# Catalina 400 opinions welcome



## msbam207 (Jun 4, 2007)

If info on these is in another thread, please direct me as nothing came up in my search.

I just looked at this boat the other day: YachtWorld.com Boats and Yachts for Sale

I think I've decided on a C400, and I'm weighing the pro's and cons of cost vs. age. This one is the first year for the C400 - and, I was told by the broker, it's actually hull #1. (would this be cause for concern in and of itself?)

The boat did not look like it was maintained very well cosmetically - it was dull (needs a wax?) and has a lot of spider cracking/crazing in the gelcoat. I understand this is not difficult to repair, but I've never done it and I would probably have the whole gelcoat redone or potentially repainted/epoxied. It had some condensation water damage in the teak near an A/C vent - I was told that is fixable as well.

Assuming these are only cosmetic issues and the mechanics are sound... My question is - am I better off just buying a newer/better maintained boat and paying a premium, or buying one that needs some work? Thanks!


----------



## Gene T (May 23, 2006)

A well cared for boat is worth considerably more than a neglected one, a lot more. How much is difficult to calculate because the problems are generally everywhere. I looked at two C400's recently of the same year and prices were $30k different. Same equipment. The cheaper boat had been used hard and put away wet, it wasn't even in charter but it looked like it was 20 years older. If the C400 was what I wanted I would have purchased the other boat without even considering the price difference, it was that nice. I have looked at a lot of boats and I only find one in 10 that is in good shape, one in 100 perhaps that is really nice. 

If you know a lot about boats you might be able to fix it up and calculate how much it will cost to get it the way you want it. My general rule after years of fixing up boats is to over estimate how much repairs will cost, then double it. It still usually costs more that that. First take off the rose colored glasses and assume everything will need repair, because things will need fixing that you can't even imagine. 

C400's are nice boats but I believe the early ones had some steering problems. There are several cat lovers on this board so you should get better specifics from them.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Old boat problems are like cockroaches, if you can easily see one, there's a million ya can't see. For Sure!


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

msbam,
I've been looking at Catalinas in the sub-40' range, and I've come to like the Catalina 380. They seem a like they're really well thought-out, and great family cruisers capable of handling some weather. They displace a whole lot of water, and take a good breeze to get going... Anyway, it's what I like. Listings on YW have them for $110,000 - $130,000. Just food for thought.
Sailhog


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

Hull number 1, really. Well remember that hull number 1 is usually a test boat. They put it together with all the options to find out how it all fits making notes and adjustments to use on future hulls. I don't know about Catalina but Hunter then beats the crap out of it to find out the weak points and areas of stress. 
Then the boat may make the boatshow rounds and you have several thousand people climbing all over it, slamming hatches, pounding the decks. And of course the bulider is transporting the boat to the shows too, which takes it toll. They then may take many people out on test sails to promote the boat.

Then they sell the boat. It's like buying a car out of a rental fleet. The plus side is the boat is probably loaded with all the options and if it broke it got fixed.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

MSBam,

I own a 400 and am the Technical Editor for Catalina (Mainsheet) on the 400. CaptRon400 also frequents this board and he was the previous Tech Editor for the 400 and knows them better than I do (knows the older ones a lot better than I do).

Fire away with questions and I will try and help. However, to answer your general question about a boat that needs work or one that costs more and needs less, that can only be answered this way: Do you have more money, or time?

Take a look at the MKII's versus the early boats. Several changes. Ron would probably know them more in depth. However, if I had to venture a suggestion, I would tell you to buy the boat that needs less work and costs more. As has been suggested, if it does not look good on the ouside (where you can see), I would shudder to know how it was maintained on the inside (where you cannot see). You will be busy enough with the boat as it is... find one that has been loved and pampered. 

- CD

PS And for what it is worth, I have owned a 380, 320, and 250. The 400 is the best of the bunch. It is a very nice sailing boat, sure footed, and comfortable. There appear to be a few idiosyncracies, but what boat does not have them??


----------



## msbam207 (Jun 4, 2007)

Thanks everyone for your input. Is there a rule of thumb for average hours on an engine per year? (kind of like 12k miles/year for a car). I've been told that the boat was sold to the 1st owner new (so not used for testing or boat shows), but I may try to contact Catalina to see if they have any records.

