# Tartan 34c vs Tartan 37



## abmessick11 (Apr 27, 2021)

Hi all, I'm extremely new to this and trying to feel my way out into the world of living aboard a sailboat and eventually singlehanded cruising. 

I've been really drawn to the Tartans because of their lines, and I really like the stern shape. Trivial stuff in the long run, I know, and there are much more important things to consider when looking for a liveaboard sailboat and an ocean cruiser. 

But I'm drawn to them anyway. I've found a 1971 Tartan 34c that I really like, looks really clean and well cared for, priced at $17000. But I've also found a 1969 Tartan Hood 37 that I'm really drawn to just because of its size and because of its full keel, but it's a bit more expensive at $25000. I have absolutely no grounding on if these boats are fairly priced, or if I should absolutely look elsewhere, or if they're a good deal. 

I'm hoping I'll be able to move on board and save money eventually. I know that's usually not the case, but anything feels cheaper than living in the DC metro area. Also, I shouldn't say I'm extremely new; I have some limited sailing experience, and a great deal of what I would call an academic understanding of sailing and living onboard. But I have no practical experience, and thats where I defer to you fine people, in the hopes that you'll be able to give me some guidance. Also so I can maybe stop getting emails from Popyachts every time I open their website to look at the 34c.


----------



## Ninefingers (Oct 15, 2009)

Well, both are very pretty boats to look at for sure. I own a 1973 Tartan 34C. I bought it in November and am currently refitting it, so I can't tell you much about it's sailing ability, although I know from others it will not be a flat ride. It's a straightforward boat. Built very solidly. Not a ton of room for a 34 footer, but the huge cockpit attracted me, and the pretty lines most of all. I have owned many modern sailboats, and always wanted to try a classic, so here we are. Mine has a newish diesel Yanmar. Without it, I would not have purchased it. Nothing will kill your bank account faster than a wonky engine, and the Tartan 34c's all came with an Atomic 4 gas engine - which can be fine, but more often, not. A new engine is a $10,000 hit on a good day. 

It looks like you favor pretty boats. No doubt, people will tell you to ignore looks and just buy a Catalina 30 and be done with all this lust. Not that a Catalina 30 is ugly by any means. In fact, you SHOULD look at one. It will give you a great reference point from which to judge all other boats, because a C30 does so much so well. 

You really need to do yourself a favor and look at as many boats in person before you settle on the Tartan 34c, (or the Hood 37).


----------



## abmessick11 (Apr 27, 2021)

Ninefingers said:


> Well, both are very pretty boats to look at for sure. I own a 1973 Tartan 34C. I bought it in November and am currently refitting it, so I can't tell you much about it's sailing ability, although I know from others it will not be a flat ride. It's a straightforward boat. Built very solidly. Not a ton of room for a 34 footer, but the huge cockpit attracted me, and the pretty lines most of all. I have owned many modern sailboats, and always wanted to try a classic, so here we are. Mine has a newish diesel Yanmar. Without it, I would not have purchased it. Nothing will kill your bank account faster than a wonky engine, and the Tartan 34c's all came with an Atomic 4 gas engine - which can be fine, but more often, not. A new engine is a $10,000 hit on a good day.
> 
> It looks like you favor pretty boats. No doubt, people will tell you to ignore looks and just buy a Catalina 30 and be done with all this lust. Not that a Catalina 30 is ugly by any means. In fact, you SHOULD look at one. It will give you a great reference point from which to judge all other boats, because a C30 does so much so well.
> 
> You really need to do yourself a favor and look at as many boats in person before you settle on the Tartan 34c, (or the Hood 37).


I've been looking at a LOT of boats. Bayfields mostly as well (big surprise there) but I can never seem to find anything newer/better/worth my time in my price range. I also have some stuff I really don't want to compromise on, like having a full keel (or mostly full keel in the case of the 34c) and not having a spade rudder; I'd much rather have a keel or skeg mounted one, for the sake of durability.

I'll definitely keep looking! Thanks for the advice.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Starting with the basics, both of those boats are CCA racing rule beaters. The CCA race rule forced a lot of compromises to the hull form and rig. Those rule beating measures, adversely impact seaworthiness, motion comfort, ease of handling, carrying capacity, accommodations for their length and performance. So while a lot of people are attracted to their looks, they tend to be a pretty crummy choice as a cruising boat or live aboard.

