# Catalina 42 for Blue Water?



## bdkorth

My wife and I are looking at a 1995 Catalina 42'', thinking of buying it, putting it in charter for about 2 years while we finish padding our cruising kitty here in Idaho, and then head out. We look to be the type of cruisers whose schedules are strictly decided by weather, not time. We look to circumnavigate and have been told by some that the Catalina 42 would do just fine, not ideal, but fine. Others have said that the Catalina would not do the job at all. They talk about the boat flexing in heavier weather and not being as stiff as some. We have heard that most cruisers spend about 10% of the time sailing and about 90% of time at anchor or in a slip.

Looking for opinions. We like what the Catalina has to offer for living space, and have been impressed with other Catalinas that we have owned and been on before.

Thanks for any input.

Brad


----------



## Jeff_H

Sailing around the world places the kinds of wear and tear on a boat that is the equivilent of decades of normal coastal cruising. The conditions can be very harsh, repair facilities are often widely spaced, and the boats are always heavily loaded placing higher stresses on the boat. A circumnavigation can pretty much wear out a purpose built boat. 

Putting a boat into charter can be very tough as well. The boats are used hard by people who are not familiar with that model. Charter boats are out on the water several times the number of hours that a normal cruiser might experience in a year. The Carribean is very hard on a boat and its gear. Charter company maintenance is notoriously underwhelming.Most of the boats that I have been involved with that have been in charter come out really trashed and to one degree or another in need of major restoration. 

Of the big three, solely in my opinion, Catalina has generally struck me as the poorest engineered of the three (although Hunter''s current rolled out hull to deck joint does nothing to warm my heart.) One of the big issues with most of the higher production boats is getting access to the hull and underdeck for repairs and to maintain systems. In a boat that you intend to sail around the world, instant access becomes even more critical.

So you are talking about taking an already abused and used hard production cruiser and going around the world. If you were very lucky you might make it but I would never suggest that it is a reasonable way to go. There are a lot of really good distance cruisers out there that are a lot less expensive than the well over $200K that it would take to buy and prepare a Cat 42 for distance voyaging. 

Respectfully
Jeff


----------



## TSOJOURNER

There was a review of that boat in a recent Practical Sailor. Good boat, but maybe a little light for world cruising. 

It''s true that you spend far more time at anchor while cruising, but that dosen''t mean a giant, easy to fill cockpit or a rudder made for speed will make you confident when the going is snotty - and it will occaisonally be snotty. 

Think strong and simple.


----------



## jack_patricia

Brad, I''d like to echo Jeff''s observations except that I''m a little (that''s "a little") less worried about the charter side of your plan and a lot more concerned about the blue water/extended offshore sailing side. A circumnavigation puts wear on a boat that isn''t just ''decades of coastal cruising'' but is uniquely and extraordinarily harsh in its own right. As just one example (and there are others), which route are you planning for your circle: Red Sea or Cape of Good Hope? Either choice will present something well beyond coastal cruising, for an extended period, and that''s after a 3,000 mile rumble in tough tho'' fair winds across the Indian Ocean.

OTOH I''ve been especially impressed - perhaps ''amazed'' is a better word - with the Copeland''s experience sailing their (early 90''s, I believe) Beneteau. They''ve circled, done a subsequent circle around N/Central America W to E, and then put the boat thru a real bashing by sailing her too early in the season across the N Atlantic to the Med. Yet the boat has handled all this well, not that Liza nor her sailing/racing husband are slouches at knowing when to push the boat and when to protect her. This doesn''t mean I think buying a Beneteau is a grand idea, but to me this is evidence that shopping by brand name alone can be misleading, whether one is ''pro'' or ''con'' WRT a given brand.

Another wrinkle is the spotty quality of these production boats. I personally know of one Catalina (a 40, as I recall) where the rudder could not be turned under certain points of sail. The cause was that the hull flexed so extremely (we''re talking in Charleston Harbor''s open bay) that it fouled the quadrant. The boat was toast, and was quietly recalled by the factory (to be ''fixed'' and then resold, of course). How you reconcile your desire for long-term structural health with the history of these boats - no survey is perfect, nor does it offer a guarantee - I don''t know. (Just to be fair, I''ll add that a Hinckley 60 we came to be quite familiar with in the Caribbean had a massive hull failure when only a few years old, again due to shoddy build practices on a cored hull).

One suggestion: review the recommended characteristics discussed in John Neal''s website, along with the many boat brands on which he comments. John is about to complete 400,000 ocean sailing miles; his experience is unique and he''s a fair, thoughtful fellow. And then shop by basic build & design characteristics rather than first by brand; this is harder but gets you closer to your goal. You''ll find his site at www.mahina.com.

