# Catalina 320



## swampcreek (Feb 14, 2010)

Well I think we pretty much are narrowing it down to a short list. We decided to up our spending limit a lot. What we're looking for is a walk through transom, lead keel, large cockpit, newer (post 1990) boat. At the moment I'm really looking at those Catalina 320's, they are ranging from around 50K on up. But a '97 Beneteau Oceanis 321 that I read about in Spinsheet looks really nice at about 50K. When we get back from Johnstown PA Bike Week I guess we're going to have to visit these boats. 

We did see a 320 today while waiting for the tall ships to leave Baltimore, it was really moving out...Then there's that Catalina 36. We'll get there.


----------



## Dfok (Apr 11, 2010)

The walk thru transom is a huge deal for me, can't imagine having a boat without it. Everyone who comes aboard it seems mentions how great it is; each time I think of something two feet longer that is tops on my list.
My Catalina 28 is a tall rig of the original vintage, not the mk II. Much less money than the 320. If you are sailing alone or as a couple with occasional guests it may be just right and will leave you a hefty sailing kitty for chartering in other places.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

We're 'sorta' shopping and the C320 is on our list. However we are finding the storage space sorely lacking compared to what we have (this will be a common theme going newer)

The V berth is smallish too, with tight access.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Our charter boat was an Oceanis 32. We didn't like the layout at all. For one thing the V-berth was considerably shorter than that in our C30. The valve to switch the head from tank to overboard was in a PITA spot while the one on our boat is conveniently located. A bunch of other little stuff that as the week went on just aggravated me. I was worried that I'd come home and not like our 30 YO boat as much, but that didn't happen at all. I have a new appreciation for it after spending a week on the Oceanis.


----------



## swampcreek (Feb 14, 2010)

Dfok said:


> The walk thru transom is a huge deal for me, can't imagine having a boat without it. Everyone who comes aboard it seems mentions how great it is; each time I think of something two feet longer that is tops on my list.
> My Catalina 28 is a tall rig of the original vintage, not the mk II. Much less money than the 320. If you are sailing alone or as a couple with occasional guests it may be just right and will leave you a hefty sailing kitty for chartering in other places.


Yeah, we're a sailing couple with occasional guests. We had 6 of us out today but thats very rare. In length I want to go into the 30's, my Dad mentioned that he would go out with us more if we had a bigger boat, he's 82and would feel better with more stability and a decent size head. About the 50K I'd be comfortable in that range but would really prefer to spend less and of course more if nessassary.

Hi Donna! A C-30 isn't completely out of the picture either, there is a 1994 Catalina MKIII up in the Delaware River that we could sail down through the C&D, being way up there its basically a freshwater boat although I don't have too much of an idea what a hassle buying a boat out of state and transfering it to Moneyland might be. They want almost $40K. Looking at boats up in that area is all DeniseO30's fault , she told me about a smoke'n deal up there on an Allied Princess, I don't have the time for another project but for someone who does it's hard to beat. I started looking at other boats in that area too being that it's fresh water.

What they say about the 320 sailing fast is true, out in the Patapsco today we saw one really moving out. Of course we also saw a C36 which past us up...well at least I'm in the Catalina camp. As I said we'll start seriously shopping in a few weeks.

I always seem to buy a boat after Johnstown Bike Week, 2 so far.


----------



## Sabreman (Sep 23, 2006)

Go with the 320. It's a sweet boat, there is one 3 slips down from me and I look at it a lot. IMO, it's a better constructed, straight-ahead boat. No nonsense. 

Again, IMO, within reason don't worry about the price. In a few years the differential won't seem like much. I've never heard someone say "I really love my boat but there was this other one that I didn't like as much that was $10k cheaper; I should have bought it." Never heard that.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Catalina 320 phrf rating is around 140s
Catalina 30 phrf ratings around 170s
Beneteau 32- phrf ratings around 140

http://offshore.ussailing.org/Assets/Offshore/PHRF/High+Low+Mean+PHRF+Handicaps.pdf

Those are just ratings and have nothing to do with comfort and layout. If you are looking for a fast boat with cruising cabalilites...look at the sabres, and the c&c's

If you just want fast J's


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

When looking for a "new" boat in the 32-35 foot range a couple years ago, the boats you mention were all considered. My criteria were slightly different, with good sailing qualities the top priority, and an open transom a nice-to-have but not essential feature. I eliminated the 320 for the reasons Faster mentioned - poor storage and tight vee berth. I basically took all the Beneteaus off the short list except for the First Series racer-cruisers. Keep in mind that most Benes will have iron keels while Cats will have lead keels. 

A quick check of the national PHRF database shows some slightly different numbers than quoted above.

