. The cal 3-30 had ceased production before 1980 and the Cal 9.2 (which this definitely is not) hadn't started production. I think your guess as a 2-29 or 2-30 is probably correct. My best guess is it's a 2-29.

[tommays]

based on the side shot




and interior it is a a 29 unless they changed nothing on the 30





I cant point out the for sure issue spots as there all a bit train wreck at this price range

[Faster]

Looks like a Cal 29 to me too..... The 3-30 is quite a different boat, esp on deck. I think there was an extended version made briefly that had a slightly reverse transom, but this one's not that.

[SloopJonB]

It's a 2-29. I've been noticing more and more frequently that people are playing fast & loose or perhaps are just ignorant of "Name" boat lengths. The "model" length that defines the boat is frequently subordinated to some sort of measurement taken by the owner. Currently on Vancouver C.L. we have a "Cal 23" for sale. It is actually a Crown 23 that was a knockoff of the raised deck Cal 25.

I saw an ad for a Columbia 36 being advertised as a Columbia 38 a while back. Two completely different boats from different designers. After the boat had been advertised for a long time that way, I contacted the owner to advise him of his error, thinking more knowledgeable people might regard it as dishonesty and bypass it. He got very snotty and condescending about it - he was an "engineer" and knew how to read a tape measure and so forth. I imagine he stretched a tape between the tips of the bow and stern pulpits and - presto, a Columbia 38.

[mitiempo]

It sure looks like a 2-29, but according to Sailboat Data the last one was built in 1978 and the listing states 1980. Also according to Sailboat Data the original engine in a 2-29 is a Farymann diesel of 12 hp.

The Cal 29 was last built in 1974 but did have an Atomic 4 engine and has the same profile.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by mitiempo

It sure looks like a 2-29, but according to Sailboat Data the last one was built in 1978 and the listing states 1980. Also according to Sailboat Data the original engine in a 2-29 is a Farymann diesel of 12 hp.

The Cal 29 was last built in 1974 but did have an Atomic 4 engine and has the same profile.

Calgan Marine in North Van built 2-29's later than 78 - my uncle bought one from them later than that - 79 or 80.

[mitiempo]

Thanks for that. Sailboat Data has been incorrect in the past as well.

2-29 it probably is then.

[smp]

Thanks all. I spoke to the seller and he said "229" and I asked, "do you mean a 2-29" he said, "No, a 229, that was the model name".

He also told me that the boat in the picture is "not the one for sale". Geez, can people stop wasting my time with these ridiculous classified ads!?! Needless to say, I'm not interested.

[mitiempo]

He has to mean 2-29 as the other (229) doesn't exist.