I will further note that neither of these boats, and frankly almost none of the CCA era boats have full keels. Instead they had keels that were sharply cut away at the forward end, and which had raked rudder posts at the aft end, which when combined with the extremely short waterline resulted in a similar keel area area to a fin keel of that era. Most had the rudder attached to the keels, placing the rudder at greater risk of damage in a grounding (due to the same depth as the keel), and much harder to steer and maneuver. 

The combination of what was effectively a fin keel, with an attached rudder, made for a boat that does not track well, and is hard to balance. From a yacht design standpoint, these mid-length keels with attached rudders were the worst of all worlds, having almost none of the virtues of a either a full keel or fin keel, but with pretty much all of the liabilities of both.

As liveaboard boats these CCA designs have all of the slip rental costs and maintenance costs of a 34-37 footer, with the interior space, storage and sailing ability of a more modern 28 footer.

I will note that in any period and from any particular builder there were better and worse designs. In the CCA era the Tartan 34 was one of the better designs in that era. Other superior designs from that era and in your price range, might include the Bristol 33 & 34, Galaxy 32, Medalist 32-II, Cal 36 and Tartan 30(almost the same interior as the Tartan 34 but a better sailing boat, that would be cheaper to own).

Unless you are solely looking for a boat to live on, and sailing ability and operating costs are irrelevant, I suggest that you look at boats from later periods with shorter overhangs, and a bit more beam.

FWIW, the smaller Bayfields are pretty crummy boats on almost all counts (other than as a dedicated liveaboard that never leaves its slip.)

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## abmessick11 (Apr 27, 2021)

Jeff_H said:


> Starting with the basics, both of those boats are CCA racing rule beaters. The CCA race rule forced a lot of compromises to the hull form and rig. Those rule beating measures, adversely impact seaworthiness, motion comfort, ease of handling, carrying capacity, accommodations for their length and performance. So while a lot of people are attracted to their looks, they tend to be a pretty crummy choice as a cruising boat or live aboard.
> 
> I will further note that neither of these boats, and frankly almost none of the CCA era boats have full keels. Instead they had keels that were sharply cut away at the forward end, and which had raked rudder posts at the aft end, which when combined with the extremely short waterline resulted in a similar keel area area to a fin keel of that era. Most had the rudder attached to the keels, placing the rudder at greater risk of damage in a grounding (due to the same depth as the keel), and much harder to steer and maneuver.
> 
> ...


That is a lot of helpful information and greatly appreciated! I will definitely look into the boats you listed. I'm not looking for a racer by any means, but I do intend to leave the slip, and eventually I want to live off the hook entirely as finances allow.


----------



## Quester (Sep 16, 2012)

As a rule of thumb adding 4 feet to the length of a boat in this size range doubles the volume. The 37 would be a lot more boat. I lived on a Cal 40 (actually 39 feet long) for a year or so and it was comfortable. (Size-wise, anyway. The lack of heat, refrigeration, pressure water and other issues were less comfortable, but I was younger then.) I've known many people living in 34 feet or less. They tend to be organized, frugal and not collect stuff.

Good liveaboard boats aren't necessarily fun to sail. It's also a real pain to have to clean up the loose stuff from a few months of living before you can leave the dock in a good breeze. Balance your desire to live on the boat against enjoying sailing it.

Although the cost of owning a boat can be astonishing, so is the amount of stuff you don't buy when you live on one. Make sure you know where you will keep it, the price and the policy on live-aboards. Good luck. Sounds like fun.


----------



## VIEXILE (Jan 10, 2001)

Take all advice with a grain of salt, except this: don't "click" on Popyachts. It seems like a majority of the time they really don't have a "listing" on that boat. They want you to make an offer and send them a deposit. Now they have "PopRV's" as well. Eh. 

I went to look at a boat with a friend last Saturday. He's smitten by a 30' 1966 Pearson Wanderer. I bit my tongue the whole time I was there. I DID try to point him toward a Pearson 10M, but didn't want to further confuse or discourage him. The wanderer was fine for what it is. Fancied out by a woodworking prior owner. Gorgeous work inside and out. But I made him tell me he'd be moving up within a year or two. With a newer Yanmar in it and spotless in and out, I gave up and said "it's up to you." I explained weather helm and how the boat would likely respond with that big wooden rudder. We'll see what he does, but the goal is to get on the water, get some practical experience and learn. And move on. There are people sailing the Caribbean and the world on boats that people repeatedly disparage. And boats I wouldn't sail from St. Thomas to St. Croix. I've seen too many tigers fishing the South Drop. 

