# C&C 30 vs Ericson 30+



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

Time to buy a new used sailboat. My last was a San Juan 21' I owned for ten years. Looking at 30 footers now, for sailing/cruising in south Puget Sound, so light-wind performance is important. 

My dream craft is a C&C 30 MkII--I crewed on one many years ago. Next choice is a C&C 30 MkI. I'm not finding many available in the Seattle area. Everett has a BEAUTIFUL C&C 32, but when I checked the specs, it has the same waterline as the 30 MkI but weighs 2K more. I'm worried about it's light-wind performance. I think it's a Cadillac kind of boat.

Vancouver has a very nice Ericson 30+ for sail.

I'm wondering if anyone could chime-in on the C&C 30 vs Ericson 30+ comps. The 30's have comparable SA/Disp and Disp/WL. The PHRF range on the Ericsons is 162-216. I'm wondering why it's such a wide range (C&C MkI is 171-174, and MkII shows 144-147).

Also, I've read that there may be some advantages to a fractional rig (the Ericson) and the resulting smaller head-sail, particularity for single-handling, which I do a lot of.

It's my impression that both are considered "quality" makes.

Any help out there?


----------



## PaulinVictoria (Aug 23, 2009)

Both good boats, the Ericson is a bit of a newer design and a lot more IOR influenced. The C&C is a very stiff boat, for single handing you could probably fly a 135 genoa and not even bother with a reef until 20kts+ true. Personally I think the C&C is a nicer looking boat but overall I don't think you'd be disappointed with either. There's a C&C30 here in Sidney for sale at Thunderbird Yacht sales, the weak Canadian $ could make that very attractive for you.

[Edit: seems that 30' has gone]

[Edit: Neither are going to be great light-air boats]


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

I like the double-spreader frac rig of the Ericson.. all else being equal that might be the tipping point for me. However Paul is right in that the C&C is a stiff boat that's a good candidate for singlehanded sailing. I find both boats have nice lines and consider them 'good looking' boats. C&C and Bruce King seemed to always get that 'right'.

Is the Ericson in Vancouver WA or here? A Canadian purchase will make for a good deal for you these days.


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

The Ericson is in BC. Yeah, I like the rigging, too..... and the exchange rate.


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

I had to look up IOR to grasp the "influence" you mentioned. I found this on Wikipedia:

_"The IOR rule encouraged wide short boats with limited stability. A narrow waterline and large beam on deck, combined with a high centre of gravity, meant that crew weight provided a significant proportion of stability at small heel angles, and boats had a relatively low angle of vanishing stability..... This meant that the hull was often locally distorted to maximise or minimise a measurement locally, with minimal effect to the surrounding hull. This gave a characteristic bumped look to many boats, particularly at the point of maximum beam and in the stern. Also, as stability was only measured at very low heel angles (less than 5 degrees), boats were designed with a very narrow waterline and low stability in measurement trim, but a hull form that gained stability with the weight of the crew and other equipment, and with increasing angles of heel. Interestingly, low stability was encouraged (up to a point)." _

Is this what you were referring to or are there other common traits associated with IOR driven designs. (I thought the birds-eye view of the Ericson deck showed a fairly exaggerated curvature... at least in comparison to the C&Cs.)


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

The E30+ is by no means an example of 'extreme IOR influence'. As with most racer cruisers of the era, there were stylistic and design elements that were 'driven' to some extent by the IOR rules - but they were in such a state of flux that no particular shape lasted long. In fact IOR specs did not necessarily result in the fastest boat.. more like (as designers worked around the 'loopholes') they came up with boats that 'performed' better than their assigned ratings, therefore able to more easily win on handicap. Along the way some nasty downwind habits were evident.

The early Jboat line (24/30/36/35) were examples of boat designs that eschewed the IOR and simply tried to come up with raw 'fast'. Another good local example would be the Martin 242 - light weight, lots of sail area, clean runs aft, capable of planing. These boats likely would have been difficult to race to the podium under IOR because the rule would have penalized them heavily on the ratings.

If indeed the E30 exhibits the IOR-ish skittishness downwind it will be toned down by the fractional rig dimensions and the proportionately smaller kites and gennys. Our boat is a much more extreme IOR hull from the late 70s design-wise, as evidenced by the sharply pointed DWL plane aft and a bit of a 'bustle'. We owned a similar era 40 foot masthead that definitely gave us fits now and then.. this boat with its extremely frac rig has never done the downwind dance - but we're careful...


