# Cs 36 Versus niagara 35



## soyuz (Oct 25, 2010)

hey guys, friend of mine is about to buy a sailboat for offshore cruising. He is looking at those 2 boats they are about the same price 55k range. I know its hard to choose when so limited info on the boats shape and all that but lets pretend they both in same shape. Cs is 82 Niagara is 81.Which one would you pick and why ?


----------



## jimrafford (Jan 7, 2011)

my previous boat was a cs36 and a friend docked next to me has a niagra 41. We have spent many summers cruising together.
Both boats are solid and capable cruisers and exceptional values. As far as the cs is concerned I found engine access to raw water pump and alternator a pain because of vdrive. The companionway access is pretty steep also. Otherwise we enjoyed the boat.
My only comment about the niagra is the interior felt crowded. At least on the 41 anyway. 
Both of our boats had Westerbekes. Rugged and reliable but parts are expensive.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Agree both are good boats, the Niagara may have a rather non-standard interior if I recall correctly. Not sure if both are cored hulls, but I'm pretty sure the Niagara is if that's an issue for the buyer.

The Niagara could be said to have a more traditional 'shippier' look to it with its deeper sheer and traditional overhangs, but that's all in the eye of the beholder anyway. Gut feeling is that the CS would outperform the Niagara but probably not to a degree that would be a problem for cruising.


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

An '82 CS36 is also known as a CS36-T. Maine Sail has one and loves it. These boats are built like tanks. The 36T did NOT have a cored hull. 

The later ('86+) CS 36 Merlin had a cored hull.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

My buddy Brian had a Niagra 35. Nice boat and well built but slow compared to the CS-36T. We sailed together a lot, and he's a good sailor, but he always had trouble keeping up.

The Niagra is cored and the interior rather dark IMHO. The layout is ok but after sailing on the Niagra, a lot, I still prefer my 36T over it. You can't go wrong with either one unless the cored hull has you worried. Both boats are built like tanks..


----------



## dgrenwich (Nov 16, 2005)

*Cs36t*

Funny I was in the same position last fall and ended up with the CS36T. I've looked at several Niagaras and think they are great boats but the cored hull is a concern only in that one doesn't know if it is a good hull until after the surveyor has been paid. The CS36 is a tough and smartly designed cruiser-tankage is generous for the size. The engine access is annoying but livable and the companionway steepness takes two trips to get adjusted to and it is not an issue.

aboard Blue Monday,
a CS36 Traditional sloop

~~~~_/) ~~~
~~~~~~~~~~


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

... of course I meant "tank" in a good way. 

My only caveat is that the engine access in the CS is, IMHO, not great.

If you're interested, here are some pics of one that I looked at. Lost Boat pictures by eherlihy - Photobucket


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

eherlihy said:


> ... of course I meant "tank" in a good way.
> 
> My only caveat is that the engine access in the CS is, IMHO, not great.
> 
> If you're interested, here are some pics of one that I looked at. Lost Boat pictures by eherlihy - Photobucket


I find this criticism odd. Both the starboard and port panels remove so both sides of the engine can be accessed plus the companionway removes too. I can easily reach every bit of my engine and have.

You guys should try working on a Bristol 35.5, Sabre 34, Catalina 30 or any Cape Dory ..... Poor engine access...NOT!!!!

This is starboard side access and it takes 15 seconds to get open. The entire silver panel on the port side also removes.









The port side is just as easy to get to from the lazarette.









Front side access is good too.


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

The current PHRF list in New England has the CS36 with a 30 second/mile advantage over the Niagara 35, so the CS36 is obviously the faster boat--everything else being equal. The Niagara 35 is about 28 seconds faster than an Island Packet 35, so it isn't a slouch, either. If you want a fast boat in this range, get a J-35, with more than 60 seconds/mile over the CS36. However, the original post was about offshore cruising--not racing. 

A properly constructed cored hull has its structural advantages over solid glass, and Hinterhoeller had an excellent reputation, so that is not a negative in my book for the Niagara 35. Also, the Niagara has a bulwark whereas the CS36 has an aluminum toe rail, which is less desirable when the seas pick up and you need to be on deck. 

Given the age of the boats (81/82), there could be a significant difference in condition and equipment. Since both have good reputations, it would come down to which package provides the best value after a survey, paying particular attention to structure, rigging, and the sail inventory, including heavy weather gear.


----------



## jimrafford (Jan 7, 2011)

While it may take just 30 seconds to remove the port access panel you first have to empty what ever you have stored in that compartment and pile it in the cockpit. To gain access to the waterpump you have to empty the starboard compartment from the cockpit, remove the panel, then go down to the quarterbirth and remove the panel in there. Not a big deal if you have time but when a tug and barge are bearing down on you it's a little stressful. Once the panels are removed access is excellent.
PS Maine sail
Nice photos.Your engine compartment is something to be proud of. I can see a bunch of improvements in the install that my boat didn't have.
Jim


----------



## killarney_sailor (May 4, 2006)

This was the decision I had to make a number of years ago (it seems to be a common pair of boats to come to for cruising in this size and price range). To complicate the matter there are two totally different interiors available for N35s - the older one has great sea berths but is 'odd' and you either like it or not. The newer one is very nice for a couple but costs quite a bit more. For the CSs, we only considered the CS36T which is a very different boat from the Merlin. One thing we did not like about the CS was the very flat, rounded bilge - water can roll up into lockers when you are heeled and you will heel a lot when offshore and there will be water in spite of your best efforts to stop it going in and to pump it out. The Niagara has a proper sump to collect the water which will help keep things dry in adjacent lockers.

The bottom line is that either is just fine. Choose based on condition, equipment, price and whatever turns your crank more.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

fallard said:


> Also, the Niagara has a bulwark whereas the CS36 has an aluminum toe rail, which is less desirable when the seas pick up and you need to be on deck.


What is bulwark? Why is aluminum toe rail less desirable when sea picks up? I was considering replacing my well worn out teak toe rail with aluminum.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Proper bulwarks offer more secure footing (at 2+ inches) than a typical aluminum toerail at the deck edge on a heeled boat.

In the graphic below the 'raised rail' would be considered a bulwark.


----------