Bene 321 - 162
Cat 320 - 153/159 (fin/shoal)
Cat 30 - 171 to 192 (many configurations, fastest is fin keel/tall rig)

FWIW, the boat I ended up with is a Cal 33-2 shoal which rates 138. I have no trouble passing Cat 320s.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Jim,

Our numbers were similar. Each boat has a range ( equipment dependent- sails etc). I gave the boats the benefits of the doubt and took their lowest number.

You boat is quicker than the 320 for sure.

Swamp take your time in picking your next boat. $50,000 is a good amount to spend and opens up a lot of different boats There are a lot of considerations to take into account such as storage, keel construction, size of berths, engine type etc. Having met you I would tell you that Jim is correct in the size of the V in the Cat 320 being small for you. 

I would also look at Tartans, Sabres, C&C's.

Dave


----------



## Sabreman (Sep 23, 2006)

"I would also look at Tartans, Sabres, C&C's."

Yeah. Look at Sabres. 
Really nice boats, but they don't do open transoms. For $50k you can get a nice one from the '80s. Generally well kept vs. many boats from high volume builders. but I'm biased......


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

Sabreman said:


> "I would also look at Tartans, Sabres, C&C's."
> 
> Yeah. Look at Sabres.
> Really nice boats, but they don't do open transoms. For $50k you can get a nice one from the '80s. Generally well kept vs. many boats from high volume builders. but I'm biased......


Agreed. The Sabre 34-2 and Tartan 34-2 were on my short list. Just a matter of what was available when my previous boat sold.


----------



## NCC320 (Dec 23, 2008)

Re: C320

I own a 2000 C320, which I purchased new. Love the boat and have never had any trouble with it. As Faster points out there is somewhat limited hanging storage inside. Cockpit locker is large and with the large, wide stern, there is lots of room in the lazarets aft for storage. All boats are a trade off as to how the space is utilized. The C320 doesn't, in my opinion, have any wasted space and is well thought out. The Catalina320.org is a large, active, owner organization and is a good place to get advice on any of those typically small problems or questions that come up from time to time. Generally, the owners seem quite satisfied with the boat.


----------



## swampcreek (Feb 14, 2010)

Thanks everyone, I just finished loading the motorcycles on the trailer and we're off to Johnstown Bike Week tomorrow so I'll have some time to consider things. It appears Tide Water marine has many of the boats mentioned here on their for sale list. When we get back we might run up there a have a look around. The Sabre does seem like a nice boat and I'll definately check them out but that open transom is still very appealing. I'm a water nut so I like the idea of swimming off the back. I'll recheck but I seem to remember Tartans and C&C's having cored hulls, right or wrong that concerns me.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Cored hulls are not inherently a problem...Not all have them. Its if the particular boat has been taken care of or not. The Balsa core on both the Sabres and the C&C's give the boat some stiffness, and added structural integrity and add strength to the hull and structure. Maybe that contributes to why the Sabres and C&C's as a rule are quicker boats and tend to also point higher.

It isnt just about the hull, is also about the equipment, build quality the structire and tabbing about these three brands.

The fiberglass on the Sabres, Tartans, and C&Cs of that area is also thicker than the Catalina and Hunters.

You are welcome to come sail on my C&C 35MKIII which you could get in your price range possibly. You would be hard pressed to find a larger V berth or quickness in a similar sized boat.

As far as the open cockpit, not my preference. In a Following sea, especially in the ocean I dont need water sloshing and hitting me from behind in my cockpit. We have no trouble swimming off of our boat or having dinghy davits

I think all Sabreman and I are saying is check out these other brands also.
If you check only Tidewater all you will see are Catalinas and Hunters. Expand you search a little. There are many nice boats out there in your price range and different brands. In any case get a boat which has been taken care of and presents a good survey. 


Dave


----------



## chuck53 (Oct 13, 2009)

look at the C-34 as well. it has a roomier feel than the 34 and the V berth is definitely much bigger.


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

chuck53 said:


> look at the C-34 as well. it has a roomier feel than the 34 and the V berth is definitely much bigger.


Chuck is right. The C34 has a better layout than the C320. And the later ones had an open stern/swim platform.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Swamp,
Folks tend to recommend the boat they own or that they want in these threads.

Coming from a 26 I think any of these boats will feel big to you. And you'll eventurally figure out storage in any boat you own. 

Spend time on the boats that interest you. I mean really spend time not just a quick walk through. Throw the salesman out and just the two of you sit on the boat for a while. After a while you'll start to notice the little things that you love or hate when you live with a boat. After that the sea trial will tell you a lot.

Enjoy the ride this weekend and best of luck finding your new boat,
Jim


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

JimsCAL said:


> Chuck is right. The C34 has a better layout than the C320. And the later ones had an open stern/swim platform.


