Catalina 42 ... Why not? - Page 6 - 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 > General Interest > General Discussion (sailing related)
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree27Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #51  
Old 03-06-2013
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 9,904
Thanks: 3
Thanked 110 Times in 53 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

The C42 is a fine boat. We had to decide between the C42 or the C400. First, let me give my perspective of several issues brought up here.

Wing keel versus fin:

THe fin should be the better performer. You should be able to point higher and run a bit faster. However, and here is the BIG however, if you can't get near shore or run the ICW, it is an irrelevant point, isn't it?

You WILL run aground, all the time, in SW FL (outside of Tampa) at 6.5. You will run aground periodically at 6, especially anywhere near Port Charlotte south. I am 6 with a wing. I have run aground on this boat more times than I can count. Several of these times have been in the middle of the ICW, incidentally, which is supposed to be maintained 7. Many of the holes and passes are 5 1/2 feet unless you have good local knowledge, catch a really high tide, or are flat out lucky. So, for your intended cruising area, I would avoid anything over 6, with 5.5 better. People that consider 7 or better an option crack me up. I would love to know their experience sailing these waters. Just so you know, when I have 12 inches under my keel, I feel like I am in deep water. DOnt like the wing or the small performance you will lose, then don't come here or be very careful where you go and where you can go. I mean, just look at the water depths off of Rodriguez Key (where you will wait to jump to Bimini, Bahamas). I bet I didn't have six inches under my keel. SO for this area, go shallow. Another reason to go shallow is if you ever want to sell the boat, you may very well rule out a huge percentage of the buyers if they sail or plan to sail any of these waters. You can sail a shoal draft boat in deep waters but you can sail a deep draft boat in shallow waters.


Inmast versus Slab.

Inmast is another performance loss. Funny story, but when I got my c400, I was checking with the owners groups to see if anyone wanted to change out masts for a slab and I would pay for their exchange. At that time, I think the inmast was a $10,000 option. Well, no one took it and I decided to at least give it a go. Now that I have used it and logged thousands of miles, I will tell you that I will never go back to a slab reef (unless for racing). Never. I have been in some really nasty weather and never (not once) had a jam. I also find I am much more likely to use the main than with slab reefing, or more likely to drop in a reef or shake one out. It is easy, and safe. The trick is understanding that it is not a slab reef main and there are nuances to doing it. You cannot reef or shake one out like a traditional main. I find almost all of the jams are do to people not understanding how to properly use the system, or they are old systems. I can go through all this in another thread if you want. But basically, you can do everything from the cockpit of the boat. Assuming you also have a RF Jib, no one ever has to leave the cockpit in any conditions. I find that safety aspect much more valuable than the off chance it might jam and I would have to cut it down.

C42 thoughts...

Positives:

Great cockpit. Sails comfortably. A little more tender than some boats, but not bad. Pretty fast, comparatively. Nice "garage" in the locker beside the galley. Lots of storage. The head in the V can take a washer/dryer. Nice access to second head from Salon. Ability to up tankage under salon floorboard.

Negatives:

Not as sure footed as a 400, and not as fast. The 400 has a much better Hull-deck joint and an aluminum toe rail with "holes" to secure the odd things. Curved settees (I hate them) as they do not make good sea berths. THe Nav station is undersized and all the way to the forward of the main salon. I do not care for pullmans. The problem with pullmans is that when one person always has to crawl over the other and this becomes a real issue at night when you need to take a pee, check the anchor, get a drink, etc. Think about how many times you get up in the middle of the night now and consider doing that on a nightly basis. Better yet, practice it with your spouse now and crawl over her every night for a week when you get up. Now, you can get a different layout (no pullman), but then you lose some of the positives of the original layout.

For those that think the C42 would not cross an ocean, history (and current events) have proven you wrong. We even have a poster that posts here that just crossed the Atlantic in his C42... by himself to boot. (I think his boat is named Reboot). Personally, I think there are better boats for doing that run (Tayana 42, Cabo, Valiant, etc) because of the tankage and other benefits of those boats, but those same benefits are detrimental for the cruising you want to do. I would make that run in my boat, but I have also dumped in tens of thousands of dollars in modifications on my boat. Even so, I would prefer to ship it (though I would prefer to ship any boat).

In essence, I think the C42 would be a fine boat for your purpose. She has a great owners group, great support at the factory, and was one of the best boats Catalina has built. See ya out there.

My opinions,

Brian
JimMcGee and AlaskaMC like this.
__________________
Sailnet Moderator



1987 Tayana Vancouver 42, Credendo Vides, (Mom and Pops boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in Puget Sound)

My Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow My Blog at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow me on Facebook:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #52  
Old 03-06-2013
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 9,904
Thanks: 3
Thanked 110 Times in 53 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

Oh yeah, as I have a pretty fair amount of experience un-sticking a fin and a wing keel, I will tell you the fin is MUCH easier. The wing loves to suction into the bottom (especially mud), and you cannot heel it over to get it off.

