SailNet Community - Reply to Topic

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  

Quick Menu
Boat Reviews  
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Marine Electronics
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here

Go Back   SailNet Community > On Board > Boat Review and Purchase Forum > Boat Reviews > C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2
 Not a Member? 

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

Thread: C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2 Reply to Thread

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

Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:

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:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:


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.

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below

Topic Review (Newest First)
12-30-2013 03:51 PM
Re: C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

The Mark 1 is fatter and more tender. Very fast in light air but so tender in heavy air. Loves to round up. Rudder needs to be bigger. More room than Mark 2.
02-10-2013 08:59 PM
C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

To update the discussion.
The C&C 29 Mk 1 that I was trying to see is off the market. No responses from seller when I was asking to see the boat.
I'm guessing it sold.
I'm sitting back a bit watching what is avail. Couple of nice looking C&C 30's that are not terribly far away. They might be a good fit.
I'll likely wait until summer when I can have the boat assessed on the water.
Thx for all the feedback.
01-28-2013 12:10 PM
Re: C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

FDR, not to start a fight, but here are some things to ponder. The waterline for the 29-1 is: 23.58', the 29-2 is 22.33. Of course the heeled waterline length is longer on both boats because of the overhangs. The I dimensions are the same for both boats. The -1 has a foot and a half bigger J and the E is a 1/2 foot shorter compared to the -2. The headsails and foredeck work is easier to handle on the -2.

Here is a direct quote on the 29-1 from Hank Evans, former C&C sales manager about the 29-1
"The 29 MK I (and the 26) reflected the design thinking of the time which was to take some volume out of the underbody and put it in the topsides thus reducing wetted surface. 29 was distinctly flattened on the bottom adjacent to the keel. This flat was anticipated to provide some lift or planning effect when the boat was sailed relatively flat off the wind, thus further reducing wetted surface. This volume was placed above the water line in rather extreme topsides flair. This produced a "tender" boat at the dock and initially under sail. As the boat healed the flare became immersed and the boat stiffened markedly. The more flair immersed the stiffer it became and it is actually hard to get the the windows of a MK I wet. An additional benefit of this thinking was a very beamy and roomy interior above the water line where the space could be used for living and storage and indeed that part of the concept worked nicely. Unfortunately, as the boat healed and mimersed all that topsides flair it started to slow down. The greater the angle of heel the more more the flair was immersed and the slower the boat went. Not literally, but relatively. The immersed flair created increased drag and had the unwanted consequence of providing a large surface for the water flow to tend to push the bow to windward. That combined with the rudder becoming less effective at greater angles of heel and the natural tendency of a sailboat to round up made the 29 MK I difficult to keep going straight at high angles of heel.

Every 29 MK I owner has had unintentional and undesired round ups into the wind where the combination of the immersed hull shape and rudder made it impossible to prevent unless you had someone very quick on the sheets and sometimes even that didn't help. Holding the 29 off the wind at high angles of heel requires excessive rudder and that adds dramatically to drag. That is up to the point where the rudder stalls and you round up quickly. Sometimes so quickly, the boat will actually tack itself and that can create some very hairy situations on the race course. This design thinking was pretty short lived with 29 and 26 being the prime examples. They were getting pretty far away from it with 34 . Obviously, this design thinking wasn't the best idea C&C ever came up with. About the only solution is to sail the boat relatively flat (15 to 17 degrees) and keep that flair from immersing very far, much like you would sail a dingy. People racing MK I's will ease the traveller down, carry a luff in the main and when it really blows may carry the main almost fully aback while driving the boat on the jib. Sometimes you even have to feather the jib to keep it on its feet. Whatever it takes to keep the boat upright. Don't misunderstand, you can drive a MK I with the rail in the water and its as much fun as sailing any other C&C that way. You just have to accept the fact that the 29 next to you that's at 15 degrees with the main luffing is going to kick your tail.

For the record, I looked very hard at the -1 when looking to purchase one 3 years ago. After talking to a couple of owners of both boats the -2 won out. The market price for a good not pristine condition freshwater -2 was 18K 2 years ago. The -1 were in the 12-15 k range for boats that were were 5-7 years older than the -2. So far, the Yanmar has been very good and properly sized for this boat. I like it. I had an A4 on my last boat. Pretty bullet proof no doubt. I'd be concerned about a raw water cooled one that has been in saltwater though. Fresh water cooled A4s are all aftermarket modified AFAIK.
01-27-2013 07:21 PM
C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

FDR - thanks for the insight.
I've not had a chance to see the boat yet but I'll have a better handle on what to look for.
I've read a lot online and was coming to the same conclusion you have offered - that the boat sails well as long as you don't overpower.
Intrigued to hear your positive thoughts on the Atomic 4. I thought that might be a major sticking point. I'm hoping to boat has a fresh water cooling system rather than salt water - since it sounds like the salt water systems cause more problems.

