c&c/tartan

[QuickMick]

Any of you guys sail these? any general opinions? Comments appreciated...

thanks
Q

[PaulinVictoria]

They made/make quite a few different ones under various different ownerships so you might want to be a little more specific

[neverknow]

We once looked at a C&C for sale in Florida but wasn't impressed. But that was a boat that had not been used much, had no upgrades in 20 or so yrs. Kind of a bare-boat that needed almost every system brought up to date.

The construction seemed sound though.

[QuickMick]

http://marinesc.com/sites/default/fi...antcontact.pdf

[blt2ski]

"IF" the general info I have on it is correct, it is the same hull as a C&C 121, different deck, sailplan and Keel/rudder. Granted what somemight call new, others not.

There is a new owner, that is and has worked with some folks to correct what are/were blatent warranty issues with boats produced by the previous owners. He does not have too per say. I know a local with a C&C115 that has some deck gelcoat issues, it was repaired late last summer with a new deck paint job curtasie of the current owner.

Certainly worth looking at......Personally, if the hull is the same as teh 121, I would get a new 121 vs the tartan, as the c&c will be a bit sparser interior wise, but still nice, but quicker in speed! But that is my leaning for a boat in general.

marty

[BubbleheadMd]

Hey QM,

Long time, no hear.

Ohhhh, you're looking at the newer boats!

I had the opportunity to board a few of each during the Annapolis boat show. The interior appointments are deluxe, and one of the locals races a C&C 115 and cleans up all the time, so they sail well.

The only question is build quality. I've heard some anecdotals of people having problems getting warranties honored. The owner of the C&C 115 basically had his saildrive rot out from under him, and they told him to pack sand. He fixed it on his own dime. But I can't say what the cause was. Was he in a hot marina and failed to use a galvanic isolater? Did he not keep up with his zincs? Who knows.

Did you win the lottery, and are going shopping? Take me with you!

[T37Chef]

In general, both are exceptional but you're going to have to be a lot more specific to get any kind of decent answer...its like asking, hey have any of you driven a Ford or Chevy?

Tartan/C&C are under new ownership, but did retain Tim Jacket, the principle designer.

Older (say pre 1995) Tartans and C&C are great boats. Typically very well built, and good designs, some better then others. Some are highly sought after boats, for example, my boat sold new for about the same price its worth today, and in some cases, they are worth more today.

Newer models seem to still be well built, designed and $$$, but have been tarnished by a series of cases a few years ago related to warranty issues, design issues, and mostly how the company did not handle it appropriately. No point in getting into the details, you can do a google search on the topic or head over to Anything Sailing Forum and read about it there. The new owners seem to have the best intentions and a desire to get the brand back on its feet so to speak. I belive Tartan is offering some semi custom options now?

[jameso]

so a new C&C or Tartan?

[chef2sail]

I own an older C&C 35 MKIII 1983. Personally I am not entralled with the new C&Cs. Mine is a racer cruiser...good turn of speed, points better tha a similar Tartan...better PHRF rating, but also comfortable for cruising as we go from the Chessapeake to New England/ Long Island every summer.

The Newer C%C are not as well appointed and are in my mind really a racer racer cruiser. They have been made too light for a good cruising bohat.The Tartans are also nice bopats especially pre 1998. As Chef said there are warrenty oissues after then when they joined with C&C. Tartans are more cruiser racers with comforatable interiors.

Davel

[smackdaddy]

Hey quick. Good to see you around dude!