Swan 41 vs CT 38 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > On Board > Boat Review and Purchase Forum > Boat Reviews
 Not a Member? 

Boat Reviews This forum has all types of boat reviews. Take a look, Dream, Agree, Dissagree.... but enjoy.


Like Tree2Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
kirkrf7 is on a distinguished road
Swan 41 vs CT 38

Hi,

I'm strongly considering:

1974 Swan 41: I'm unable to post links here, but it's listed at oceanicyachts . com

1982 CT 38: I'm unable to post links here, but its' posted at faralloneyachts . com

Can anyone weigh in on:
1) the relative cost to maintain for these two boats? I understand it varies tremendously boat to boat, but is there any reason to believe that if these two boats were in similar condition today, one would be more expensive to maintain than the other?
2) relative blue ocean worthiness?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #2  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
tdw's Avatar
tdw tdw is online now
Super Fuzzy Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 14,562
Thanks: 5
Thanked 72 Times in 67 Posts
Rep Power: 10
tdw is a jewel in the rough tdw is a jewel in the rough tdw is a jewel in the rough
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

Interesting. Remember i've not seen either in the plastic.

For cruising purposes I'd take the CT but teak deck ?

That said .... teak deck on a boat that old freaks me somewhat and then the Swan is eight years older.

By the look of it the CT has a much nicer interior for cruising/liveaboard. Personally I do not like the Swan companionway arrangement. Virtually impossible to fit a worthwhile dodger and while that design has its good points ease of access is not one of them.

Cost to maintain .... horses for courses .... presumably if you want to keep her original the Swan would be the more expensive.
Offshore ..... six of one half a dozen of the other but I'd think the CT would be the nicer boat to sail short handed. I'm sure they are both quite capable.

Warwick is/was a fine designer.
sailorbill1 likes this.
__________________
Andrew B

"Do you think God gets stoned? I think so... Look at the platypus." Robin Williams.

Last edited by tdw; 4 Weeks Ago at 11:55 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #3  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
SloopJonB's Avatar
Senior Moment Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: West Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 10,823
Thanks: 58
Thanked 52 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 4
SloopJonB will become famous soon enough
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

FWIW the 41 was one of the principal boats that established the Nautor Swan label as being "The Best".

The CT38 was produced around the time that Ta Chiao was improving their rep from being a builder of "Leaky Teakies".

Assuming the teak decks are in comparable condition, I'd take the Swan, no contest. The state of the decks could be a deal breaker though - if they are shot it will be a major job to fix, even just to strip the teak off and paint. To replace the teak will cost as much as the boat these days.
__________________
I, myself, personally intend to continue being outspoken and opinionated, intolerant of all fanatics, fools and ignoramuses, deeply suspicious of all those who have "found the answer" and on my bad days, downright rude.

Last edited by SloopJonB; 4 Weeks Ago at 09:36 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #4  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
kirkrf7 is on a distinguished road
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

thanks!

you think they would have comparable speed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #5  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Marlborough sounds NZ
Posts: 29
Thanks: 5
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
sailorbill1 is on a distinguished road
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

the swan for the sailor, the other for the shore sider, the swan sails magnificently, loves wind ward work, im sorry the other is a leaky risk, I've seen a lot of money spent on theme trying to stop leaks and they arnt the best sailing vessel particuley to wind ward. Both boats really arnt that good of a choice for long term live aboard ocean going, but I no you would enjoy the sailing capability's of the swan, very strongly built.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #6  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
tdw's Avatar
tdw tdw is online now
Super Fuzzy Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 14,562
Thanks: 5
Thanked 72 Times in 67 Posts
Rep Power: 10
tdw is a jewel in the rough tdw is a jewel in the rough tdw is a jewel in the rough
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

Bloke in Sydney we occasionally share an anchorage with has one of the Swan 41s of that age and yep she is a fine boat and he loves to sail her but still I'll stick to what I said earlier. For cruising that companionway is a pain in the butt and unless you are very young and very agile climbing up and down into the cave that is her interior could well lose its attraction quite quickly. The dodger installation problem should also be of concern to a cruiser.

One whoops on my part I do confess is that I thought for some reason that the CT was built in the US. Silly thought indeed but allowing for the removal of the teak and presuming for one moment that the deck itself is still solid then I'd still go for the CT .... of the two. Acknowledging my brain slip re the CT's origins one would also figure that by now any sub standard hardware would have already been replaced.

Speed wise one would have to think that the Swan would be the more rapid a machine all things being equal. Certainly the Swan would seem to have it all over the CT uphill but really as a cruiser you do pretty much anything you can to avoid more than the occasional bit of windward work. Arriving feeling relatively human is for me a priority and while a floating brick is not my idea of fun no matter how comfortable I'm still of the opinion that the comfort of the CT would make up for any loss when compared to the Swan.

btw .... and I'm not prepared to put money on this but weren't those Swans supposed to be a major handful off the wind ?
__________________
Andrew B

"Do you think God gets stoned? I think so... Look at the platypus." Robin Williams.

