# Sabre v. Pearson



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Can some of you folks help me to compare the Sabre 30-I (1979-82) & 30-II (1983-85) with the Pearson 31-II (1987-91)? Use would be for Great Lakes cruising and daysailing. Any comments or info would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

The Sabres are generally better built, equipped and finished, they generally sail better and are faster. The 31 II was one of the reasons that Pearson went belly up. They world of boat building was changing and Pearson was not keeping up. 

Jeff


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

First my biases. I currently own two Pearsons, a 1988 P-33-2 (bought late last fall) and a 1989 P-27. Hopefully within another week I will only own the P-33. I also am the commodore of the Pearson Sailing Association of the Chesapeake Bay. I wrote an article on the history of Pearson Yachts that appeared in Good Old Boat magazine several years ago (check there website for it.) 

Thus, perhaps you understand why I totally disagree with Jeff''s comments about the P-31-2 and why Pearson went out of business. Sabre went out of business at about the same time but was saved by sugar daddy owners. Unfortunately, Pearson had no such savior in 1991 when it closed its doors. But this isn''t about the sailboat market 15 years ago.

The P-31-2 is a fine boat. I probably know half a dozen owners and all of them love the boat. If you want to check out their opionions for yourself, please sign up for the Pearson email list here on Sailnet and ask your questions there. (Click on the Join E-mail List button to the left as you read this.) The P-31 would be a terrific boat for Great Lakes Sailing.

Having said that, the Sabre 30 is a venerable boat. I considered them while searching for a larger boat. As always, it comes down to which boat grabs you.

As for Sabre''s being faster than Pearson''s, the S-30-2 has a PHRF rating of 174. The P-31-2 has a PHRF rating of 156. Go figure.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I am not sure where you found the PHRF that you quote and I know that they vary from region to region but looking at LIS the Sabre 30 rates 162 and the Pearson 31-2 rates 165. It looks to me like the Sabre is slightly faster. There is a shoal draft version of the Sabre 30 that rates 174 but LIS did not have a shoal draft rating for the Pearson with which to compare it. 

Jeff


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

www.phrfne.org

And yes, it''s well known that PHRF ratings vary by region.


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

Just to clarify since I know how utterly important this point is to some -- the phrfne.org site has a 165 rating for a Pearson 31-2 with a winged keel and 156 with a fin keel. The original post was about a Sabre 30-2, which rates 174 on that site (no mention of fin or shoal draft keel.) The Sabre 30-3 rates 165, again no mention ok which keel. So if you want to race these two boats, put me in the Pearson.


----------



## windship (May 4, 2002)

The Sabre is 600 Lbs.lighter, has a 1" longer waterline,has 3" thinner beam, the draft''s are 4'' and 5''9" (P 3''11" wing 5''9" fin).The pearson has 32 more feet of sail area.
It seems to me that the Sabre would be faster and the Sabre is pretier, has a much nicer interior,much better built and will have better resale value.
Sorry for buttin'' in,

Dennis


----------



## windship (May 4, 2002)

My post is for the P-31 not the 32. 
9my ''edit''isn''t working.

Dennis


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Thanks to all for your posts.

SailorMitch, great article on the history of Pearson. I have been subscribed to the Pearson and Sabre mail lists and have gotten help there as well, although it''s slightly biased  .

I have been researching and looking for a boat for 2 years. One year ago I decided that a Sabre 30-I or 30-II would be the optimal boat for me given my priorities, intended use, budget, etc., and, besides, I like how they look.

I have looked into every S-30 that''s been on the market in the last 2 years, came close a couple of times, but no cigar. Somewhat frustrated, I recently started taking another look at boats that I had ruled out, which is when the P31-II came to my attention.

I have not been on a P31-II yet, although I plan to see one soon. Do you know of any GOOD exterior photos of P31-IIs (not necessarily for sale) on the internet? (Other than those on Yachtworld.) I''m trying to get a better handle on their looks before I make a trip.

Also, would you say that a P31-II built in 1987 (when the Company had relatively stable operations) would be less likely to have a construction defect than one built in the final year the Company was in business?

Thanks.


----------



## Bob1112 (Jan 27, 2003)

I can''t speak to the Pearson, but I know a little about the Sabres. The Mark I was a rocket; very favorably rated under PHRF. The Mark III was good all-around, but not so favorably rated. The Mark III shoal-draft was good in light air, but performance fell off as the wind picked up.


----------



## foxglove (Dec 27, 2002)

I used to charter Sabres in the Chesapeake Bay and have owned a Pearson 323 for 21 years. 

I like both boats. However, having done numerous maintenance projects on my Pearson, my opinion is that Pearson does (did) everything right. It seems that everytime I read about some mishap (prop shaft falling out, lead gravel pouring out after holing a keel, gate valve shearing off) I consider if that could happen to me and I always determine that Pearson has me covered. The Sabres occasionally gave me trouble which required a chase boat visit.

The Pearson is also a sturdy boat. I''ve rammed into 15 footers on Lake Erie and rammed into piers about every place else. 

Pearson did get left behind in design. The Sabres I chartered had cozy quarter berths or a head aft the companionway. The living area of my Pearson ends at the bulkhead which make the boat less livable than the Sabres.

I was alway able to trim a Sabre for speed more effectively than the Pearson. I don''t race but I like to get the most out of the sails and the Sabre seemed to respond to my tinkering better than the Pearson.


