|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|01-30-2010 08:12 PM|
|Allan C&C Less||
Hey Mike your right about the C&C 36!
Yes, Mike the C&C 36 was not nearly the boat the 35 was.
I should know I owned both and regretted the day I bought the 36'. It was a poor design,tender and not as fast as the 35. A slug in light air, which was unusual since most C&C's excelled in light winds. The only worse design was the C&C 30 Mega. Now that was a horrible design. I know someone here posted some good comments about this boat. Trust me I owned/sailed many C&C's for 30 years. The Mega was C&C's version of the Ford Pinto! The 30 Mk1 or 2 was a great boat for that era. But the Mega is best suited to be a future anchor.
Fair winds, Allan
|01-28-2010 03:02 PM|
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
innovations, but was so unconventional in appearance
that it never gained any traction.
The Hobie 33 was much better at doing what
the Mega 30 set out to do.
|01-28-2010 12:51 PM|
|Csobanc||thanks for the advice... started new thread... regards.|
|01-28-2010 12:18 PM|
|SecondWindNC||Probably want to start a new thread for that, with a subject line that indicates your question.|
|01-28-2010 12:14 PM|
c&c 30 design mk1 a, b, c, etc.
Does anyone know when did C&C change the keel mast support (in the hull) from wood to aluminium? I think this was done in the late 70's before the mkii modell... but not sure. Any issues with the wood support vs the aluminium?
Also, was there hot water heater, pressure water, and/or shower in the mki series? Looking through the old c&c brossures it seems these were not included... has anyone done a successful conversion?
Thanks for any input...
|09-30-2002 07:45 AM|
JEFF H input wanted
Hey my turn to backpedal a bit! I am no expert on boat design, racing or crusing. Just a guy that spends too much time wishing I were sailing.
I often say to a friend that there are no bad boats ... just boats designed for a different purpose than what you intend. A trailerable sailboat is great if you need to trailer one to a lake, but compromised for sailing on the ocean for example.
In Halifax there are many many C&C sailboats. We had a very active dealer here in 70''s & 80s. My family had a 36 from 1981 - 1990, our neighbour had a 27 mk IV or V in the mid 80''s (never sailed on that 27). This was back in the good old days when Dad paid for sailing and I just went along for the ride! Also raced on an aft cabin 40 for one or two seasons as a foredeck guy (ie. just a set of arms & hands).
I had always thought that when my boat grew enough to be a C&C than I would finally know I had a real boat rather than just a dingy. I love the looks of the C&Cs and usually compare all boats against them.
I like the C&C 30 Mk I. I think it sails well but do not imagine it to be much better or worse than a host of other 30 footers made in the same era. My father had a 36 in 81 and I remember hearing at the time how many people preferred the 35 that preceded it for its sailing ability. This has been confirmed by articles on cncphothoalbum.com and other sources.
When I sail on a boat I look at the inside as much as the outside. I have found that the 30Mk I, the 27 and to some degree the 25 of the same era all look similar with just more or less room. From the outside they also look very similar. I think that was done on purpose so that a C&C could be easily recognized. Of all those boats I personally like the 27 Mk III the best. It has a decent interior and it sails very well in light airs. I race against a 25 mk I, a 27 Mk III and a 30 mk I. For coastal sailing where shore is always near I think the 27 mk III is a great boat. If I were spending more time offshore I would tend toward the 30. In our races the 30 sails well below its handicap in any wind less than 15knots. I have a Niagara 26 which is supposed to be slower than the 30 by rating but crosses the line ahead of the 30 unless there is some wind. When it is 20knots the 30 starts to sail well and finishes far ahead of me.
My thoughts on the 27 III, 30 I and my Niagara 26?
I think that the Niagara sails well in light air and could be much better in more wind. This is the weakness with that boat ... cannot sail competitively in any wind over 20 knots.
The C&C 30 Mk I sails well in winds over 15 knots but should sail a lot better in lighter winds. I imagine this was done on purpose but I think that a really good design should sail well in both ... especially when the boat is 30 feet in length!
The 27Mk III sails well in light air and sails better in 20 knots than my niagara. If I had more money when I bought my boat I could have bought a Mk III and would have loved it! Of course people who love the 30 call the 27 "tender". I hate that word! The 27 is a fabulous boat because it sails well and has a usable interior!
So back to what the boats are designed for...
To have a boat sail well in lighter and heavier air would probably require a lot of sail change and a lot of attention to sail trim, etc... Since these are CRUISING BOATS I believe that maybe ... just maybe the 30 was designed so for people that do not wish to be changing sails all the time. Thus the main is too small so that reefing is not a continuous activity and 2 people can relax and enjoy sailing!