Last edited by tdw; 4 Weeks Ago at 06:49 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #7  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
Bristol 45.5 - AiniA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,411
Thanks: 3
Thanked 72 Times in 64 Posts
Rep Power: 9
killarney_sailor is on a distinguished road
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

There seems to be some confusion. There are two entirely different boats called a CT 38. One is designed by Warwick and is, in general similar to the Swan with a narrowish fin keel. This is the one the OP is talking about.



The other is the one that other posters are talking about



Given that the two boats are similar I would imagine the Swan is going to faster for two reasons - it is bigger and it is a very successful S&S design. The Swan build quality is certainly going to be superior. When both were new, the Swan would have definitely been a much better, much more expensive boat (not just because of size).

My concern would be about the teak decks - can cost tens of thousands to fix and teak decks of the age of these boats either have been fixed or need to be. The companionway is not the newer design where it is purchased in the middle of the deck several feet from the cockpit. The newer Swans did this to allow an aft cabin - we looked at a Holland-designed 43 and could not figure how to make the deck arrangement for extended cruising. Both of these boats have conventional companionways.

Everything else being equal, and it never is, I would go for the Swan except the 7' draft could be a problem in some places and the Admiral would never go for a boat without a 'proper bed'. I guess you could convert the forward cabin from sails to living. There are six good sea berths and some of them could become storage.
__________________
Finished the circumnavigation in early February in Grenada. Have to work on a book project for the next several months so the boat will be waiting for next year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #8  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
SloopJonB's Avatar
Senior Moment Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: West Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 10,823
Thanks: 58
Thanked 52 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 4
SloopJonB will become famous soon enough
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

The S&S Swan 41 has the manhole style companionway they were so fond of.

Everything about those S&S boats was biased towards windward work offshore. Cruising comfort was not factored into their design philosophy.

One thing to consider is the Swan is a much bigger boat - about 1/3 larger.

SWAN 41 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
__________________
I, myself, personally intend to continue being outspoken and opinionated, intolerant of all fanatics, fools and ignoramuses, deeply suspicious of all those who have "found the answer" and on my bad days, downright rude.

Last edited by SloopJonB; 4 Weeks Ago at 07:59 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #9  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
Bristol 45.5 - AiniA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,411
Thanks: 3
Thanked 72 Times in 64 Posts
Rep Power: 9
killarney_sailor is on a distinguished road
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

The Swan 41 companionway is close enough to the cockpit that you have, in effect, a wide bridge deck and so you could put on a dodger. As well as the Swan 43, we looked at a Hylas (42?) aft cockpit boat and both had about six feet between the cockpit and the companionway. One of them had a mini cockpit at the companionway (Hylas). If you were in the real cockpit where one assumes you would have a dodger you would have to go onto the side deck around the dodger and then walk or crawl to the companionway which would have a pram hood over it. Not appealing at watch change at 0300 when its blowing like snot. Also makes it pretty hard if you were on watch and wanted a snack or a pee. It was a deal breaker for us. What makes a boat good for full crew racing for a day or four is not the same as what you want for a 20 day passage with a couple.
__________________
Finished the circumnavigation in early February in Grenada. Have to work on a book project for the next several months so the boat will be waiting for next year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #10  
Old 4 Weeks Ago
tdw's Avatar
tdw tdw is online now
Super Fuzzy Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 14,562
Thanks: 5
Thanked 72 Times in 67 Posts
Rep Power: 10
tdw is a jewel in the rough tdw is a jewel in the rough tdw is a jewel in the rough
Re: Swan 41 vs CT 38

Was the first CT38 from Bruce's post also Asian build ? Taiwan ? Hong Kong ? I don't know where CT where/are located. It was the first version I was commenting on.

I'd hate to try and crawl under a dodger and down the rabbit hole. Then again I'm old and somewhat croaky.

No dispute from me btw that the Swan would be the better boat performance wise but I was presuming that the OP was after a cruising boat ergo my favouring of the CT.
__________________
Andrew B

"Do you think God gets stoned? I think so... Look at the platypus." Robin Williams.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
Reply

Tags
ct38 , swan

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/boat-reviews/167058-swan-41-vs-ct-38-a.html
Posted By For Type Date
Swan 41 vs CT 38 - SailNet Community This thread Refback 4 Weeks Ago 11:23 PM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Swan 44 vs Swan 441 silli1971 Boat Review and Purchase Forum 9 02-08-2011 02:14 PM
Swan 41's ? LyleRussell Boat Review and Purchase Forum 15 07-07-2010 12:21 PM
Swan falls in love with plastic swan (TVNZ) NewsReader News Feeds 0 05-29-2006 11:15 PM
Lovesick swan falls in love with swan paddle boat (Reuters via Yahoo! News) NewsReader News Feeds 0 05-26-2006 02:15 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:08 PM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.