Jack


----------



## bambam

Benetau is a fine boat with good and bad points as is any other boat. there are many Catalina 42's that have circumnavigated so they would not be the first.
I am a fan of Catalina great boat as is Benetau,Jenau,Morgan and many others I would not say that Hunter is bad just not my cup of tea. having sailed all of these boats I can't say that I fint a problem with the 42 MKII I would take it in blue water with some modifications (more fuel and so on). But if one is serious about blue water you might want to look into something more in the line of Island Packet or pacific seacraft, there are plenty true blue water boats made with this in mind. Choose what works for you and understand that comfort at dock and comfort at sea are two diferent things and saftey comes first. I would look at as many boats as I could learn exactly where I plan to cross what is my experiance and budget are. Don't choose a boat from what anyone says (me included) it is just an opinion see what other people are actualy circumnavigating in knowledge in this case is your best friend! 
I have sailed Benetau, Jenau, Hunter, Irwin, Catalina, Santana, Morgan, Cal, Newport, C&C, Tartan just to name a few and all are good for what they were made for some better than other some just ok. I realy like the I.P's and Tartans as well as Dephi these are some good over built boats.
what you realy want to look at is constuction and hull design, Keel type, rigging how much fuel does she carry? this is real important you will need it in bad weather and in duldrums. How much you are willing to spend on setting it up for offshore all this is important for a good safe cruise.
happy hunting and best wishes.


----------



## paulk

*In a word, no.*

Taking a Catalina 42 on a rtw trip is somewhat akin to plowing for 2000 acres of potatoes (you're from Idaho, right?) with a Cadet Cub tractor. You may be able to get the job done, (others referred to above apparently have) but it will likely kill the tractor and may not be as enjoyable as using a tractor that was better suited to the task (a Massey/Ferguson 7400 comes to mind...) Books could help you learn more about what to expect and what your boat will need to do. Beth Leonard and Steve Dashew each have written books about extensive cruising and preparing for it. They would be worth reading before you make a 42' mistake.


----------



## Sabreman

IMHO and bluntly, find another boat. My father owed 3 Catalinas in the 70's and I worked for two dealers. I think that they're great coastal boats, but a s friend who is a very experienced boat carpenter, delivery captain, and licensed captain said, "I wouldn't sail around the world in one". Ene though it's true that boats spend most of their time tied to a dock (99%??), it's that last 1% that could get you and your crew killed. I wouldn't climb Mt. everest in WalMart boots, nor would I take my chances at sea with a coastal boat.

I've seen deep water, having about 17000 offshore miles. This is serous business.


----------



## PaulOWindsor

Brad :

A friend of ours always says, that...

"_Taking a boat you love & putting it out for (bareboat) charters, is like taking your daughter & putting her out to be a hooker_"

Apparently he thought that the wear & tear was not worth the modest $$ reward.

Which is why his daughter never became a hooker !! 

P.

P/S Brad, have a look here... clubbeneteau.com/hall-of-fame.html

Not that you'll ever want to circumnavigate (I'd say that the world is just too dangerous these days..) however, some of our boats have done just that.

Are you _REALLY_ sure that the east coast, Bahamas & down the thorny path to the Caribbean wouldn't be enough to keep you busy ??


----------



## tommyt

Five year old thread. They probably gave up the dream and bought the Massey Ferguson tractor.


----------



## blt2ski

Last post by Brad was in feb 07, from some others, it appears like he may have bought a Cal 2-46. 

So anyway, off to the boat race!

marty


----------



## ebs001

I have come to the conclusion that without spending a small fortune (or large) that it is not possible to find a blue water boat that it is a good liveaboard boat. You have to make the decision which way you want to go and buy accordingly. Catalina make boats for the costal cruising market with easy access to shore support. Plenty of volume but lacking in storage space both wet and dry. 50 gallons of fuel is not going to get you very far but that walk around queen sure is nice at anchor. Don't be fooled by that 90%/10% statistic - when your at sea it's 0%/100%. That's a coastal cruising statistic.