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

Well, thanks. I'm glad to hear the E30+ has only moderate IOR influence. IOR is new to me. I'll think of it like ...... the US tax code.

Do you know of any reasons why a production boat would have a 50 point spread in its PHRF range????? How do I know if I'm buying a 216 boat or a 162 boat?


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Kenneth K said:


> ....
> Do you know of any reasons why a production boat would have a 50 point spread in its PHRF range????? How do I know if I'm buying a 216 boat or a 162 boat?


Ratings vary regionally, but they also vary with the setup of the boat. There's a 'standard' rating for a boat with the standard maximum sail area AND spinnaker.. adjusted ratings for boats without spinnakers and otherwise undersized sails. In the old days you could get rating credit for a modified, heavier interior but I'm not sure that's still the case.

Anyhow - comparing numbers your need to also compare the rating code, which indicates whether or not the rating listed is 'standard' for the design or if it's been adjusted for any reason.

Even so, the spread seems far too large...


----------



## jppp (Jul 13, 2008)

These youtubers are selling their E-30+. They are on the east coast but could make vids about the delivery. By water that is. Youtube search:Wicked Salty


----------



## Sanduskysailor (Aug 1, 2008)

I have sailed on both. Hands down the C&C 30 is a sweeter sailing boat.

Ericson 30+* positives.* Smaller headsail is easier to handle
*Negatives*- more wetted surface, lower SA/D, slightly pinched stern, deeper draft, weight is higher in keel. Cabin top traveler on some versions is very inconvenient

C&C30. Cult boat in Canada. 
*Positives*- lower wetter surface, weight low in keel, shorter draft, higher SA/D, actual longer waterline due to unusual rudder which extends aft of stern

Negatives- rudder and keel design is better for reaching. Be careful backing into dock with rudder extending past transom.

The Mark 1 had the longest production run of any C&C model. A very well balanced boat with no hull distortion and no flat section in the bottom. The boat is great in a seaway.

Don't sweat the ratings. The rating of 216 on Lake Michigan is probably a mistake as the norm is 168-174 which is the same for C&C 30-1.

My take having raced on and against both boats- C&C much faster on a reach, about the same downwind and points slightly lower than the 30+. The C&C has a lower center of gravity which makes it stiffer. I'd look for a later model version with a diesel. If racing the C&C will be a better all around boat.


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

Thanks all! The information is very helpful. Truth is, I can't say I'll never see a race course, but in reality, it'll be day-sailing and cruising 90+% of the time.
@jppp - that's a great video of an E30+ in day-to-day action.....

@Sandusky - Thanks for the +/- opinion on the two boats. Could I ask you the same for the C&C 30 Mk I vs Mk II? Does the MKII suffer from IOR influences, too? My initial nod for the -2 was because of the lower PHRFs and a newer-is-better assumption. Though they may be out of my $$ range. You said, "late model with a diesel." Were you talking -1 or Mk -2. Was there a year when diesels became standard?


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

Also, Paul mentioned Thunderbird Yacht sales in B.C., which I just added to my scan list. No C&C's, but a nice looking CS30 (Canadian Sailcraft) popped up. CS is an unknown quantity to me, but the performance specs look right in line with the C&C and Ericson 30s. Can anyone comment on how CS holds up to the others in terms of quality, performance, and cruise-ability?


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

There's a thread here on CS yachts and a number of very passionate owners here on SailNet. They are well constructed (the boats) and generally very well regarded.

The CS30 is of the newer CS breed, a Castro design (as are the 36 Merlin, the 40 and the 44.) The earlier CS 27, 33, and 36Traditional are Ray Wall boats. The early boats have a better rep than the more recent ones, but all are good boats.

Ray Wall's last boat was a mid sized Quanta 28, built in BC after he moved here. Probably more in line with his earlier CS boats. There were not many built, and are rare on the market.

The 30 is a much more modern design than the C&C or the Ericson, and of course younger, whatever that might be worth. You could do much worse.