I've got a Tartan 37. I'm fine with it, no matter who doesn't care for the CCA era boats. My prior boats were Bristol 35 Yawl (great times on that bird), but when she turned downwind it was like dragging a paddle in a canoe. They make up their waterline on heel. Good learner over 30 years ago. Sold it for WAY more than I thought it was worth, but I do good work. Then a Pearson 10M (for $2500 and a refit) and I figured out I want to go fast and set the sails and balance the boat. Incredible trim on that thing. Tiller steered. Now it's the Tartan 37 for cruising, putting WAY too much into it. Point is, though, all these boats were cash purchased with low prices and I refitted them. Learning every system along the way, including the individual diesels and their peccadilloes. And we raced on frac rig Jeanneaus, J's, Beneteaus and others. Your boat is YOUR boat. Make the right choice for you. 

Grain of salt. And for your first boat I'd recommend NOT going with something that needs complete refit in any event. Get a solid boat, get on the water. Mistakes are educational. They all have their followings, including the Bayfields and even the lowly Macgregor.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

VIEXILE said:


> I've got a Tartan 37. I'm fine with it, no matter who doesn't care for the CCA era boats.


VIEXILE,

Don't you have the 1970's era S&S designed Tartan 37 rather than the 1960's era Hood design (that is the subject of this thread)?

Jeff


----------



## VIEXILE (Jan 10, 2001)

Well, yes I do. 1976 to 1986. Commentary on what I currently have only. Here's the Blackwatch, big underbody. https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/black-watch-37. And here's the T34C: https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/tartan-34-c; then of course there is the T37 S&S: https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/tartan-37-ss
There are similarities between the 34 and the S&S 37 in draft, underbody and shape, but the venerable old Blackwatch with her long overhangs was like the Bristol 35 downwind - dragging a paddle in a canoe. But it's all about just being on the water.

My point was we had a CCA era boat for 15 years. Brought it from Maine to the BVI, where some guy went by us one day off Sea Cow Bay and said "I'm going to own that boat." Loved it, but had the 10M at the same time and cruising wasn't in the cards. Just racing. And he offered me too much. One of the winningest boats down there over the years was something. . .something " . . . flower." An Alberg 35: https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/alberg-35 Ridiculously high PHRF. And the family from St. Croix loved it. But he traded up for a J-36. There's an obvious progression there and, as I believe I said, I bite my tongue and recommend just getting on the water . . . safely. Things happen slower on some of these old boats as well, which can be a good thing. Nothing wrong with the old boats for living aboard, cruising around and getting used to everything. Provided systems and gear are good.


----------



## emcentar (Apr 28, 2009)

AB,

If you want to make the move from land to boat in the DC metro area, you're looking at finding a liveaboard marina (or one that tolerates them) between Baltimore and Herring Bay (unless you had the foresight to get yourself added to the Gangplank Marina waitlist five or six years ago). So your sailing waters are likely the Chesapeake for a while, until you expand your plans.

If I was doing this - and I know many people who have done this - my priorities would be (a) easy to sail and dock singlehandedly on the bay, (b) has AC and heat or can be outfitted with it easily, and (c) lots of living space below relative to waterline to keep marina bills from stacking up fast. Preferences for keel design would be way, way down on my list, as would be aesthetics (a smart person once told me 'you don't care what your boat looks like when you're sailing her, there's typically no one to see and you're having too good a time anyway'). I'd start with a list of practical criteria for the actual living and sailing you are doing the next few years and worry about those 'long range' plans later. If you buy a good used boat and maintain her you can always sell her for what you paid when you upgrade to bigger plans.

Good luck with your search!


----------



## T37Chef (Oct 9, 2006)

I lived aboard my T37 for 4 years and sailed it a lot. It works but honestly there are probably better choices. I still sail a lot, just not a liveaboard for now


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

T37Chef said:


> I lived aboard my T37 for 4 years and sailed it a lot. It works but honestly there are probably better choices. I still sail a lot, just not a liveaboard for now


Shawn,

This is not the S&S designed Tartan 37 that you own but a much earlier Hood designed CCA era design based on the Black Watch 37. It would be a really poor choice for a new sailor, a really poor choice as a live aboard, and a really poor choice for distance cruising compared to your boat.

