# Tayana 37 cutter vs. Allied Princess 36 ketch



## Alberg30 (Jul 20, 2006)

I am looking seriously at these two boats for liveaboard and cruising. Both in comparable shape (pre-survey, seem to be in pretty good shape, but need some work).

I'm handy and have pretty extensive experience doing major projects on boats, so I am not afraid of getting my hands dirty.

All else being equal, I give the Tayana the edge, but the asking price on the Princess is more than $20k less.

Thoughts from anyone who has experience with one or (better yet!) both of these boats would be appreciated!


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

I think the Tayana 37 is more numerous and popular, but I can't recall anything bad said about the Allied Princess 36. In fact, it seems a tough little ketch: Allied Princess 36 Reviews and History Photo Gallery by Garry Prater at pbase.com

All things considered, the Princess is 7,000 lbs lighter than the Tayana and all that teak would discourage me. The Tayana has greater tankage and range, but is probably less lively in light airs. Not crazy about that canoe stern, either, but that's mostly taste and the desire for space aft in me. Both boats are quite traditional. Imagine Yachts, Ltd., Tayana 37 yacht

If all else is equal, the $20K you save on the Princess could pay for a complete repower and a new main and jib...something to consider.

EDIT: Found a Practical Sailor review: Princess 36 - Practical Sailor review photo - Garry Prater photos at pbase.com


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I'd say go for the Princess and use the $20k to upgrade her, and then put whatever is left over on the cruising kitty.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

I'd opt for the Allied as well. Like Valiente, I'm not fond of the loss of stowage with a canoe stern, or the amount of teak. And that extra 20K you save, WILL come in handy.

Good luck with either one though and hope one will be what you want.


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

There are several points. Assuming both are say 1977 and similarly equipped the NADA base values are Allied 35600, and Tayana 30700 without counting any extras.
I am not sure that I would attach to much weight to the accuracy of those figures, but from observation would say the Tayanas tend to ask more say 60k and sell for much less, say 40k whereas the equivalent Allied may be 50k and sell for 40K.
Maybe the Allieds price more realistically, but both end up much the same.
You are talking of a liveaboard with some cruising. Both are ocean going - the Tayana certainly is, the Allied with some reservations potentially.
To a degree it depends on the balance and where you intend to go and how much, whether you favour blue water capability or liveaboard comfort.
The Tayana seems a bit bigger inside and better fitted out. However with that bowsprit you are looking at higher berth costs.
Blue waterwise the Tayana is heavier with a higher ballast ratio, but the displ/length are quite close, and the Tayana has a higher SA/displ at 18 v 17. However the motion comfort is 38.4 for the Tayana v 30.4. I don't think the differences are major but the Tayana should be a bit faster stiffer and more comfortable.
Of more concern to me would be the cockpit volume on the Allied. A large cockpit is ok for swanning around but not filling with water.
I think with those concerns in mind on some of the later Allied Princess boats, the keel was deepened by 7 inches and a 1000 lb added to the ballast. As I recall the transom was strengthened and bigger cockpit drains installed, all changes better fitting her to ocean going. However even with those she still lags the Tayana. In fact it makes her displ/L higher than the Tayana and SA/displ less. I think only a limited number of boats were modified and I have never seen one advertised with those specs so I suspect most brokers don't know they exist and just use standard figures.
Either boat is ok for limited cruising but I would think the Tayana is better fitted out and a better more stable ocean boat, albeit with that bowsprit and bigger sails.
There shouldn't be a 20k difference is selling price if they are equal in gear and condition. They should be similar with maybe the Tayana a bit higher as they are often reasonably equipped. 
If the Allied suits what you will be doing and you would be paying 20k less that goes a fair way towards upgrading.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

I didn't get the feeling the OP was discussing passagemaking in the ocean. I prefer the Tayana 37 for that use, but favour the Princess for liveaboard/coastal, because I suspect it's more apropos for gunkholing/Caribbean stuff, rather than going from Panama/Marquesas, say...

One of the links I cited addressed how many Princesses have had bigger cockpit scuppers fitted as the "pooping" problem had been an issue.


----------



## Alberg30 (Jul 20, 2006)

thanks so much for all the great info.

actually, i did want to keep open the option for big water. I have a bit of experience in other people's boats and hope to someday plan a larger trip.

what if i throw an Allied Seabreeze 35 into the mix - a yawl rig? Seems like a slightly more seaworthy boat than the Princess and can be found for about the same price advantage.


