# JEFF H input wanted



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

Jeff,

You made a comment about C&C 30s in a previous thread. You probably are aware that this is a VERY popular boat in Eastern Canada and in Halifax. As I know lots of these boats I am very interested to hear your reasons for calling the 30 among the worst C&C designs ...

As stated on C&C thread there was Redwing built by Hinterhoeller (and maybe C&C as well) and designed by C&C, the Mark I with two slightly different versions (approx 1972 - 1981), the Mark II circa 1988, the Mega and probably some others?

Were you referring to the Mark I or was it some other early C&C 30 I am unfamiliar with?

What is so bad about these boats? I have always thought the Mark I (and esp. the 35 Mk I) to be among the best boats ever built by C&C ...

Looking forward to your reply,

Mike


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Hi Mike,

I am speaking of the C&C 30 mark 1. I am familiar with the earlier C&C designed Corvette and Redwing. The Corvette was a neat boat in its day but the Redwing has never impressed me all that much. 

To your question, in their day the early C&C''s (late 1960''s) were quite a revolation and quite highly regarded. (I actually owned a 1965 C&C designed 22 footer that I thought was a wonderful boat). When introduced the first C&C designs were quite cheaply priced in the US market and tended to offer spectacularly good sailing ability and reasonably good construction. They offered nice, simple, functional interior layouts. C&C was quite innovative pionering the use of high density foam coring in decks and a glassed in system of stringers and athwartships framing. 

There were a whole cluster of boats tooled in the early 1970''s when C&C began building boats under their own name. The C&C 35 and the C&C 40 of the early to mid 1970''s were real barnstormers. The 35 mk1 with its fine bow (for that era), design weight in the same general range as the J-36,(an 8 years later design), and with a very high ballast to weight ratio for the day, the 35 Mk1 was really impressive on the race course. All of that said, while the C&C 35 Mk 1 was very impressive for its day, I would certainly never say that it was one of the best boats that C&C ever designed but I would say that it was one of C&C''s designs that was most advanced for the era that it was produced.

BUT amoungst the C&C afficionatos the C&C 30 mk1 was seen as a major dud. C&C had tried to reduce the same design brief in length and it did not work out as planned. Racing them in Savannah, they were thought to be very poor light air boats. They were also not very good in a breeze. perhaps because of their smaller size or to hold down costs they did not seem as well engineered as the larger C&C 35. Driven hard they tended to flex, especially in the large bow panels. Very early on, the two that I knew best which were raced pretty hard, showed flexure cracks around the cabin trunk and transom. Very early on there were also issues with rudders on both boats. 

Sailing in the short chop in the Atlantic off Savanah they tended to hobbyhorse badly, just about stopping in their tracks, when earlier designs like the original Morgan 30 was able to keep driving to weather. They were quite corky compared to other designs of this era and were often pointed to as the poster child when someone wanted to make a point about the negatives of light weight boats.

It was funny because the C&C 24 of almost the same era, was seen as a super little boat. BUT amoungst folks that really liked C&C''s the 30 mk1 was seen as a real dud. In hindsight, perhaps the 30 mk1 was not all that bad when compared to other boats of that era (Oday 27 for example), but given the strength of the C&C design team''s prior design, to those of us who were big fans of C&C''s (and I knew quite a few of them in those days)the 30 mk1 was seen as a missed opportunity and a real stain on C&C nearly flawless record up to that point in time. 

I haven''t sailed a 30 in many years and based the initial way that they held up, I would be interested in what present owner''s think of their boats. (I must say that I was not aware that this is a very popular boat in Eastern Canada and in Halifax although it does not surprise me.)

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

Jeff,

Check out cncphotoalbum.com and [email protected] Both are very interesting groups and are very well supported and received.

Thanks for your comments. I can see that if compared to the 35 at the time there may be some deficiencies (I still say the 35 was a great boat at the time).

C&C being Canadian and having a dealer in Halifax sold many boats here. My father had an 1981 36 and I had heard at the time that although a nice boat the earlier 35 was preferred by many.