I have sailed fairly extensively on the C-310, owned one, the C-320 almost bought one, and the C-34 and C-36 and owned a C-36. The C-34 & C-36 are very nice sailing boats when compared to the 310 or 320.. We kept our C-310 a year before listing it. The 320 & 310 have very similar sailing characteristics. I won't be brutally honest here but if anyone wants my true feelings feel free to PM me...


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

JimMcGee said:


> Spend time on the boats that interest you. I mean really spend time not just a quick walk through. Throw the salesman out and just the two of you sit on the boat for a while.


Agree. We didn't throw anyone out as the boat was at a boat show, but before we got our C30 we sat in the C309 for about 40 minutes when it was first introduced and both of us noticed how we were NOT in anyone's way as others tromped through the boat. Coming from a 22 footer space and headroom was important.


----------



## johnnyquest37 (Feb 16, 2012)

I chartered a C320 our of Havre de Grace back in 2000. Loved the boat and chartered her again in 2001. Was very impressed with the how well she sailed considering the volume with the beam carried so far back. Would not have thought such a "fat bottomed girl" would handle so well.

Not the fastest boat out there, but a solid performer and very comfortable. In 2005, I bought a C350, which I considered to be a larger version of C320.


----------



## Ninefingers (Oct 15, 2009)

Maine Sail said:


> I have sailed fairly extensively on the C-310, owned one, the C-320 almost bought one, and the C-34 and C-36 and owned a C-36. The C-34 & C-36 are very nice sailing boats when compared to the 310 or 320.. We kept our C-310 a year before listing it. The 320 & 310 have very similar sailing characteristics. I won't be brutally honest here but if anyone wants my true feelings feel free to PM me...


Hey Maine,

Just wondering if your willing to share a bit more on the 310 and 320. I'm in the market for a small cruiser, and those as well the 309 are on my list. I'm on Lake Ontario. Mostly day sailing.


----------



## wkw (Nov 3, 2017)

Anyone looking at the Catalina 320 and the Beneteau 321 have the right idea of comparable boats for size and what they offer. Most compare the Catalina 320 to the 35' beneteau's and this is not fair for Catalina....well, maybe it is for what Catinlina offers. Shopping around for my upgrade to a 32 footer I came across the 320 and he 321. My "must have" is a lead keel and it being a shoal draft. My wife likes an aft cabin queen bed, and a safe cockpit, and a walk through transom, both boats fit this requirement. My first impression and comparison of these two boats goes like this:Same year comparison of 4 boats(2 - catalina 320's 2 -Bene 321's) ... Catalina was far more robust and superior in build and materials. Examples being; the Stanchions, pulpit, stern rails, standing rigging and winches were far superior on the Catalina 320. The Beneteau's stanchions were weak and wiggled, the Pulpit and stern rails were thinner and cheaper quality and they too could be wiggled to move loosely, Standing rigging on the beneteau was inferior and the chainplates where less robust than Catalina's...including points of fastening to the hull. The Hull keel joint on the Beneteau is sloppy and obvious and the Catalina's smooth and tight and with a smooth epoxy compound hiding the seam. Walking on deck and cockpit, Catalina had a solid feel and again looked to be better built with clean undamaged decking. Beneteau, had signs of compromised deck core around the stanchion areas. Lots of spider cracks on deck and flex under foot. The cockpit floor by the helm on the Beneteau had some kind of insert and it was very weak and flexed underfoot with a creaking sound. Maybe not a structural issue, but it would annoy me. Now, with the obvious lack in build quality of the Beneteau 321, Lets point out some good things...Good things are: The interior design and layout is better than the 320. The aft cabin queen feels a lot bigger, roomier and brighter. The main saloon with it's rich wood tones, the cabinetry and the dinette table are very nice compared the the Catalina 320. The engine and the engine compartment are much better designed on the Beneteau....Beneteau's engine compartment is very roomy and looks like the engine is displayed as an art piece. The stairs into the main cabin are...Solid feeling stairs....The catalina has a ladder with flimsy wood screwed into a stainless frame. The engine on the Beneteau is a 27 hp Yanmar...this is a nice engine to have on this light boat. Catalina has the same engine pushing it's heavier weight. Another good thing if you compare shoal draft designs....The Beneteau shoal draft on the 321 has a bulb keel (yes, lead..not iron as most beneteau's have). Common sense tells me the bulb is a much better design than the "wing keel" on the Catalina for a grounding. You can heel your Bene' 321 and pull it any direction to free it...the Catalina will dig in like an anchor, this can be very bad. There you have it, Catalina 320 or the Beneteau 321? I say either one. If I go with the Beneteau the positives are definitely strong for light coastal cruising and it has to be a bit quicker than the 320 but knowing the build quality and longevity are lower than the Catalina 320... maybe I would have more courage to push harder and be in bad weather with the Catalina, Knowing it's better engineered with the winches, rigging and the overall build compared to the 321.


----------