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

I think you need to be more precise on what you want the boat for - to yourself not us. Hope someday a longer trip is a bit vague. Like buy for what you realistically intend doing. If it is a liveaboard that's one thing. You might find the seabreeze a bit cramped for that relative to the others. There are reviews - look at the overhang 24' lwl and narrow beam.
If you might wander down the coast and maybe to the Bahamas any will do it. 
The other point I suggest is that you really look at your total budget. The Seabreezes advertised are from 1965 at 20k to 1970 at 35K - in each case you get what you pay for, but even the more expensive one has a petrol motor and no real offshore gear. That costs the $$.
The Princess seems to come in at 72 for around 39k. I dont think the Tayana starts til 77.
I am not saying there will necessarily be a major difference between a 1966 and a 1977 boat per se but a boat that has been kept up to scratch will show it and both might need substantial refitting. In say 9 years it would have to be a pretty classic upgraded 50 year or even 39 year old boat to have much residual value.
Just remember that there are a lot of items eg sails rigging motor etc that may have to be replaced so it is final cost and value that counts.
A 35 k boat that costs 30k to refit may then sell for 45k. The 50 k boat that costs 15 may then sell for 55K.
It is pretty hard to find a boat that is cheap and good. If you are working on her for a few years, which is one choice, if you have the time, skill, and interest, is still time before you get the boat you want to use.


----------



## Alberg30 (Jul 20, 2006)

I am a veteran of both fairly substantial refits and a fair number of offshore passages, some in pretty mean water here in Asia (e.g., South China Sea, Indian Ocean). To me, there's no difference between a coastal cruiser and a bluewater cruiser. If the boat isn't capable of handling a storm at sea, she shouldn't be out of the bay. There are plenty of instances where there's not time to find an appropriate harbor to escape bad weather and getting sea room is the only safe option. That turns every coastal cruiser into a potential bluewater boat.

Second, I'd never buy a sailboat with a petrol engine. That's a given. Many, if not most, of the Seabreezes on the market have been repowered with Weterbekes and Yanmars. I wouldn't consider one otherwise.

I'm single (divorced) with a 10-year-old son who lives with me half the time. So, accomodations should of course be comfortable, but I do intend to sail as often as I can - mostly near shore, but once annually or so down the coast, maybe to the Bahamas. Eventually, depending on the job, I will probably want to try something a bit more ambitious. In short, I want that option.


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

Well my two cents worth would be the Princess as being capable of what you want. You have the skills and $ probably count. Enjoy your son and good fortune.


----------



## Alberg30 (Jul 20, 2006)

thanks chris,

i am still mulling it and have to get a first-hand look at the Seabreeze, as I am still out of the country.

cheers


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

I own a Ty37 and used to race on an Allied 36.

Performance-wise the Ty37 will win hands down in light winds as well as rough weather. PHRF-NE 174 vs. PHRF-NE 210. I also find the Ty37 a bit more weatherly (I tack through close to 90 but with inboard sheeting ... and use the staysail under a genoa for upwind), but requires more finesse in sail shaping and setting, etc. because of the inherent complexity of balancing forestay/headstay tensions, etc. If you're not used to precise setting/shaping, a cutter will be just a "Winnebago with triangular cloth on top" ... not an 'easy' rig to sail (well).

I find the Ty37 a bit top-heavy with a slow roll period, initiallly tender to about 15+ degrees then 'solid'; slips off to the lee beyond 30deg. of heel. Very 'sea-kindly' motion (I power-puke on a 'snapper'). To me the A36 is a bit stiffer; but, with that short waterline length a bit of a 'hobbyhorse' in comparison. With a good set of light sails, feathering prop and properly faired and smooooooth hull (and bottom paint) the Ty37 is very good in light air. Full sails up (w/135 & staysail) gives you about 1150 sq. ft. aloft, although for beating she performs better to windward a bit 'shortened' or well flattened. The cockpit is small and proper for a bluewater boat; therefore not good for 'dockside entertaining'. The MkII has higher cockpit coaming, especially at the stern.

My Ty37 has a clubfooted staysail .... absolutely LOVE it. Good for shorthanding, excellent for sailshape (but needs to be vanged when off the wind.). 

Definitly the Ty37 has immensely more interior volume (and more importantly **stowage**) and can carry more at 1200 #/in than the A36 at 900#/in. Ty37s are all semi-custom inside. Rarely will you ever find two the same on the inside. The interior are an intelligent design for a seaway with handholds, etc. with easy reach ... everywhere. There were some 'pullman berth' versions built ... could you imagine a pullman berth in a heavy seaway??!!! The interior work is impeccable with masterful joinery ... but do seek out one thats been varnished inside as an oil finish usually and ultimately goes 'dark as a tomb' over time ... then its a royal ***** to restore back to 'bright'. The teak is either old growth Thai or Burmese (with 'wonderful' grain). 

