# C&C 29 and C&C 33



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

For interest a friend and I started looking at what we would like for our next boats. I have come to like a lot about the C&C 29 mark 1 while my friend likes the C&C 33 mk 1.

Both seem to be raced actively and appear to be good performers.

So what do we know about these boats? Is the flat section on the 29 a concern or an advantage? Are these good boats for both cruising and club racing?

Mike


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

All C&Cs of that period are good performance boats. The C&C 29 MI is actually a second generation design, somewhat infamous for being tender, if you get stuck on this model, look for one where a PO has added the lead shoe to the bottom of the keel to improve performance (enuff said?). IMHO the 33 MI is a much more desireable boat. It is a first generation C&C all built like tanks, and is better looking than the 29.

Either of these models make a lously cruiser, lacking any amenities, such as headroom, water, storage, etc. Racing and day-sail - good boats.

The best of this bunch is the C&C 30 Mod 1 which C&C actually manufactured from 1972 until 1983, reflected how solid a design this boat represented. I consider the 1977 30 MI owned the best of my six boats. From my experience the 30 clearly justified its rep as the stiffest boat C&C ever produced. While the boat performed well in light air, ours easily sailed wellover rating in wind over 15 knots (oftten to the embarrassment of a set of C&C 33s starting 10 minutes earlier, and owning us 14 seconds a mile. With a breeze we''d beat somet of them boat for boat, wind 20 MPH, we''d beat them all.)

The 30 has typical room for a boat that size (materially more than the 29), and you can add amenities. I''d buy another in a second, so that''s my advice...

good luck.


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

Thanks Sailingfool

I am actually very familiar with the 30-1 as there are more than 6 in our club. They are very good boats as you have said but more of a cruiser than I would like esp in light winds (which we have a lot of). Are you certain that you are referring to the 29-1 when you say it is small inside? I have been inside bother the 29-1 and the 29-2 and the 29-1 seems very large for a 29 fotter (at 29''11") whereas the 29-2 does indeed seem much smaller.

PS I like "tender" over stiff boats.

Regards

Mike


----------



## Johnrb (Sep 21, 2002)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

FWIW here are some comments taken from a review Practical Sailor recently did on both versions of the C&C 29.

" The MK 1 version of the 29 grew out of a management directive to "make our little boats more cost effective to build". The resulting 29 was lighter (by 500 lbs.) and cheaper (700 lbs. less ballast) alternative to the 30 says Hank Evans, one-time C&C sales manager. "The thinking was to take some of the volume out of the underbody and put it in the topsides, thus reducing wetted surface. This volume was replaced above the waterline where the space was used for living and storage."

The new boat was virtually as "liveable" as the 30 that she was meant to replace. However, Evans remembers, the 29's hull shape "produced a boat that was 'tender' at the dock and initially under sail. As the boat heeled the flare became immersed and the boat stiffened markedly. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. Unfortunately, as the boat heeled and immersed all that topside flare, the unwanted drag not only slowed her down, it tended to push the bow to windward. That, combined with the rudder becoming less effective (even coming out of the water at times) at greater angles of heel, caused unintentional and undesired roundups."

Evans says that the original 29 was one of Cuthbertson's least favorite designs."

I don''t have any first hand experience with the 29 so if you disagree - I''m just the messenger.


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

Thanks John

I was aware of the comments that you mentioned and of these issues. I am looking for some comments also from others out there who may actually have sailing experience with these boats.

As I understand it if you have typically flat water and lighter breezes the 29-1 is an outstanding boat for racing when compared to other boats such as the 30-1 which is quite slow in light winds.

Where my main curiosities lie is how does the 29-1 handle when the sail inventory is used properly to match the proper sails to the wind conditions. I know it has a reputation of being squirley in a wind and that some do not like the flat bottom as it pulls the rudder out of the water when heeled. So when we are in these conditions where the 30-1 comes into its elemet (25-30 knots) how does the 29-1 respond when the sails are reduced for conditions? Is it still a problem, etc ...

In my mind it seems that the two boats (30-1 and 29-1) are interesting contrasts. The 30-1 is a great cruising boat and known as being stiff but pays the price when the winds are light. The 29-1 is a great light air boat that has problems as it gets windier.

Looking for comments by people who have sailed and raced on the 29-1 in various conditions or know of it. Obviously if a person likes the 30-1 they would be inclined to displike the characteristics of the 29-1 and vice-versa.

How about it Jeff? Any comments? anyone else?