My best friend has a 74 C&C 25 which I think is a very nice 25 and I used to have C&C designed Paceship P23 that was a lot of fun as well. There are a 72 and a 81 C&C at our club as well and these seem to be good boats and like most of the old boats have held up well.

Thanks for responding to my question. In these parts C&C have always been very well regarded and used to be the biggest sellers. 

Best Regards,

Mike


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

The 72 & 81 are C&C 30 Mk I
We also have 2 C&C 27 Mk III, 2 C&C 25 mk I

Regards

Mike


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

The 72 & 81 are C&C 30 Mk I
We also have 2 C&C 27 Mk III, 2 C&C 25 mk I

Regards

Mike


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Jeff H.

Were you dreaming when you wrote your message or having a Bacardi nightmare.

Your facts are incorrect in almost all aspects.

C&C Yachts did not come about until 1969. Prior to that Cuthbertson & Cassian had a design group but were not building boats. What was the 22 foot boat designed by C&C? You said the Redwing 35 never impressed you but the C&C 35 was a barnstormer. C&Cs first real success was the 35 - essentially the same boat as the Redwing 35 and was origninally designed for Hinterhoeller Yachts.

You said that "amoungst the C&C afficionatos the C&C 30 mk1 was seen as a major dud". Show me an "afficionato" who claims the C&C 30 MKI as a dud and I''ll take him out for a sail on mine. Sure they might be slow in light air but given 8 knots of wind and you''ll see my transom. How many boats of that size can fly a 150 jenny, no reefs in the main and withstand it? The C&C 30 MKI will. If it was such a dud, why did C&C continue building the boat for 10 years and produce close to 1000 boats (second only the the 27 that went through 4 models). I''ve got a 1973 model and there is abosultely no flexing, especially in the bow. The boat was built to be stiff, construction was superior and today they show it.

The 24 did not come until a few years later when C&C figured it was time for some new models to replace the 25, 27 and 30. The results were poor. So the 30 went back into production. Why would C&C restart the production of a dud?

C&C did not use high density foam coring in the decks and hulls - it was balsa. C&C proved that for most uses, and certainly racing, lightweight, stiff hulls were superior to heavy, single-skin hulls. 

When a boat starts to hobbyhorse, it is not the boat''s fault but the crew. If the boat is not rigged correctly it will do some pretty wierd things. More complications set in when the helmsman wants to go one way and the crew tweaks the sails to go another. 

What do other C&C MK I owners think - you are a dreamer.

Stu
Owner - C&C Photo Album
http://www.cncphotoalbum.com


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Nice tirade and I am glad that you like your boat but lets see if we can keep the record accurate.....I think we both agree that C&C began as a design partnership between Cuthbertson and Cassian in the early 1960''s. Fairly early in the 1960''s C&C began designing boats across a wide size range. Some were built semi-custom basis with C&C contracting the tooling and construction to existing Canadian boat builders. Sold under the name of C&C Yachts as early as 1967 or so the C&C Custom 41 was a good example of this. 

Also during the 1960''s C&C was instrumental in what I consider a very sophisticated boat building concept. C&C working in concert with a number of Canadian yards began designing boats in a number of size ranges in which several yards would share the cost of tooling. These different yards would each build their own distinct versions of these basic designs off of the same tooling. 

Probably the first of these syndicated designs was the C&C 22''s which were produced as the Grampian Classic 22 (which is the 22 foot C&C that I actually owned. I worked in the Grampian Booth at the 1965 NY Boatshow.), the Bluejacket and as the Viking 22. There was a 4th version whose name escapes me. 

C&C designed a number of 30 footers before the C&C 30 mk1. These included the Corvette (which was a nice K/CB boat), the Redwing which was a fin keel 30 footer with a terribly pinched transom, and the Northwind which was a K/Cb boat but which was very similar in hull form to the C&C 30 mk1.)

There was a whole collection of 35 footers including the Frigate and Redjacket (named for the first C&C to win the SORC) but again I am not recalling the names of the other 35''s. 

There were also a number of 41 footers including the Redline, Crusader, C&C Custom 41, and Newport 41. 