Jeff


----------



## T37Chef (Oct 9, 2006)

Whoops lol


----------



## VIEXILE (Jan 10, 2001)

Some people love the Blackwatch. Tartan put the boats together quite well, nice joinery compared to the older Bristols and Pearsons. At 17,000# it is almost 2 long tons heavier in displacement than the T37CB. It looks suspiciously like a Bristol 40, also a Hood design which I've seen almost everywhere the last one sitting pretty in Coral Bay St. John. That guy had been everywhere with his. Love 'em or hate 'em they will do the job. Not everyone can throw $80K and up for a boat that has the room they desire. It's kinda like the Bermuda 40 - big following, fans, etc. but everyone isn't racing or needs to make time on cruise. Sacrifices are often made at the right price point. That's all.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

In terms of hull cross sections, the Black Watch/Black Watch and Bristol 40 are similar, but they sail very differently and have very different 'numbers'. The Black Watch has a much smaller ballast to weight, much shorter waterline to length ratio, much higher Displacement to Length ratio, A much smaller sail area to displacement ratio as compared to the Bristol 40 or the S&S Designed Tartan 37. Collectively that makes the Black Watch less seaworthy, with a poorer motion comfort, and a harder boat to sail and a harder boat to learn to sail as a beginner. Beyond that sailing ability, the Tartan 37's / Black Watch are 50-60 year old boats and Douglass-McLeod did not do all that great a job on build quality. 

But to clear, my posts are not advocating buying a more expensive boat. The intent is to encourage the original poster to buy a boat that better suits his needs within his budget and to discourage buying an obsolete design that will need a lot of work, not suit his needs and will be very hard to sell. 

Jeff


----------



## VIEXILE (Jan 10, 2001)

Makes sense. But I can't talk my friend out of buying a Pearson Wanderer and instead grab the 10M I found, the latter from which he'd learn a lot more a lot faster. And actually be able to stand behind the helm. But the Wanderer makes his heart go pitty-pat due to all the brightwork added by the previous owner. Still working on him, though, until he puts down a deposit.


----------



## J-LOker (Aug 25, 2020)

VIEXILE said:


> Makes sense. But I can't talk my friend out of buying a Pearson Wanderer and instead grab the 10M I found, the latter from which he'd learn a lot more a lot faster. And actually be able to stand behind the helm. But the Wanderer makes his heart go pitty-pat due to all the brightwork added by the previous owner. Still working on him, though, until he puts down a deposit.


I've got 10M Hull #65....and I've been looking at every single one that pops onto the market; it's an obsession I guess, just like learning about all different types of sloops and cutters. Take care, though, for there are a few really nice looking 10M's out there that look like they have the original chain plate design with knees. I'm sure you're familiar with what the retrofit should look like, and I'll post a couple of photos if anyone wants to see how much of a robust design it is with the change. But, then again, those few 10M's with original chainplate configuration have been out sailing for almost 50 years with no issues, guess so long as they're not pushed too hard racing. I have the aluminum mast step that's one of the options presented on Dan Pfeiffer's 10M page; it's over 8 years old, and perhaps should be replaced in a few years, but so far it looks almost new still....btw, a 10M is an absolute perfect boat for single handing, and amazing at how fast she is given her medium-heavy displacement


----------



## VIEXILE (Jan 10, 2001)

I had a 1973 10M we raised from the ashes. Maybe hull #11? New bulkheads, the whole bit. Reinforced the glass around the chainplates and sailed it HARD in the Caribbean. Looked at adding aluminum boxes for the plates, but said the hell with it. Beat the hell out of it. I could balance that boat like nothing else, singlehand racing in 30kn. Lock the Switlik tiller extension (no wheel - PERFECT), run forward and deal with hank on headsails. Last time I was racing out of Coral Bay and the first hank on the old 150 I had up blew out. Balance, lock tiller, run forward, ease the halyard, tie it down from the 2nd hank, tighten the halyard on the run back to the cockpit, rinse and repeat for 6 or 7 hanks. It was a sacrificial sail anyway. Singlehanding in a steady 30. No reefs in main. Passed other boats while I was bouncing like a monkey on a string going back and forth to the foredeck. Won the race. Next day, after that blow, there were big swells out of the SE for the ride back to St. Thomas. We clicked 10kn on the gps surfing down the backside. Quick trip home. Just have to remember to turn slightly off those troughs.

Yeah. My buddy should take a run at the 10M here in Maine on Craigslist. NOT the Wanderer. The thing with the 10M's is water intrusion in the deck at the stanchions. They're not well-attached or backed and years of yanking causes problems.


----------



## VIEXILE (Jan 10, 2001)

By the way - there's a T34C I'm going to go look at for someone here in Maine. Been on the hard for years, way too many things purchased for refit, low hours Yanmar, "make an offer."


----------



## Rob_802 (Oct 12, 2021)

Can't say enough good things about my 34C - sturdy, simple, good lines, even one that was in complete disrepair was able to be brought back to fine condition with a little love and money!


----------