Thanks

Mike


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

Mike,

As someone who raced these boats sersiously for about five years, I gotta tell you "as you understand it..." is all wrong. You don''t seem to have picked up the theme that, for a C&C, the 29-I was and is a dog. I hope that comment is un-varnished enuff.
If you want to listen to experience, in dozens of races over those years, the only time one of the several 29-Is that usually showed up, beat our 30-I was when we did something stupid or unlucky. That light air performance is their better suit, only means that they could sail closer to their ratings in light air, as opposed to being SOL in moderate to heavy air. Even though light air was their relative sweet spot, our 30-I had no difficuly beating those 29-Is as consistently in 4MPH as in 20 MPH, the difference being that with a breeze even if we made mistakes we would still beat the 29-Is!
But not to just opine - check 
http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html
for the technical characteristics of the two boats - note that the higher SA/DSP, WLW and Hull Speed of the 30-I. Using whatever criteria they programmed, this calcualtor classes the 29-I as a "cruiser" and the 30-I as a "racer/cruiser". 
The 30-I pays no price when the wind is down - where the heck did you come up with that - I bet it wasn''t from someone who raced the 30-I or raced against one!
To get back to the big picture - the C&C 29-I is a nice boat, and I considered one before buying a 30-I. The issue is just that the 30-I is simply a GREAT boat, whose raceabilty is consistently superior to the 29-I. Note that C&C produced the 30-I design for eleven years (72-83), and the 29-I for only two or three. 
If your criteria is a superior light air boat, completely skip the C&Cs (except for a bastard called the Mega....) Take a look at Evelyns or Kirbys or other sleds, and accept their other shortcomings...
Even as to cruising, one of my requirements back then for habitabilty in a boat was that I could stand upright when using the head, have you tried taking a leak in a 29-I?

Good luck.


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

Sailingfool,

Interesting points. I had heard that the 29-1 had problems in windier conditions and am very familiar with the 30-1 as there are 6 of them in our club and one that is actively raced by someone who knows how. Perhaps the problem is that most of our 30s are set up primarily for cruising.

I currently own a Niagara 26 (Hinterhoeller). This is also a relatively tender boat that requires reefing early and careful selection of headsails when the breeze is over 15 knots. Sails like a dingy which can be great! When we race against the 30s we are ALWAYS ahead of them in a light breeze and ALWAYS behind them in any breeze over 15 knots. They are great boats but light airs are a weakness. BTW they owe us time. The Niagara is like a cruisy Kirby 25 ... a bit slower but has a livable interior and a usuable cockpit.

My experience with the 29-1? None. I looked inside one on land and really liked the layout. I looked at it on the cradle and like the lines. It was a 79 model.

I looked at a 29-2 and found ot looks great from outside but much smaller inside.

Coming from a relatively tender boat my "impression" of the 29-1 was that it would have similar characteristics to the boat I have but more interior room. I had understood it required running with a smaller headsail as the wind comes up and reefing but was curious to know from someone who sailed on one if it was OK when the proper sail selection was used.

My biggest problem with the 30? Only that all 30 owners go on and on about STIFF boats. Drives me nuts.

The Kirby 30 is an interesting boat but has a cored hull which would scare me in an old boat.

The Mega 30. Interesting boat. Interior sucks. Very good sailing boat from what I have heard if you like racing.

Still looking ....

Thanks for the comments ...

Still Looking

Mike
on Full Tilt 2


----------



## Johnrb (Sep 21, 2002)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

Mike: it's nice to hear you have a Niagara 26 - they look like a nice boat although I've never had the opportunity to sail on one. How do you manage the rather clumsy outboard arrangement? This seemed to work well on the smaller Hinterhoeller designed Shark (usually with a small, light weight outboard) but I expect most Niagara 26 owners use a heavier outboard that would be difficult to unmount and store in the lazaret.

BTW, how do the non-Hinterhoeller N26's compare with respect to quality (e.g. both Goman and Halman)?


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

John

In races the Niagaras in Nova Scotia do not remove the outboard to store in the lazarette. Not sure what is done in other areas. Is bulky when removing at end of season as the 4 stk Honda I use is over 100lbs.

Haven''t heard much about quality differences between the Hinterhoeller, Halman and Goman Niagaras but have heard of several other differences.

The Hinterhoellers (1979 -81) have swept back spreaders whereas later models did not. Racers in Nova Scotia prefer the Hinterhoeller Niagaras as they believe them to be faster.

The Later Niagaras (Halman I believe) have longer bunks by about 4 inches. This would be a nice change.

Some of the early Hinterhoellers did not have a supporting strip over the door between main salon and head area. This caused some difficulties and many owners retrofitted some such strip.

Other than that I have heard no other comments.

Boat is a delight to sail but requires headsail changes and reefing as the wind picks up. After 15knots requires the blade (better sail anyway according to most for this boat). After 22 knots requires a single reef. Between 25 and 30 a 2nd reef is nice.

Mike


----------



## danabarlow4 (Sep 28, 2002)

*C&C 29 and C&C 33*

It is about what your really looking for,even in some cases,what you can do your self to a boat as well,your own needs are going to shape the best boat for you.
Mikehoyt said he thinks the C&C Mega interior was not to his liking,but I loved it better then any other trailer sailor,all C&C were great designs for what they were made to do,some owner have tryed to do things with them that was not what that design was for . Over the many happy fun years of owning a Mega,my needs have changed some ,but the Mega has kepted up nicely,and the best part of that has been how very EZ I have been abel to mod. the interior to fill them. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mega30sailors/
The C&C 30-1 is a great boat if you have a dock,or slip.


----------