I did not say that the Redwing 35 never impressed me. I said the Redwing 30 never impressed me. The Redwing was an early C&C designed 30 footer. It obviously was a very different boat than the C&C 35 mk 1 (being 5 feet shorter) and also very different from the nearly 6 year later design for the C&C 30 mk1. 

You are mistaken when you say that C&C did not use foam coring. They pioneered it in the 1960''s. My Grampian Classic had foam cored decks and a foam cored, hand laid up system of stringers and athwartships frames. In the late 1960''s they moved away from this system to a less expensive balsa coring. 

The first C&C 24 that I sailed on was a 1973 model. It was a super boat for its day. Qute a bit faster than my S&S designed Northstar 500 that I owned in those days.

During the 1970''s C&C went in and out of finacial trouble. They recycled many of their designs with subtle changes keeping them in production far longer than probably made sense given the revolutions in yacht design that were taking place during this period.

Lastly, I am glad to show you a C&C afficionado who thinks the C&C 30 is a dud. I''m one. I was a fan of these boats since the 1960''s when I began sailing on them and worked selling them. Of course you are welcome to tie up at my dock next time you are in Annapolis and take me out for a sail to try to prove me wrong! 8^)

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

Will all the OTHER C&C afficionado''s who think the C&C30MK1 was a dud please speak now...


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Jeff, I also sail on the Chesapeake, and don''t agree that the 30-1 is a dud. Yes, it is not the best light air boat around, but overall, it performs adequately. Mine is a 1980 and has spent all of its life on the bay. I don''t understand your comment about flexing, I have been in everything up to around 40 knots of wind and 6-7'' seas and haven''t noticed any problems. A few years ago we cruise/raced back to St. Michaels from West River and saw 35 knots before the wind meter died - just my wife driving and me crewing. Beat a number of larger boats with small crews. The previous day we beat them in light air. Proper sail selection is important. The boat is quite stiff (maybe that''s the dud part) but that lends an air of security. It is pretty dry. I have no gelcoat problems in the transom area, just on the deck where a fellow competitor (idiot) tacked into me (T-bone) - messed his bow up big time but just bent a couple of stanchions. I guess I just don''t understand your comments, as I don''t think the boat is a dud at all.....


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

I have been sailing for 2 years, this being the first full season with my C&C.

I don''t know who is more thick, me or NOAA but I am just now learning to add 10 knots of wind and 2 feet of sea to their forcast.

I won''t bore you with heavy air stories that only I think are comical, but I will say that my boat has on at least 4 occasions this year stood up well to winds over 40 knots and seas of up to 9 feet. Also, my boat has been sailing WAY longer than I have so I think it is safe to assume it has seen heavy air before.

I have seen on one breezy afternoon under double reef and no head sail, my wind speed indicator reach 50 (yes fifty) knots. And yes I have 3 witnesses. The only flexing was my butt clenching as myself and 3 other sailors decided to get in an early sail before a storm was due to hit. Yes, that is a stupid thing to do but I never claimed to be the brightest bulb on the xmass tree. 

4 guys standing around the boatyard bullshiting because NOAA says don''t go out today can be a bad combination.

Did I say I wasn''t going to bore you?


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

Jeff,

Was the other 22 you were thinking of the Paceship P-23? This looks like a mini Northwind and was designed by C&C. I used to sail a 1975 model. Very similar to the Tanzer 22 in many respects. 

I am assuming the Blue Jacket you refer to is the one designed by C&C and built by Paceship. There are also a number of these in Halifax as they were built in Nova Scotia.

Are you sure the 1973 24 footer was not the 25 Mk I? I have a friend who has a 1974 Mk I with the hull laid up in 1973. He really likes his boat as do I. I know that C&C designed a 24 foot boat for Mirage and I believe it was produced prior to the C&C 25 Mk I. There was also a Redline 25 but I know little about that.

Regards,

Mike


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

I meant the Mirage 24 started production prior to C&C 25 Mk I. Not sure how long the run lasted.