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

The CS 30 looks like a pretty fine boat. It would probably have been out of my $$ reach but the exchange rate has me thinking about stretching a little bit. SailingJoy.com shows 500 were sold between '84 & '90. Surprised I haven't seen more of them. Maybe their owners don't want to part with them.


----------



## Sanduskysailor (Aug 1, 2008)

The 30-2 is a nice boat. They are a bit faster rating 147 on average. They have a more modern look than the -1 and rod rigging. Clear sliding hatch with a clear fixed light in cabin top makes them pretty bright on the inside which is a plus. I really wanted one when I bought my last boat but they are pretty scarce and they still pretty pricey at 35-45K. More modern design with an open interior. Rob Ball design which is well done. Yanmar engine has relatively moderate part prices.

The Mark 1 C&Cs stated using diesels around 1977.

The CS 30 rates the same as the 30-2. Dimensions are pretty similar. Interior is more of a standard layout. CS has a great reputation for building good boats. All good things. There are 34 rated for racing on Lake Ontario. The boat just looks out of balance to my eye. Too big/high of a cabin top and a proportionally small foredeck. Volvo engine is a good engine but has very high part prices if you ever need to replace something.


----------



## Sanduskysailor (Aug 1, 2008)

Putting PHRF numbers in perspective. PHRF numbers are expressed in seconds per mile. Believe it or not they actually reflect speed through the water in 10 knots of wind sailing in a combination of beating, reaching, and running. Let's say your PHRF rating is 150. 150 actually is 550 +150= 700 sec/mi or 11min -40 sec to travel a mile. 550 seconds is the generally accepted factor to translate the PHRF number to actual seconds per mile. 3 sec/mile is the equivalent of 1 boat length for a 30 foot boat. Bottom line is that a boat rating 171 has to sail within 8 boat lengths/mi of a boat that rates 150 to beat it on a handicap.

Obviously this is not exact because some boats have one or 2 points of sail that are exceptional and maybe one point where it isn't. Prime example is a Tupperware 40 with a beamy fat rear end and a short stick. It reaches at 7.5knots but goes to weather like a square rigger. It might have a slower rating than a 30 footer like the CS 30 and will only do well when the wind is up and there is a lot of reaching.

PS-PHRF NW is an outlier when it comes to ratings. They arbitrarily raised the rating 10% of boats rating slower than 99. That is the reason why the CS 30 rates 168 in the PHRF NW and 147-150 everywhere else


----------



## PaulinVictoria (Aug 23, 2009)

The C&C30MkII is a totally different boat to the MkI, nothing in common other than a 30 in there. The MkII is faster, but considerably more tender so you'll be reefing in lower winds, on the other hand it's better in light air. The MkII also has IMHO one of the best cabins in a 30' sailing boat ever, amazing use of space. I would buy one if I had the money, orange hull or not.
CS30 is a nice boat too, really you aren't going to go wrong with any of your current shortlist.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

All three boats are quality. The C&C have great standard equipment on them and may set the apart as most were ma de with oversized winches etc. I like rod rigging also.

You can't go wrong with any one of the three so look for the one in the best condition.


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

I really appreciate all the info. As I said, my last boat was a San Juan 21, so I don't have much background in 30+ footers. 

I like the the idea of a "stiffer" boat. If I'm not going solo, I may have some younger kids on board with me and I'm not crazy about having to use them as ballast. The SJ21 was pretty tender through about 15 deg, then it firmed up nicely. After 15 deg of heel or so, you could feel the forces of a gust--first hitting the sails, then translating down through the keel, and ending with a slight extra tug on the tiller to balance it. Loved that feeling of the forces balancing each other out with the end result simply being an added forward velocity.....

It sounds like the CC-1 is clearly the stiffest of the bunch. The E30+ while not as stiff, maybe gains some single-handed points for the frac rig. Then the CC-2 and CS30 may be more tender (though highest performance). Is that a fair summary???

For the racer/cruiser crowd (with the emphasis on cruising), is boat "stiffness" ever viewed as a bad thing?


----------



## PaulinVictoria (Aug 23, 2009)

Singlehanding a masthead is as easy as a fractional. Flying a 150 genoa is a pain, put a 115-135 on instead and you're good to go in most winds.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

You might get ahold of "sloop john b" as he had a CS30 at one time. The one for sale may be his old one. 