I'm looking forward to checking the boat out shortly. I will likely do a cursory evaluation - then go back when the snow clears if it looks good under its cover.

01-26-2013 11:43 AM
Dog Ship
Re: C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

You can see the coreing on the inside of the hull.
There will be a step in the fiberglass where it goes from a thick cored hull to a thinner solid fiberglass hull. Some C&C's are solid fiberglass, some were cored to just above the waterline and some were cored to just below the gunnel.
You will see a step on the inside of the hulls' fiberglass in these areas if it is cored.
01-26-2013 01:19 AM
Re: C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

Thanks for that, FDR, so I stand corrected about the cored hulls on MKI 29s...
01-25-2013 11:29 PM
Re: C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

Well we sail a MkI out of Niagara on the Lake and over the years the 29's here about have sailed as a one design fleet. The MkII is a redesign of the C&C27 and carries a longer water line than the MkI and therefore should be faster. In reality of the 12 or so boats in the fleet it has been my experience that this is true only if you have a really good skipper. That being said, the MkI is an IOR design (an adaptation of C&C's winning half tonner), and as such she is a round bottom flyer. I never found her too tender but in fact carries more canvas than she should. This requires you to roll up the genny and reef early but I have sailed her in 30 knt breeze with no bad habits. She likes to be kept on her feet as she will drag the rudder like a barn door. When we raced her we had a rule that over 20 degrees we were slow, change down. C&C designed her for the Youngstown YC and they requested a club racer and family cruiser. So she is fast and comfortable and sails like a dingy. If I had a choice I would replace her with a 1985 33 or stay with what I have. But then I don't like dinette boats, (she is 11'8 wide however).

Downside, these are not cored hulls, deck yes but not hull. I have repaired the C&C smile once, and replaced the pillow block under the mast step twice, once before the YYC level regatta in 45 min flat. If you are not careful about water in the bilge, the stringers under the mast step supporting the pillow block have to be replaced since they are not glassed on the bottom. We installed a garboard plug and keep her dry over the winter and the season. I replaced the cabin windows with Beckson's but would opt for lexan inserts for the originals with new rubber if I had to do it again. MkII windows are real pain in the tush as is the case with most of the newer boats. My Atomic 4 is a joy, and I would only replace it with a Beta or Volkwagen, but I see no reason to do so. They say gasoline is dangerous on the boat but the MkII carries propane which is a hell of a lot more dangerous. I see alot of Yanmar grief here in C&C's home port, mostly because of owner lack of attention.

We don't race much anymore since the crew is off raising Jr Sailors or owners of J22's. But we have retrofitted it as a express cruiser with more electronics than a Russian Trawler, and like getting on the club cruise and arriving in time for cocktails. We did show up for the 30th aniv. at the Level regatta and took second by a hair behind a really well sailed MkII. Having made our point,people asked who invited us back for this party.

Contact me if you have any other specific questions.
01-22-2013 03:10 PM
C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

I see your point. But having looked at the 30' it has one less bunk.
With 4 kids the extra bunk in the 29 actually works better for me.
Plus also about availability and price. Nice 30' locally is listing for $36500. Even making a run down north eastern seaboard they are mostly over $18-20000 plus transport and taxes.

Don't want to buy a dog, but don't have the $ to buy a pearl either. If the boat doesn't look great I'll just stick with my M24 for another year or 2

01-22-2013 02:42 PM
C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

Thanks for the insight. That's exactly the type of info I was looking for. I'll watch for the failure points.
If the condition is comparable then the Mk1 I'm looking at is a great deal at $8500. No photos so I'll have to go look.
The Mk2 looks to be in fairly good condition from photos - $22500. Not a bad price.

Living in Halifax we see a variety of conditions. A lot of sailing in 5-15k winds (wind speed avg 6-7k during summer months). Last summer I never actually tried reefing down my sails on my Mirage 24 - but I also stayed in the harbor.

I'll have to look at the boats closely. Make sure I'm not buying a make work project! The extra space would be huge for taking kids out overnight.

Any additional thoughts appreciated. Especially anyone with Mk 1 experience.

01-22-2013 01:41 PM
Re: C&C 29 - Mark 1 vs 2

My advice, find a C&C 30 mark I which is a better design in all respects. there's a reason that model was produced from 1972 to 1983.

The 34 was the first cored hull, then the 36. I do not believe the 29-1 was cored but that memory cell has died...
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

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

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:54 AM.

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

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