----------



## efatzinger (Nov 30, 2000)

Interesting what you say about the ability to trim the Sabre. It was a heavy boat, and I always found it hard to figure out whether an adjustment (loosen backstay, tighten outhaul) did anything, since you didn''t feel any acceleration or decelaration, the boat took so long to respond, and the wind changed in the meantime. But relative to a Pearson, perhaps I had it good.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

If the question had been how does a Pearson 323 compare with a Sabre, I would agree with you 100%. But the question was about the Pearson 31, which was built substantially later and which seemed to be a less wholesome design and of a less robust build quality.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## windship (May 4, 2002)

newuser,
The Sabre''s displacemant is 9,400 Lbs.
The pearson''s is 10,000.

Dennis


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

Big O,

Glad to know you''re hanging in there after all these posts.

Answers to your questions: For anything related to Pearson Yachts, THE definitive website is one put together by a fellow named Dan Pfeiffer. The address is www.pearsoninfo.net. Click on the 31-2 link in the line up and you''ll see more photos of the boat.

As for problems with Pearsons made in the years leading up to 1991 when Pearson went belly up, I don''t think that''s an issue. In fact, the 31-2 pictured in the above website belongs to a fellow named Bill Crane, who says his 31-2 was the last boat out of the factory before they closed the doors. I''ve owned a P-27 since new in 1989, and also now own a 1988 P-33-2 and have had no problems I''d relate to any financial problems Pearson may have been having. Also, remember that these boats are now at least a dozen years old and are still going strong. As a general rule, the boats are holding up very well.

As for looks, obviously I like the distinctive look Bill Shaw dsigned in the mid-1980''s and used throughout the line. They are handsome boats in my book. And just today at my marina three different people told me how pretty my 33-2 is. So others share my opinion. 

And we know what they say about opinions........ 

I don''t think you can beat the quality/price ratio of a Pearson, but that''s just me. It''s your money, so buy what makes you happy. that''s what it''s all about.


----------



## Denr (Feb 7, 2001)

So sailormitch-miller, what did you think of that hotrod you crossed lake Michigan on last year?? If anyone wants photos of sailormitch behind the wheel of a Sabre please contact me.


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

Denr,

Given my lengthy Pearson credentials, I have tried to keep quiet about those 5 glorious days on your Sabre. Besides, if I could afford a Sabre 34 I would''ve bought one instead of my P-33! You especially know that I have said if I won Lotto, a new S-362 would suddenly appear in my slip -- except Sabre no longer makes new 362''s. "Oh well" on that one.

Hey, I greatly admire Sabres. I''d be proud to own one. I just happened to go with a boat (my P-33-2) that fits my budget, is of more than acceptable quality, and also fits my intended use. Pay your money and take your pick.


----------



## windship (May 4, 2002)

Denr,
You own Sabre 34? My friend had a 34.What a wonderfull boat and no solid overhead fiberglass liner.

Dennis


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Thanks again to all of you folks for your posts. They were extremetly helpful (not to mention entertaining).

While I will be taking a hard look at the aforementioned Sabres and Pearson, a substantially different (I believe) boat has re-emerged on my short list. I need your advice even more for this one, but I think it''s best to start a new thread. Hope to "see" you there.


----------



## jgsailor (Aug 18, 2006)

I'm in the process of buying a Sabre 30 Mk II, 1983. It seems to be quite well built, with very few obvious problems. I am having trouble finding a definitive source of information for this model. I've been to the Sabre website, and there is useful information there (e.g., the complete user manual), but I'm wondering if there's a user association I can might contact or join. If so, could you let me know.

FYI, I also consider Pearsons to be quite well-made, but I found a good deal on this Sabre (well, I think it's a good deal)


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

JG -- If you haven't already done so, join the Sabre email list here on Sailnet and ask your questions there. There probably are a number of owners on that list who can hwlp you.


----------



## Sonofasonofasailor (Feb 22, 2006)

I love the old threads dragged up from obscurity.
Sailormitch are you still on the P-33-2?

I am currently in a boat search and have been told by many (brokers, sailors & surveyors) that while Pearson on the whole made a great boat that one should stay away from the p-31. Is this valid? The number one reason among others given for that was the decks were poorly constructed. The reputation seems that the P-31 was the dog of the line.

Don't kill me, I'm just the messenger.


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

SOASOAS,

1) Yes, I still have my P-33-2 and am quite happy with it even though since it has a wing keel, I'm lucky it goes forward when I put the sails up from what I've read on another thread! I gather it really should sail backwards in the opinion of some! Oh well.

2) I think I just answered that same question on another thread about the poor, maligned P-31-2. I am not aware of Pearson building the deck of the P-31 any differently from any other boat during that period, nor am I aware of widespread problems with the P-31. But without maintenance of deck hardware any boat can become a problem. As I've said before, I know several owners of P-31-2's and will be glad to put anyone in touch with them to get first hand information rather than rumors.

3) Yes, digging up these old threads is a blast from the past.


----------



## Bob1112 (Jan 27, 2003)

*Sabre 30 Mark II*

My impression is that the 30 Mark II is not so different from the Mark I. Thie big changes did not come until the Mark III (I owned a Mark III).

If that is correct, the Mark II will be a great boat. Sabre did great design jobs on their early boats: they were good upwind boats, sturdy underfoot (nothing flexes or bends when you move your weight around), and looked good.


----------