Mike


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Jeff

George Cuthbertson & George Cassian formed a partnership in 1961 as Cuthbertson & Cassian.. Their prime endeavour was to design boats for other yacht builders. Tooling and construction was handled by the builders not C&C. The Grampian ?Classic 22? was designed for Grampian Marine and was taken over by Ontario Yachts who also produced the Viking 22.

Yes, very earlier models did use foam coring.

Hinterhoeller Yachts contracted C&C to design the Invader 35 and the Redwing 30 and 35. The Redwing 35 was never marketed as it soon became the C&C 35 around the same time C&C Yachts was formed in 1969. ?Redwings? were Hinterhoeller and Bruckman Marine built the ?Redlines? including Red Jacket. The Corvettes, Crusaders and Invaders were designed for and built by Belleville Marine Yards. The Frigate was a shoal draft centerboard derivative of the Invader.

The Northwind, Westwind, and Eastwind were designed and built by Paceship in Nova Scotia.

Red Jacket was a 40 foot yacht ? not a 35

The designation ?built by C&C Yachts? was not used until C&C Yachts Ltd was formed in 1969. Prior to that they were ?built by Hinterhoeller, Bruckman, Belleville Marine, or whoever?.

The Mega 30 foot came out in 1977 and the brainchild of C&C & Peter Barret of North Sails.

You said, ?During the 1970''s C&C went in and out of finacial trouble. They recycled many of their designs with subtle changes keeping them in production far longer than probably made sense given the revolutions in yacht design that were taking place during this period.? 

C&C did not get into any financial problems until 1986 when it went into receivership. Jim Plaxton purchased the company in a hostile takeover in 1982. North South Yacht Sales purchased the company in 1986. The orientals bought C&C in 1992 and finally in 1998 Fairport Marine Co. bought the remaining molds (after a devestating fir in 1994) and the company name.

C&C continued using their original designs for many years. C&C found itself competing with its own used boats; why buy a new boat when you could buy a four-year-old bigger, better equipped boat that costs less. Canadian boats were popular in the US because of the strong Canadian dollar. Canadian boats sold in the US paid only 3% tariff. It was the US government that wanted to up the tariff and C&C decided to counter attack by opening a plant in Rhode Island in 1976.

The above information has been gathered by Dan Spurr and is published in the September/October issue of Good Old Boat and in a conversation held between myself and George Cuthbertson on Sept. 22/02.

Now for some other comments from C&C 30 Owners:
They felt this boat was similar to a modern half-toner and that it was extremely fast off the wind and did well in heavy air (20-30K).

Going to weather in light air, it was not successful and "pinching was not the answer." In contrast to the above, the standard keel model C&C 30 is considered to point well in heavy or light air. Several Great Lakes racers said that this was where they almost always made up time. Sailing off the wind in light air was not considered to be the boat''s strong point but in heavy air on a broad reach the performance was excellent and exciting.

Oscillating under a spinnaker was not considered any problem by most owners and this includes some generally inexperienced families. One family successfully handled their new spinnaker and spinnaker gear in 25 knots of wind with a 4-6 foot sea.

The C&C 30 is considered by many who have sailed her extensively, to be a very stiff boat even in heavy air. It takes a lot of wind and owners report that when really hard on the wind it usually requires 20 knots of wind before reefing is necessary. Even then, reefing is done primarily to take out helm.

The consensus: The boat is extremely seaworthy, maneuverable, and comfortable when anchored.

Stu


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

I think Jeffh is just trying to drive down the prices of C&C30 MK1''s so that he can buy one for himself.


----------



## Ice King (Sep 28, 2002)

so Jeff, think you may have rubbed Stu the wrong way?


----------



## Savannah (Sep 27, 2002)

Mike - I own a C&C 30, Mark 1 (1981) and was a previous owner of a 1981 C&C 25, Mark 11. I much prefer the 30. This is an extremely popular boat here on Lake Ontario and they are highly regarded both for performance and cruising. They are definitely quality built and this is reflected in their resale prices. In very light air the C&C 27 is little faster but as soon as the breeze picks up the 30 moves ahead. I have to say that I am a bit puzzled by your commentary as it would not seem to be shared in this area. Obviously you seem to know a good deal about the C&C line-up of boats. I wonder what your thoughts are about the C&C 27s? Our 30 will move quickly past the pact of Kelts,Northerns and Catalinas in this area. Any further thoughts?