Is there a good thread in here or other resource on what to look for in a used sailboat? Questions to ask the seller, things to look for, etc. When I asked the broker that showed me the boat to crank on the engine, he said he couldn't do that without the sellers permission - is that typical? Before making an offer or paying for a survey, I should probably check as much out as I can first, right? (enginge, water pressure/heat, a/c, rigging, electrical, etc.)

I'm hoping that a bit of diligence will show that the apparent neglect was only limited to cleanliness/cosmetics - and that the important stuff is sound.


----------



## henrygermond (Mar 27, 2007)

don't buy #1. even #205.. had a lot of problems. at some point they gave up on the westerbeke for the yanmar. they do a bad job on the shower sump,
the location of the sea strainer, access to the galley sink sea cock, access to the sea water pump, the holding tank vents, the anchor windlass, and
the vented loop over the engine. it has taken me seven years to whip mine into shape.


----------



## henrygermond (Mar 27, 2007)

oh,i forgot, serious steering misalignment of idler sheaves.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Yeah...but they are a great platform for solar panels and bar-b-ques! 
Oh CD....I think I hear your technical support line ringing!! (g)


----------



## Denr (Feb 7, 2001)

Let the buyer beware, my friend purchased one of the first 400s (with the wingding keel), rudder was deeper than the bottom of the keel, first time he went over a coral reef in south Florida the rudder exploded when it came in contact with the bottom, why people by Catalinas are still a mystery to me?


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Hmm,

Honestly, these threads get a little old after a while. In fact, it is starting to piss me off. I bought a Catalina. I have bought 4 of them. They did not force me too nor did my finances force me to buy a production boat. My other choices were a Nordhavn and Kadey-Krogens which cost vastly more money and cost vastly more than even some of the finest sailboats. Money is not the issue. Also, my pops is about to go look at a 380. Catalina, Hunter, Benetea, Jeauneau, etc... make fine boats for their intended purpose. That purpose is N/S AMerica cruising. They were not built to cross oceans. That is a different boat - more tankage, fewer and different hatches, hopefull a water tight bulkhead, really tight quarters where you will uncomfortably sit in each others lap.
*
I feel many people buy boats that have no business buying boats and would be better suited chartering a captained boat out of the caribean so they can maintaing their illusion of sunsets and margaritas.*

It has been reported that some of the very early model 400's had some engine issues. I will say that Gerry Douglas assured me that they went to a lot of lengths to fix them. Did they? Did they not?? I have no clue. I was not a 400 owner then nor was I the technical editor then. However, there are two sides to every story. I will say that there was an enormous stink put together on the 400 forum that all the 400s had back pressure problems and if you didn't change it out in a hurry your engine would fail. I found that, and proved that, to be COMPLETELY wrong... at least on my boat. I also checked the steering issues that have been reported and found that my boat had no such problems... at all.

I am not saying that there was or was not some issues on these boats. I am saying that I do not have them and many others I have spoken to do not have them. What I will say is that ANY boat... ANY boat!!!.... has its quirks. Anyone that says they do not has not owned it long enough or it never leaves the dock. The comment about the 400 hitting the reef and it being a design flaw that it hit the reef and lost its rudder is an enigma to me. The only sure fire way around that which I know is to get a full keel or better yet just keep your boat on jack stands and don't put it in the water. Neither is an option I would consider.

For those that go out and drop 200-250k on a boat and get frustrated when it has problems, all I can tell you is be glad you did not drop 1 million on a boat because it would have problems too and you would be 4 times further in the hole. If you want a finer boat... buy a finer boat. I love Hylas, personally, and would probably choose a V50 to cross the Pacific in. You should have no problem buying one of those for 600-1million. GO fot it. It is just money and you would not be happy in anything else that costs less. You won't see me stopping you.

I love my boat. There are things I would change, but who wouldn't? It has problems that come up and I fix them. No big deal. But I will tell you that I would not put my kids at risk buying an inferior boat (and no offense, but I have a LOT more knowledge about boats than many of the people on this forum) nor would I turn right back around and reccomend my parents buy a Catalina if I had any issues with them. It is a fine boat and we HAVE cruised on them before, and we HAVE been offshore MANY times before, we HAVE weathered a hurricane while on our boat and have come out fine, and we HAVE cruised Florida but I will admit we never hit any reefs. Perhaps that is where my resume is lacking??