----------



## dsleyland

Having read the string bashing the Catalina 42 it seems to me most comments are based on bias and not first hand knowledge and experience with the boat. I own hull 615, 1997 MKII, which I believe to be a good solid boat, certainly not perfect. The one weakness, that I believe needs to be strengthened is the rudder post; gusset plates port & starboard against the post is recommended. The chain plates and tie in ins are plenty rugged, the deck is through bolted every 4 inches. Anyway, my boat and another MKII, Common Sense, just crossed the north Atlantic, the hard way, from west to east as part of ARC Europe 2012. we spent 4 days in a gale (winds 35+ waves 20+) and experienced a knock down, thank god we were below deck during knockdown, and the boat came through fine with only gel coat cracks on the leeward side which had been pounded into the sea by a rogue wave. the knockdown destroyed the dodger. Fours years pr ior I was in a storm off Long Island in 45 to 55 kt winds for 26 hrs; a Swan 44 that was 20 miles east of me was demasted. so say what you will about the Catalina 42 MKII, I think it is a fine boat; I prefer the MKII because. The hull is vinyl resin which is much stronger than polyester and does not have moisture adsorption issues. One real issue, is the lack of handholds inside; the interior layout is a bit too open for days at sea. Regarding fuel capacity (40gal), I carried 30 in cans on the transom and 20 more along the forward lifelines - it was not an issue.


----------



## chall03

dsleyland said:


> Having read the string bashing the Catalina 42 it seems to me most comments are based on bias and not first hand knowledge and experience with the boat. I own hull 615, 1997 MKII, which I believe to be a good solid boat, certainly not perfect. The one weakness, that I believe needs to be strengthened is the rudder post; gusset plates port & starboard against the post is recommended. The chain plates and tie in ins are plenty rugged, the deck is through bolted every 4 inches. Anyway, my boat and another MKII, Common Sense, just crossed the north Atlantic, the hard way, from west to east as part of ARC Europe 2012. we spent 4 days in a gale (winds 35+ waves 20+) and experienced a knock down, thank god we were below deck during knockdown, and the boat came through fine with only gel coat cracks on the leeward side which had been pounded into the sea by a rogue wave. the knockdown destroyed the dodger. Fours years pr ior I was in a storm off Long Island in 45 to 55 kt winds for 26 hrs; a Swan 44 that was 20 miles east of me was demasted. so say what you will about the Catalina 42 MKII, I think it is a fine boat; I prefer the MKII because. The hull is vinyl resin which is much stronger than polyester and does not have moisture adsorption issues. One real issue, is the lack of handholds inside; the interior layout is a bit too open for days at sea. Regarding fuel capacity (40gal), I carried 30 in cans on the transom and 20 more along the forward lifelines - it was not an issue.


Great information from someone in the know.

Thanks and welcome to Sailnet! It is worth noting however that this discussion dates back 10 years, however there is another general discussion taking place now in the following thread about Catalina's being suitable for 'bluewater'.

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/88448-she-bluewater-interesting-story-help-these-questions.html

It would be great to get your take on that discussion as well.
How was the ARC????
My wife and I last night were on the ARC website talking about how it is something we would love to do one day. Possibly as our first ocean crossing, it seems like it would be a great experience.


----------



## dsleyland

I realize the original query about whether a Catalina 42 is adequate for blue water is nearly 10 years old, though I imagine the debate continues. I have owned hull number 615 a 42 Mk II for 5 years and lived on her for nearly two of those years. She is a wonderful boat. The boat is very well built contrary to what others on this string may think. I have pounded through 26 hrs of 8 to 12 waves (3 second period between them) off Long Island while a Swan 44 20 miles behind me was demisted and sank (Oct 2008). I recently crossed the north Atlantic with another 42 Mk II in the ARC Europe group. And about 200 nm west of the Azores took a knock down from a rogue wave. No damage to the rigging, though the dodger was smashed, the rub rail pulled loose and some cabinetry below deck loosened. That story is briefly recounted in Sail Sept 2012. A Solid boat.
What does she need ? - 
more hand hold below deck, more fuel capacity (I carried 55 extra gallons on the sugar scoop stern and foredeck). The rudder post should be reinforced - that is the single weakness I can see with this boat.


----------



## Thunderchild

OK, I know. Late to the party. But I have a question for you all that is close to this topic. I just want to coastal sail. From Martha's Vineyard to the Keys. I will do just coastal. I heard someone say Island Packet. I have looked into them. Great boats but I need to find one with a good price if I go there. I am looking at something 34 to 40 feet.


----------



## night0wl

If you're withing range of a 3-5 day weather forecast, near any coastal cruising boat could do that kind of journey. For the sake of comfort of crew, I'd probably do it in a 35' boat or bigger, but many many smaller boats have done it. Just make sure that the rig (mast, shrouds, stays, chainplates, deck, load bearing bulkheads, mast base step, etc), systems (engine, fuel, plumbing, steering, anchoring) are in good condition. One thing I'd pay attention to is backup steering...since these modern coastal cruisers have very exposed rudders. My coastal cruiser came with a backup tiller in case the wheel goes bad, but not if the rudder goes. Still need to research that!


----------



## Thunderchild

Thanks night0wl. Those are good suggestions. I think a good survey would let me know those issues.


----------