Noone in their right mind will add weight to the ends of a sea-going boat ... so the misperception of apparent lack of stowage in the pinched stern doesnt matter. For buoyancy of the pinched stern: take a look at that FAT underwater stern 'bustle', that canoe stern is simply 'style' and most certainly has vastly more reserve buoyancy than an IOR design. Besides, there is a 'ton' of stowage elsewhere on a Ty37. I will never understand why someone would want to add **weight** inside the ends of a boat. 

Expect to pay $80K-90K+ for a 'good' Ty37 ... usually direct from a current owner. Most available boats are found in FL and also Tx ... but some are usually available in the MidAtlantic. I prefer a MkII configuration ... deeper cockpit, etc., mine is a MkI. Most of Ty37s from the 80s will have a Yanmar, those older will have a Perkins. 

Downsides of a Ty37 that bear investigation: 
Teak decks ... especially if left unmaintained/grey
Bowsprit rot ... nuff said but easily repairable if youre handy. 
Chainplate bases ... if wet will probably need total rebuilding due to crevice corrosion of the 'non-removable' chainplate attachment bolting.
Substandard OEM rigging components. Has intermediate shrouds which dont do much support and add a lot of weight aloft (change out to hi tech runners). 
Bulwark leaks in older (70s) boats
A 'mixture' of fasteners: Whitworth(Imperial variant), SAE, even some god-awful metric profile.
Encapsulated keel (but internal ballast is a casting not 'scrap punchings set in concrete')
Black iron fuel tank (rots from underneath from the outside) ... usually mounted in the bow (so dont totally fill it with 100+ gallons !!!).
Wiring is 'automotive' grade ... not tinned and should be entirely replaced with tinned wiring. 
Brightwork ... I use Honey Teak (hand-rubbed equal to a 'Hinckly quality' varnish job) and am going into my 7th season with only 'minor repair' of the HT - yearly maintenance is a quick coat with HT 2part clear over; I do the 'whole' boat in less than 6 hours every 2 years and lightly powerbuff the HT every intervening year. 

I havent been in true stink conditions in an A36 but have been F9-10 in my Ty37 and find its a very stable platform that puts a smile on your face because of its stability ... although I'd like a finer bow to cut through the 'heavy' stuff. With a cutaway full keel with slack bilges, its like riding on steel rails as the boat essentially self steers when the sailplan is balanced. 

With almost 650 built you wont have much problem locating a 'good' one ... look at a 'few' before making a decision. A 'good' or 'restored' Ty37 will hold its value very well; but, there are a LOT of 'project' Ty37s out there. 

........ and you can tell Im somewhat biased toward the Ty37: better sailing in heavy & light, vastly better stowage, more interior, 'sea-kindlier', built like tank, a 'true' cutter, more value for the $$$, etc. 

hope this helps.


----------



## Alberg30 (Jul 20, 2006)

Excellent information, Rich! 

Really appreciate your frank and thorough assessment. As I said, I prefer the Tayana myself, but have been trying to psychologically sell myself on the bigger price-tag. I had heard about the chainplate backing problems and investigated the fix - I am sure I can do it, if necessary. Leaky-teaky decks worry me more, precisely because I have done the strip, scoop, rebed before on a smaller boat. Not fun!

But, I agree with your points. You make a lot of sense.


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

*Leakey decks....*

can be a big bummer. Leakey decks are impossible to survey correctly as the rot can be in various stages of growth, plus the thickness of the underdeck can 'fool' a so-called moisture meter. That said, many have had their decks stripped off, the rot removed and have been reglassed as a DIY project. Of note the Ty37 deck structure is made up of a core of approx. ~8"X8" softwood blocks which were intended to be isolated with polyester 'dams' surrounding/encapsulating the blocks with the intention of moisture isolation between the blocks. Good in theory but didnt work out well in practice ... and makes a horrendous job to cutout when rebuilding; but, 'can' be done by a DIYer.
Of the ~650 Ty37s out there there is only one reported to be structurally damaged due to a soft deck ... supposedly took a large boarding wave abeam and the deck split/cracked away from the doghouse joint.

Forgot to mention that prior to the early 80s most Ty37s had wooden spars.

Both the Ty37 and Allied36 have full keels ... and that means drag, and barn door rudders which require a lot of force to turn when at speed and thus require bodaceous wheel steering to overcome the generated rudder force. If you sail an Alberg30 you already know what I mean.

Personally if were doing it all over again Id probably seek out a boat with the longest *waterline length* I could afford and with a fractional rig, fin keel ......... with balanced spade rudder with TILLER just for the ability to steer with finger tips and/or to use simple and much cheaper tillerpilot.

hope this helps.


----------



## BVIslander (Dec 27, 2009)

*Allied vs Gulfstar*

Hi everyone...
curious which boat "Alberg 30" sprung for?
I'm looking at a Allied Princess or a Gulfstar 37...
Just looking for reviews on both
Cheers


----------