As far as stiff vs soft.....both can be good and bad. for a boat that heels quickly, it may at a certain point, actually get stiffer than one that is stiff at the get go! With a softer one, you reduce sail a bit sooner than a stiffer one too. In which case, a stiffer one when it reaches a limit, may be worst than a softer one per say......
Reality is, neither is better IMHO. Only what works best for you. For around here, A boat with a bit more SA/Disp, and to a degree, softer, might be the better boat due to the ability to sail in lighter winds, vs a stiffer one having to motor. 

Marty


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

blt2ski said:


> You might get ahold of "sloop john b" as he had a CS30 at one time. The one for sale may be his old one.


I'm not sure you're right about that, Marty.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Faster,

Maybe I am wrong on the who......but I am pretty sure someone on here had a CS30 up that way.......Sloop is ringing a bell in my brain.......than again, like all of us humans, Been wrong before, will be wrong again.........

Marty


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

ok ok ok,,,,,

Did a search, mitiempo has/had a cs27...wrong person, wrong boat model.......

anyway, djodenda got winded out in the local race out of our marina this morning........He has a CS36 Merlin.......does that count too! 

Marine servicenter has a CS 40 for sale, Similar to the 30 and 36M in that it is designed by tony castro.......

There is a Jeanneau Arcadia for sale in Everett. Also a Castro design.......at Port Gardner Yachts. 

Marty


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

blt2ski said:


> ok ok ok,,,,,
> 
> Did a search, mitiempo has/had a cs27...wrong person, wrong boat model.......
> 
> Marty


.. but besides that, you were close


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Faster said:


> .. but besides that, you were close


I knew I was close.......but obviously not as close as I thought.....

i least I admit to mistakes, unlike one or two around here!

Marty


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

I viewed the Jenneau Arcadia in Everett a few weeks ago. I liked the exterior and the specs, but the cabin was too low for me--couldn't stand up straight.

I think someone said its okay to keep beating a dead horse as long as you're learning something. So, I'll go on.....

The CS 30 has a shoal-draft keel (4'3" vs 5' 6" fin keel). I searched SN for "shoal vs fin keel" discussions and came away with this; "there's _never_ a performance-based reason to choose a shoal keel." Still the PHRFs don't penalize the SD model at all, and all ratios are the same (including ballast/disp).

Marty mentioned, *"For around here, A boat with a bit more SA/Disp, and to a degree, softer, might be the better boat due to the ability to sail in lighter winds, vs a stiffer one having to motor." * I'm assuming you mean Puget Sound / W. WA.

So how much "penalty" should I give a SD CS30 vs a CC30 or E30+ for a Puget Sound CRUISER/racer?

Also, some of the boat-data sites list a Motion Comfort Ratio. All the boats I've been considering have MCRs of 18.9 to 21.2. Does MCR have any real-world significance?


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Kenneth K said:


> ..... I searched SN for "shoal vs fin keel" discussions and came away with this; "there's _never_ a performance-based reason to choose a shoal keel."
> 
> So how much "penalty" should I give a SD CS30 vs a CC30 or E30+ for a Puget Sound CRUISER/racer?
> 
> Also, some of the boat-data sites list a Motion Comfort Ratio. All the boats I've been considering have MCRs of 18.9 to 21.2. Does MCR have any real-world significance?


I agree with that first statement... but:

If the 'racer' portion is truly the small print AND you're truly locked into a particular boat AND the only good/local/acceptable example is a shoal keel model I doubt you'd be sorry you made the deal when cruising is the priority. I'd guess the only time you'd really know a difference is beating beside an equally well-sailed deep keel version.

But I'd also say that in our area, such circumstances would be the only reason to choose shoal draft.

As to the MCR.. many give little credence to its meaning, and as has been discussed recently don't get yourself hung up on the numbers. Find a boat you 'love', if it checks 60% of your boxes or better, give it a solid chance.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Kenneth,

Yes I am assuming puget sound/salish sea, as I am a whopping 6-25 miles north of you in Edmonds depending upon where you are in Seattle. 

As faster notes, find a boat the ticks as many buttons as you can. Then buy it! I have an Arcadia, yeah head room is a bit on the low side. BUT, for the size etc, she is a quick boat, fun to sail. The one in Everett has won its division of swiftsure a few times. Another in Vancouver has been in the top 3-5 boats for many years in its division up that way. 