Regards,

- CD


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Blaming the boat for losing a rudder when you've hit a reef seems a bit backwards to me. Granted, the keel should be deeper than the rudder...but if your in water so shallow that the rudder is in danger, you really need to learn how to read a chart and navigate much better. 

I've been in plenty of waters where I hit my rudder...but that's because I'm going places no monohull would even dare think of going.  But I don't blame the manufacturer of the boat for that...


----------



## Denr (Feb 7, 2001)

Denial is the first step in recovery? It is EXACTLY a design flaw, the rudder should never have a foot deeper draft than the keel, where did you park your spaceship?


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

CD...WAS the rudder longer than the keel on some 400's?? I know Beneteau did that on some boats and it is really stupid. Keels are made to deal with some grounding...rudders are not. That would disqualify a boat from ANY kind of cruising in my book. I've never seen that on a Catalina which (as you know) is my favorite production boat. Tell me it ain't so!!


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Hmm,
> 
> Honestly, these threads get a little old after a while. In fact, it is starting to piss me off. I bought a Catalina. I have bought 4 of them. They did not force me too nor did my finances force me to buy a production boat. My other choices were a Nordhavn and Kadey-Krogens which cost vastly more money and cost vastly more than even some of the finest sailboats. Money is not the issue. Also, my pops is about to go look at a 380. Catalina, Hunter, Benetea, Jeauneau, etc... make fine boats for their intended purpose. That purpose is N/S AMerica cruising. They were not built to cross oceans. That is a different boat - more tankage, fewer and different hatches, hopefull a water tight bulkhead, really tight quarters where you will uncomfortably sit in each others lap.
> *
> ...


CD,

Tell us how you really feel!

Nothing wrong with a tirade every now and then...I enjoyed it!


----------



## Denr (Feb 7, 2001)

Don't believe me, ask a naval architect!


----------



## msbam207 (Jun 4, 2007)

Nice to see this thread spring back to life! I was the original poster and I went through with the purchase and couldn't be happer. Yeah, I would not round the horn in the C400, but it is absolutely huge and comforatble for some Texas coastal cruising and maybe a gulf crossing to the caribbean if I get ambitious. Can't beat it for the price.

btw - the rudder does not extend below the keel, at least on hull number 1. I will attach a picture if I figure out how. I think that the gentleman who told that tale was looking to blame the boat for some bad piloting.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

There are two keel versions. In the standard (deep) draft version, the keel is considerably deeper than the rudder. On the tiny sketch available at Catalinayachts.com, the draft of the shoal keel looks about even with the rudder. Probably it's slightly deeper as that would be a serious design oversight, but it's conceivable that if the boat were trimmed aft or squatting under power you could see that rudder extend a few inches deeper than the shoal keel.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Denr said:


> Denial is the first step in recovery? It is EXACTLY a design flaw, the rudder should never have a foot deeper draft than the keel, where did you park your spaceship?


Just curious... but where did you get the one foot deeper figure... I didn't see any measurements in the previous post....


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

COme on guys...

No, the *RUDDER IS NOT BELOW THE KEEL*. Where did he come up with that? Either he has the boat highly missloaded in the butt, or he had it pulled and they blocked it and he gave it the good ole quick glance.

When you pull and block the boat, many yards will not block them level which makes the rudder look deeper. It is about 1.5 inches higher. If that makes you uncomfortable then cut some of it off or watch where you are driving for gods sakes.

Now, I don't care if you are 12 inches higher, if you hop that reef (which always seem to be pointed) you can jump the reef in wave action, miss the keel altogether, and take out your rudder. The only way I know around this is to get a full keel so you cannot do that. Same could happen if sailing and turning where the rudder does not follow the keel.

Smacking a reef on almost any keel is a great way to do serious damage... whether on a Catalina, Hunter, Valiant, Hylas, Swan, Portugese racing boat, or container ship.

Catalina makes a GREAT boat, period. I often find they are purchased by new or lightly experienced sailors that missuse them and then get pissed when something breaks.