Heck they are all great boats! I would even love a MacGregor with a 50hp engine if I had to motor 20 miles every day to go sailing!
|09-28-2002 07:35 AM|
JEFF H input wanted
Mike - I own a C&C 30, Mark 1 (1981) and was a previous owner of a 1981 C&C 25, Mark 11. I much prefer the 30. This is an extremely popular boat here on Lake Ontario and they are highly regarded both for performance and cruising. They are definitely quality built and this is reflected in their resale prices. In very light air the C&C 27 is little faster but as soon as the breeze picks up the 30 moves ahead. I have to say that I am a bit puzzled by your commentary as it would not seem to be shared in this area. Obviously you seem to know a good deal about the C&C line-up of boats. I wonder what your thoughts are about the C&C 27s? Our 30 will move quickly past the pact of Kelts,Northerns and Catalinas in this area. Any further thoughts?
|09-28-2002 07:13 AM|
JEFF H input wanted
so Jeff, think you may have rubbed Stu the wrong way?
|09-27-2002 07:47 PM|
JEFF H input wanted
I think Jeffh is just trying to drive down the prices of C&C30 MK1''s so that he can buy one for himself.
|09-27-2002 02:27 PM|
JEFF H input wanted
George Cuthbertson & George Cassian formed a partnership in 1961 as Cuthbertson & Cassian.. Their prime endeavour was to design boats for other yacht builders. Tooling and construction was handled by the builders not C&C. The Grampian ?Classic 22? was designed for Grampian Marine and was taken over by Ontario Yachts who also produced the Viking 22.
Yes, very earlier models did use foam coring.
Hinterhoeller Yachts contracted C&C to design the Invader 35 and the Redwing 30 and 35. The Redwing 35 was never marketed as it soon became the C&C 35 around the same time C&C Yachts was formed in 1969. ?Redwings? were Hinterhoeller and Bruckman Marine built the ?Redlines? including Red Jacket. The Corvettes, Crusaders and Invaders were designed for and built by Belleville Marine Yards. The Frigate was a shoal draft centerboard derivative of the Invader.
The Northwind, Westwind, and Eastwind were designed and built by Paceship in Nova Scotia.
Red Jacket was a 40 foot yacht ? not a 35
The designation ?built by C&C Yachts? was not used until C&C Yachts Ltd was formed in 1969. Prior to that they were ?built by Hinterhoeller, Bruckman, Belleville Marine, or whoever?.
The Mega 30 foot came out in 1977 and the brainchild of C&C & Peter Barret of North Sails.
You said, ?During the 1970''s C&C went in and out of finacial trouble. They recycled many of their designs with subtle changes keeping them in production far longer than probably made sense given the revolutions in yacht design that were taking place during this period.?
C&C did not get into any financial problems until 1986 when it went into receivership. Jim Plaxton purchased the company in a hostile takeover in 1982. North South Yacht Sales purchased the company in 1986. The orientals bought C&C in 1992 and finally in 1998 Fairport Marine Co. bought the remaining molds (after a devestating fir in 1994) and the company name.
C&C continued using their original designs for many years. C&C found itself competing with its own used boats; why buy a new boat when you could buy a four-year-old bigger, better equipped boat that costs less. Canadian boats were popular in the US because of the strong Canadian dollar. Canadian boats sold in the US paid only 3% tariff. It was the US government that wanted to up the tariff and C&C decided to counter attack by opening a plant in Rhode Island in 1976.
The above information has been gathered by Dan Spurr and is published in the September/October issue of Good Old Boat and in a conversation held between myself and George Cuthbertson on Sept. 22/02.
Now for some other comments from C&C 30 Owners:
They felt this boat was similar to a modern half-toner and that it was extremely fast off the wind and did well in heavy air (20-30K).
Going to weather in light air, it was not successful and "pinching was not the answer." In contrast to the above, the standard keel model C&C 30 is considered to point well in heavy or light air. Several Great Lakes racers said that this was where they almost always made up time. Sailing off the wind in light air was not considered to be the boat''s strong point but in heavy air on a broad reach the performance was excellent and exciting.
Oscillating under a spinnaker was not considered any problem by most owners and this includes some generally inexperienced families. One family successfully handled their new spinnaker and spinnaker gear in 25 knots of wind with a 4-6 foot sea.
The C&C 30 is considered by many who have sailed her extensively, to be a very stiff boat even in heavy air. It takes a lot of wind and owners report that when really hard on the wind it usually requires 20 knots of wind before reefing is necessary. Even then, reefing is done primarily to take out helm.
The consensus: The boat is extremely seaworthy, maneuverable, and comfortable when anchored.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|