----------



## mikehoyt (Nov 27, 2000)

Leo,

Hey my turn to backpedal a bit! I am no expert on boat design, racing or crusing. Just a guy that spends too much time wishing I were sailing.

I often say to a friend that there are no bad boats ... just boats designed for a different purpose than what you intend. A trailerable sailboat is great if you need to trailer one to a lake, but compromised for sailing on the ocean for example.

In Halifax there are many many C&C sailboats. We had a very active dealer here in 70''s & 80s. My family had a 36 from 1981 - 1990, our neighbour had a 27 mk IV or V in the mid 80''s (never sailed on that 27). This was back in the good old days when Dad paid for sailing and I just went along for the ride! Also raced on an aft cabin 40 for one or two seasons as a foredeck guy (ie. just a set of arms & hands).

I had always thought that when my boat grew enough to be a C&C than I would finally know I had a real boat rather than just a dingy. I love the looks of the C&Cs and usually compare all boats against them.

I like the C&C 30 Mk I. I think it sails well but do not imagine it to be much better or worse than a host of other 30 footers made in the same era. My father had a 36 in 81 and I remember hearing at the time how many people preferred the 35 that preceded it for its sailing ability. This has been confirmed by articles on cncphothoalbum.com and other sources.

When I sail on a boat I look at the inside as much as the outside. I have found that the 30Mk I, the 27 and to some degree the 25 of the same era all look similar with just more or less room. From the outside they also look very similar. I think that was done on purpose so that a C&C could be easily recognized. Of all those boats I personally like the 27 Mk III the best. It has a decent interior and it sails very well in light airs. I race against a 25 mk I, a 27 Mk III and a 30 mk I. For coastal sailing where shore is always near I think the 27 mk III is a great boat. If I were spending more time offshore I would tend toward the 30. In our races the 30 sails well below its handicap in any wind less than 15knots. I have a Niagara 26 which is supposed to be slower than the 30 by rating but crosses the line ahead of the 30 unless there is some wind. When it is 20knots the 30 starts to sail well and finishes far ahead of me.

My thoughts on the 27 III, 30 I and my Niagara 26?

I think that the Niagara sails well in light air and could be much better in more wind. This is the weakness with that boat ... cannot sail competitively in any wind over 20 knots.

The C&C 30 Mk I sails well in winds over 15 knots but should sail a lot better in lighter winds. I imagine this was done on purpose but I think that a really good design should sail well in both ... especially when the boat is 30 feet in length!

The 27Mk III sails well in light air and sails better in 20 knots than my niagara. If I had more money when I bought my boat I could have bought a Mk III and would have loved it! Of course people who love the 30 call the 27 "tender". I hate that word! The 27 is a fabulous boat because it sails well and has a usable interior!

So back to what the boats are designed for...
To have a boat sail well in lighter and heavier air would probably require a lot of sail change and a lot of attention to sail trim, etc... Since these are CRUISING BOATS I believe that maybe ... just maybe the 30 was designed so for people that do not wish to be changing sails all the time. Thus the main is too small so that reefing is not a continuous activity and 2 people can relax and enjoy sailing!

Heck they are all great boats! I would even love a MacGregor with a 50hp engine if I had to motor 20 miles every day to go sailing!

Regards

Mike


----------



## Csobanc (Feb 27, 2009)

*c&c 30 design mk1 a, b, c, etc.*

Does anyone know when did C&C change the keel mast support (in the hull) from wood to aluminium? I think this was done in the late 70's before the mkii modell... but not sure. Any issues with the wood support vs the aluminium?

Also, was there hot water heater, pressure water, and/or shower in the mki series? Looking through the old c&c brossures it seems these were not included... has anyone done a successful conversion?

Thanks for any input...


----------



## SecondWindNC (Dec 29, 2008)

Probably want to start a new thread for that, with a subject line that indicates your question.