There are things I would change about my catalina, like tankage, more cabinetry, more access to systems, different portholes, etc. But it is all easily overcome if that is your intention.

There was a keel and hull modification on the newer 400's, about hull 310ish or so. I do not know how much they modified the rudder but changed the draft on the keel. It is likely that the older 400's (pre 310) may be even deeper than the new ones. I have run my 400 aground and did not touch the rudder.

- CD


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

Hey CD,

Getting a bit off-topic, but is there any scuttlebut about a Mk III version of the C42?


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

JohnRPollard said:


> Hey CD,
> 
> Getting a bit off-topic, but is there any scuttlebut about a Mk III version of the C42?


Not that I have heard. THere were some small modification in the HN#310+ b/c of draft. It is listed (pre-310) as having a 5-4 draft... it is more like 5'10. The new ones are 5'4 ish.

- CD


----------



## SailinJay (Dec 6, 2002)

Denr's (dis)regard for Catalinas is well established here in this forum. He also hates my boat, the Catalina 350.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Not that I have heard. THere were some small modification in the HN#310+ b/c of draft. It is listed (pre-310) as having a 5-4 draft... it is more like 5'10. The new ones are 5'4 ish.
> 
> - CD


CD,

I take it your comments above refer to the C400? Apologies, but I was more off-topic than you may have realized. I truly was asking about the Forty-Two, not the 400. If that's beyond the scope of this thread just ignore me.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Oops, sorry - I did not read close enough. 

I like the 42, but am not up on the MkIII - if that is what it is. You know more about it than I do!!

I liked the old 42's and spent a fair amount of time on them. It is Frank Butler's favorite boat (or so I have heard). It is a failry fast boat and sails well. However, it has a few things about the design which do not work well for me personally. Nothing wrong with it, I just have a different preference.

- CD


----------



## Denr (Feb 7, 2001)

SailinJay said:


> Denr's (dis)regard for Catalinas is well established here in this forum. He also hates my boat, the Catalina 350.


You're right, this is the only boat built for NBA players! Head room I believe to be 6'7", very functional! No hand holds in the cabin, enough free board to move through the water without actually hoisting a sail, poor storage, fatass stern with a tiny little wheel (just larger than a MacGregor 26) and slow like molasess in a Chicago winter, just an aweful boat unless used as a marina queen.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Denr said:


> You're right, this is the only boat built for NBA players! Head room I believe to be 6'7", very functional! No hand holds in the cabin, enough free board to move through the water without actually hoisting a sail, poor storage, fatass stern with a tiny little wheel (just larger than a MacGregor 26) and slow like molasess in a Chicago winter, just an aweful boat unless used as a marina queen.


... and have had several back and forth to Bermuda, through many storms and squalls, and have been to many other places deemed unreachable by a production boat.

I prefer the more traditional layout, so it is not for me, but it is not a marina queen.

- CD


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Does the 'more traditional' model have the BB-Q grill below decks with a Charlie Noble or mounted in the stern sheets? (g)


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

All I have to say is I have a 1974 Catalina 27 that shows a lot better than a lot of newer higher dollar boats. But who cares I don't. I don't care if everybody in this forum hated Catalinas. But I do have to say I love mine for what I do with it and it does have some HISTORY, It won the Oregon Offshore with the original owner. It had the crap ran out of it and still has plenty of life in it and I use and abuse it. Sure it had quite a few mods done, but it just goes to show how some people love to put down other people to make themselves feel better and stir up sxxx.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

> What I will say is that ANY boat... ANY boat!!!.... has its quirks.


This is true - even the CS boats have their little oddities...the thing it took me the longest to get used to was having to use seat belts as we went roaring across the lake at 40 knots plus


----------



## SailinJay (Dec 6, 2002)

Denr said:


> You're right, this is the only boat built for NBA players! Head room I believe to be 6'7", very functional! No hand holds in the cabin, enough free board to move through the water without actually hoisting a sail, poor storage, fatass stern with a tiny little wheel (just larger than a MacGregor 26) and slow like molasess in a Chicago winter, just an aweful boat unless used as a marina queen.


Res ipse loquitur.


----------