Marty


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

Thanks Marty and Ron for the perspective... ultimately you have to love the boat, not the specs. Still you guys have the knowledge of sailing on or against the various boats we're talking about. Without a little research, I'd have been prone to buying the one with the glossiest teak.

You'll have to double the distance, Marty, I'm down here on the west side of Gig Harbor--off Carr Inlet. All the more reason for a boat that can sail in light winds.

Cheers....


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

From a light air sailing perspective. Many of us get a drifter/reacher sail. IE a 130-155% foretriangle sail made of light weight nylon or equal. Mine is 3oz nylon. Good to about 5-6 knots true wind speed. Then I go to the fiberpath 155 if racing, or 140 if cruising. Those are too heavy to catch the zyphers when the wind is under this amount. Compared to a normal head sail. Mine was half the cost, about $800 vs 1500-2000 for a typical jib, 3000-3500 for a string style. Use some 1/4" sheets, and you can usually move....

Something to think about if you get a heavier, sticky style boat.

You are a bit south of me. That is where my boat spent the first 20 years. then brought her north. THree others with Arcadia's did not know mine exhisted until I started sailing around here, racing a bit etc. 

Have fun with what ever you get. IMHO, for around here, a cruiser/racer to race/cruiser is a better boat option than a true cruiser. As they will move better in lighter winds generally speaking!

marty


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

C&C are awesome light wind boats. The model you at looking at shows that by the PHRF rating. But your really quibbling amongst good boats.

Find the one which us in the best condition and choose that one. If you have it narrowed to the two or three you like that's my advice. Condition of what you buy is important for future costs also. The differences in racing will only be important if you are truly racing this as a primary function. In that case choose the C&C , points better and you can load up the head sail with other sized headsails. 

The years of boats you are looking at many models of C&C were sold as racer cruisers like our 35mkIII. On the Great Lakes where they were built there are even one class racing fleets of C&C like J boats have classes and fleets. 

You have it narrowed down to a few boats which is the first step. Now find a boat which is the best condition. You cam
Can always buy new electronics. Try not to overthink it, all your choices are good. Now find a boat and go sailing and enjoy it.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

The 30MKII might be a more comfortable cruising boat. The aft head is large for a 30 ft boat, there is an aft cabin with a bit of room to change in privacy. The V-berth is on the short side if you are 6 ft. or taller. Loads of ventilation with 8 opening hatches. Head room is superior. There is also the walk through transom that makes life on a mooring or at anchor so much easier.

The overall design of the 30MKII is amazing. Rob Ball and friends worked magic with 30 ft of boat. It looks like it wants to sail and the layout down below is fantastic for it's size, ahead of it's time and still feels modern today.

The overall design of the 30MKI is nice, but about what one would expect for a room 30 ft boat designed to go into production in 1970.

I have owned both the C&C 30KII and 30MKI. Honestly, the 30MKI can be more fun to sail as it's so stiff. However, the 30MKII is a better overall performer and all reefing lines lead aft so it's easy to reduce sail. Both boats have an overall feeling of quality craftsmanship.

My pet peeve with the MK II is that I sail in an area that can have constantly varying conditions due to land masses. One minute you are sailing along in light air and a mile later you need to reef, a mile later you could shake out the reef. My old MKI would just plow along at hull speed in heavy air but was an underperformed in light air.

Due get a good survey. Interviewing surveyors, you might find one who knows C&C models and what to look for.

I cannot comment on the Ericson, except that it's a nice looking boat and I would imagine it would be more like the 30 MKI.


----------



## Kenneth K (Mar 3, 2016)

'79 c&c30-1. With haunches like that, I may be in love already.......


----------



## gerryrkyle (Sep 11, 2016)

I have a great C&C 30 mk ll I will sell in Victoria. I have just returned from the summer in Desolation Sound and a month in Barkley sound and areas off the West coast of Vancouver Island. It is an awesome single handed boat, and very comfortable for a couple cruising. Stiff and mannerly while being a great all around sailing boat. They don't make boats this size built like it anymore. The interior is all teak and like new. A very well equiped boat.


----------