----------



## Csobanc (Feb 27, 2009)

thanks for the advice... started new thread... regards.


----------



## COOL (Dec 1, 2009)

Stu said:


> The Mega 30 foot came out in 1977
> the brainchild of Peter Barret of North Sails.


There is a boat that had a few 'ahead of its time'
innovations, but was so unconventional in appearance
that it never gained any traction.
The Hobie 33 was much better at doing what
the Mega 30 set out to do.


----------



## Allan C&C Less (Feb 27, 2006)

*Hey Mike your right about the C&C 36!*

Yes, Mike the C&C 36 was not nearly the boat the 35 was. 
I should know I owned both and regretted the day I bought the 36'. It was a poor design,tender and not as fast as the 35. A slug in light air, which was unusual since most C&C's excelled in light winds. The only worse design was the C&C 30 Mega. Now that was a horrible design. I know someone here posted some good comments about this boat. Trust me I owned/sailed many C&C's for 30 years. The Mega was C&C's version of the Ford Pinto! The 30 Mk1 or 2 was a great boat for that era. But the Mega is best suited to be a future anchor.

Fair winds, Allan


----------



## DBerry (Jun 8, 2015)

Jeff H.,

I am about 1.5 years away from a [used] live aboard purchase, looking for something in the 30-35 ft range, will be single handing, and looking for an average purchase price somewhere in the neighborhood of $40k.

I am familiar with some of the YouTube videos you are featured in, e.g. Vin & Amy, respect your opinion, and would like to get your ideas about acceptable cruiser-racers, and understand that I will need to put money into upgrades after the initial purchase.

Why a cruiser-racer for me? I think speed, maneuverability, and windward performance increases the safety factor, makes for easier handling, and is just plain fun.

I also want something that is sea-kindly, livable down below, including decent storage, with a clean modern layout, i.e., in a *comfortable* minimalist sense, e.g., 1988 C&C 35, but *not* something as spartan as a C&C 99 either, and would greatly appreciate your feedback.

Last, decent engine access for routine maintenance is a plus, as I am 6' 2", and not a contortionist.

* FYI: Prior to watching your videos, I had always believed that a heavy displacement boat with a full keel was the safest way to go, and I was planning to buy a Westsail 32. However, the 1979 Fastnet Contessa 32 story often made me wonder about the "necessity" for a classic, heavy blue water sailboat for passage making. *


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

It will be difficult to find a decent performance boat in that length that also offers adequate headroom, and berth lengths for someone who is 6'-2". That said there are a bunch of good boats in that general price range and length. At 5'-9" I must admit headroom is something that I don't pay much attention to. 

There are a lot of good boats in that length range and budget out there that also make good single handers and decent live aboard boats. Some are better performers and some are better cruising boats. 

In the designs that offers higher levels of performance with nicer levels of cruising amenities two designs stand out in my mind; the J-34c (J-35c) and the Farr 1020. Both of these designs were developed as cruising designs specifically by designers known for their racing designs. Both were designed without any regard for the popular racing rule of the day. Of the two I personally prefer the Farr 1020 but suspect that the J-34c may have a little more comfortable interior. 

Probably my favorite in the more cruising oriented designs is the Bristol 33/34 from the late 1960's early 1970's. These were great boats all around in terms of sailing ability, seaworthiness and build quality. the 34 was a slightly better boat dues to its improved rudder design. Off the top of my head other boats in the performance oriented side of things that I like in ouder of preference might include boats like the following:
Dehler 34 (late 19 80s -90's era)
X-342 & X-325
Nightwing 35
Thomas 35
Alsberg Brothers Express 34
Goman Express 35
Farr 1105
Tartan 33
Omega 33
Beneteau 345
Dufour 4800(35)

And I am sure that I have forgotten quite a few. 

In the more cruising oriented side and in no particular order,
Tartan 34
Pearson 323
Morgan 34 (1960's)
Ericson 36c
Jenneau Sunshine 36
Cal 36
Niagara 

And I am sure dozens of others which did not come to mind. 