Brian
__________________
Sailnet Moderator



1987 Tayana Vancouver 42, Credendo Vides, (Mom and Pops boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in Puget Sound)

My Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow My Blog at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow me on Facebook:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #53  
Old 03-06-2013
s/v 'Bout Time
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 183
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 6
malyea is on a distinguished road
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

Great info, thanks -

Do you agree with this statement -

for every 10,000 sea miles an in mast system will malfunction more often than slab reefing...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #54  
Old 03-06-2013
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 9,904
Thanks: 3
Thanked 110 Times in 53 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by malyea View Post
Great info, thanks -

Do you agree with this statement -

for every 10,000 sea miles an in mast system will malfunction more often than slab reefing...
I think the potential for inmast to jam is higher than with slab reefing... even in ONE nm. Doesn't mean you will jam it in 10,000 though... or 1,000,000. The key is understanding the system, how to use it, and what not to do. For example, one critical mistake I often see people use with inmast is reefing or furling with a winch. Why on earth would you put that much force on it!??? Our rule is everything is done by hand. If it cannot go back in by hand, we have an issue somewhere - typically the Boom Vang or Mainsheet is too tight. Inmasts go into the slot at an angle, not horizontal, so you have to give the boom some freedom. Also, keeping some McLube on the track never hurts. The exception is the last foot or so when furling out the main. That takes a winch to pull out the car as the forces are too high unless in light winds. If you want more information on this, I wrote a lengthy article on this in Mainsheet. I think it was q3 of last year, tech editor, C400.

Now, back to the question: for every 10,000 sea miles an in mast system will malfunction more often than slab reefing...[/QUOTE]

As said above, I think the potential is higher for a jam... but I would balance that with I think the potential for being injured or lost at sea is higher with a traditional main... especially for those who single.

My opinions.

Brian
JimMcGee and killarney_sailor like this.
__________________
Sailnet Moderator



1987 Tayana Vancouver 42, Credendo Vides, (Mom and Pops boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in Puget Sound)

My Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow My Blog at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow me on Facebook:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #55  
Old 03-06-2013
s/v 'Bout Time
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 183
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 6
malyea is on a distinguished road
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

Great discussion, thanks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #56  
Old 03-06-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 2,042
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Rep Power: 9
PalmettoSailor will become famous soon enough
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

CD,

If the 400 is faster, how does it get a PHRF rating nearly 30 seconds a mile over that of the C42?

Seems that would be an incredible gift rating.
__________________
PalmettoSailor
s/v Palmetto Moon
1991 Catalina 36
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #57  
Old 03-06-2013
JimMcGee's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Barnegat Bay, NJ
Posts: 1,461
Thanks: 26
Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
Rep Power: 10
JimMcGee is on a distinguished road
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeinLA View Post
Ha Ha, me too. This thread's been making me get out the 42 brochures again, sure would like that forward cabin. The only threads you ever read here about Catalinas is how they melt in salt water. This one has been refreshing.

Mike
LOL, I was just thinking the same and I LOVE our Catalina 30 MKIII. It has all the conveniences of the 309 with the better layout of the 30 (my opinion).

But every so often I start thinking about boats in the 38-42 foot range because we spend so much time aboard. This thread definitely got the wheels going again.
__________________
95 Catalina 30 Island Time

ďIf a man is to be obsessed by something, I suppose a boat is as good as anything, perhaps a bit better than most" - E.B. White
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #58  
Old 03-06-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 551
Thanks: 3
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 8
SteveInMD is on a distinguished road
I was drooling over the Catalina 445 at the Atlantic City boat show a few weeks ago. Anyone want to buy a 3 cabin 42 with a fin keel?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #59  
Old 03-06-2013
Faster's Avatar
Just another Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Westminster, BC
Posts: 15,350
Thanks: 88
Thanked 242 Times in 233 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Faster has a spectacular aura about Faster has a spectacular aura about Faster has a spectacular aura about
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PalmettoSailor View Post
CD,

If the 400 is faster, how does it get a PHRF rating nearly 30 seconds a mile over that of the C42?....

.
Palm... you have to realize that CD also thinks he's the best looking moderator, so he has a demonstrated difficulty with reality!!
Cruisingdad likes this.
__________________
Ron

1984 Fast/Nicholson 345 "FastForward"

".. there is much you could do at sea with common sense.. and very little you could do without it.."
Capt G E Ericson (from "The Cruel Sea" by Nicholas Monsarrat)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #60  
Old 03-07-2013
s/v 'Bout Time
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 183
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 6
malyea is on a distinguished road
Re: Catalina 42 ... Why not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveInMD View Post
I was drooling over the Catalina 445 at the Atlantic City boat show a few weeks ago. Anyone want to buy a 3 cabin 42 with a fin keel?
Details?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
Reply

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.




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
1994 Catalina 320 vs 1992 Catalina 36 ChuckBuck Boat Review and Purchase Forum 8 01-10-2012 10:42 AM
Difference between an '88 Catalina 30 and a Catalina 30 MkII? dennismenace111 Catalina 0 04-07-2011 02:42 PM
Catalina 30 Keel cracks (not Catalina Smile) Pelham Catalina 5 12-01-2009 11:39 AM
catalina 34 Mark II or catalina 350 casey1004 Boat Review and Purchase Forum 11 06-13-2003 05:39 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:47 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.