As broad parameters I would look for boats with L/Ds below 200, SA/Ds over 18 with over 20 as more ideal. I generally prefer boats that are not contorted to some racing rule and with a LWL/LOA over 80℅. 

I would be glad to kick around ideas with you as you go through your search. If you PM me, I'll send you my email address which is actually more convenient for me. 

Jeff


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

RobGallagher said:


> I won''t bore you with heavy air stories that only I think are comical, but I will say that my boat has on at least 4 occasions this year stood up well to winds over 40 knots and seas of up to 9 feet.


True wind or apparent?

Everyone over-estimates wave height, and few understand what the standard "significant wave height" means.


----------



## DBerry (Jun 8, 2015)

Thanks for that tremendous feedback Jeff, really appreciate the time you put into it, and I will be sending you a PM.


----------



## DBerry (Jun 8, 2015)

Jeff, I've tried to send a PM twice, but it does not show that it went thru. Will post two more responses somewhere to hit 20 posts so that I can send you an email.


----------



## DBerry (Jun 8, 2015)

*Re: Hey Mike your right about the C&C 36!*



Allan C&C Less said:


> Yes, Mike the C&C 36 was not nearly the boat the 35 was.
> I should know I owned both and regretted the day I bought the 36'. It was a poor design,tender and not as fast as the 35. A slug in light air, which was unusual since most C&C's excelled in light winds. The only worse design was the C&C 30 Mega. Now that was a horrible design. I know someone here posted some good comments about this boat. Trust me I owned/sailed many C&C's for 30 years. The Mega was C&C's version of the Ford Pinto! The 30 Mk1 or 2 was a great boat for that era. But the Mega is best suited to be a future anchor.
> 
> Fair winds, Allan


Really appreciate this discussion. Thanks Alan.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

SVAuspicious said:


> True wind or apparent?
> 
> Everyone over-estimates wave height, and few understand what the standard "significant wave height" means.


You quoted me from a post that is 14 years old. I avoid whiskey that young  Seriously.

Seriously again, I'm sure the seas where more like 6 feet and the wind was apparent. I had just bought a boat and thought I was going to sail around the world in it. I'd go out in anything, now it's too much work and I don't like to break things.

Jeff is still very wrong about that 30MKI being a dud. Odd because he makes sense most of the time. They are heavy, overbuilt even, and the main is too small. They have as many shortcomings as any other boat, but a great boat. Walk the boatyards and see what other 1972 boats are being races and one will find that they still have an well deserved, avid following.

Happy Holidays!


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

RobGallagher said:


> You quoted me from a post that is 14 years old. I avoid whiskey that young  Seriously.


Well, phooey. The thread showed in 'new posts' due to a *ahem* new post. So I scrolled back without noticing it was a zombie thread. *grin* Oops.

I will use the opportunity to display some Christmas pedanticism. <- I crack myself up.

Wave height is conventionally measured as significant wave height, which is the average of the 1/3 highest waves. That is NOT the one big wave.

P.S. They all look big from the trough.

I can't speak to the C&C 30 Mk I. I've never sailed one. Send me the lines, the sail plan, and the location of the CG and I"ll tell you what I would forecast for performance. Extra credit for longitudinal and transverse moments of inertia.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

SVAuspicious said:


> Well, phooey. The thread showed in 'new posts' due to a *ahem* new post. So I scrolled back without noticing it was a zombie thread. *grin* Oops.
> 
> I will use the opportunity to display some Christmas pedanticism. <- I crack myself up.
> 
> ...


All in good fun! Those where the days I would change my clothes while speeding to the boatyard so I had as much summer evening sail time as possible. Folks on their summer vacation would watch me run around like a fool getting the boat ready and sail off the mooring. Two hours later returning just at dark as the sea breeze died, sailing against the current a .5 knots refusing to start the engine. I would sail every moment I could. I rather miss the feeling it gave me. I'd spend all winter dreaming of being under sail. I still love it, but it's like a long term relationship now, just not as sexy  :boat :

...sometimes I go on yachtworld and look at trawlers. I look, but I don't touch. :angel


----------

