# Contessa 34 questions



## attorneyjim (Feb 17, 2010)

I'm looking at a 1979 Contessa 34 (yes 34, not a 32). I don't know much about this design except that Jeremy Rodgers (sp?) owned one of these and it's supposed to be a good open water racer. The one I'm looking at was stored for a long time and has recently seen just a little bit of use and seems to be in good shape. In fact, the new sails are probably worth more than the asking price of the entire boat.
My main question is this: This hull has ribbing built into it (original build), which is good, however, the process created a deformation in the hull such that the ribbing is clearly visable on the outside of the hull. Broker calls this "beer canning" and claims the survey says it does not effect the performance of the hull. The broker says the effect is only above the waterline but I haven't confirmed this yet.
Anyone know if this is a problem, other than cosmetic? Are you familiar with this design? Anything else you can tell me?
One last thing: this is an ultra light OOD with _some_ live-aboard accommodations. I want to eventually use it for open water cruising. Is this a good choice?
Thanks, Jim


----------



## Architeuthis (Mar 3, 2008)

I suspect that the broker was correct but not being completely honest. I think that Oil Canning is really bad over the long term. It suggests a lack of structural integrity and that flexing will make the area flexing weak. I wouldn't like that offshore. 

There are folks on here that have informed opinion (consider mine uninformed in this area) about flexing fiberglass and strength. 

In this market I'm not sure I would be all that keen on this boat unless I could fix it. Now a contessa 32.....well it wouldn't have any oil canning.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

I agree, there are so many good boats for sale why settle on one with what could be a big problem. Also an ultralight racer could make a good weekender but probably not a good offshore cruiser. Is it Bulldog? 

Now a Contessa 32 would be a much better offshore cruiser.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

*"ood 34"*

Not sure if this is what your are describing... FWIW, an OOD 34 is considered to be a tough off shore rated boat. ("Offshore One Design 34")
I have sailed on one that is now in the Bay area. Nice interior with your basic type a layout (head forward). Not many boats have a dedicated bin for a liferaft under a cockpit seat for offshore racing prep, but this boat does. Doug Peterson design.
As to the "ribbing" that was one answer to framing for FRP boats. Alternatives would be coring the whole hull.
While such terms are very subjective, I have never heard of an OOD 34 being called an ultralight.
Wonder if that is indeed what this boat is?

L


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

34' and 8000 lbs disp. Basically the same dimensions as a Peterson 34 but a few thousand pounds lighter. Sounds pretty light to me.


----------



## attorneyjim (Feb 17, 2010)

It is Bulldog as a matter of fact. Does anyone know if this "oil canning" was common with this particular design? I haven't seen any other examples of the Contessa 34 and from what I've read they didn't make very many.

I guess I'll keep looking.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

These were English built Peterson 34's and so have all of the merits and all of the major liabilities of this era of the IOR. In many ways these were one of the better designs of that period. The upside is that these boats sail very well upwind. 

The downside of these boats is that they were designed to have very big crews with their weight out on the rail so they heel alot and are difficult to short-hand. The hardware of the era was pretty marginal for the huge genoas that these boats typically carried in light to moderate winds. They are boats that have a pretty uncomfortable motion. They depend heavily on a very large sail inventory to sail across normal wind speed range ((in cruising mode typically 3 to 5 jibs minimally plus two spinnakers) and their motion and tendancy to death roll can be dowright scary dead down wind. 

The dimples in the hull are not necessarily anything to worry about. The English and their commonwealths, were slow to adopt liners and cored hulls, but they completely understood the issue of large unsupported panels. So, instead of coring the hull, they employed a system of closely spaced longitudinal stringers and transverse frames. These were typically glassed in by hand which was very labor intensive and so this boat building method pretty much died out, but it was a super way to build a boat. 

In any event, in an effort to get primary bonds for the internal framing, the frames were glassed in while the boats were in the molds and before the polyetser had completed its full-cure period (typically weeks). A minor problem with this system is that the hull panels distort a bit between the framing members as the resin's finish their cure cycle and shrink to their final dimension resulting in small non structural dimples in the hull. 

These dimples are typically in no way structural. In fact this construction technique produced a very strong, durable, light weight hull. That said, you still need a qualified surveyor to check the hull on any race boat this age. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## attorneyjim (Feb 17, 2010)

Jeff,
What you say corresponds pretty closely to what the broker said. Broker said the down wind motion was "uncomfortable" and that it sailed into the wind exceptionally well. He also said the "oil canning" was the result of the way they laminated the ribs. something about the different ways the panels and ribs cured. But it is not structural. Seems he was being very honest.

The biggest problem I have is that I would want to be able to single hand this at times in open water or, at most, sail with a 3 person crue. From what you're saying I would have to do a major re-rigging and it still might not be do-able without the weight hanging over the rail.

Still at $29 grand (or better) it is tempting.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

These boats can be single-handed but they are very tough boats to short hand in changeable conditions. If you are skilled sailor and had a custom sail inventory designed, it could be made to work. I would suggest that you P.M. Catamount who a very knowledgeable sailor who is doing a beautiful job restoring a Peterson 34 and who has been short-handly sailing his Peterson 34.

Jeff


----------



## bobmcgov (Jul 19, 2007)

Jeff: Didn't Contessa sort of pioneer vacuum resin infusion for sailboats, with the 32 and 34 being some of the earliest attempt? I read (somewhere, forget where) they did that to keep the resin-to-glass ratio low and the semi-ULDB 34's low weight is a result of it; but also that the process was still experimental and a few 34s had dry spots in the layup. Have you encountered hull trouble in early vac-bag boats? Was bagging also an attempt to address another problem you mentioned, that of getting good layups in deep, thin, one-piece keels and skegs?

_Bulldog_ is a lovely thing, well-kept with very few hours on the original engine. Which might speak to its sailing qualities. OTOH, it's been on the market for awhile at only $25k, which seems odd for a well-regarded name like Contessa.

Easy on the eyes.


----------



## attorneyjim (Feb 17, 2010)

frankly, the price made me wonder if something was wrong. It might just be the economy. It does look good. can't see any blistering, very little hazying, rigging is in good shape, etc. i haven't sea trialed her yet or gotten a survey.
But, I'd hate to sail the pacific islands with my wife and 15 yr old son always keeping her by the lee for fear of dead rolling.
I suppose that if I intend to sail to and then island hop in the pacific, I should be confident that I could handle a death roll situation. But, I'd hate to be asleep below with my son at the helm in that situation.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

I don't think it's the right boat for that kind of trip really. By the time you load everything on board for 3, add water and provisions as well as cruising gear you'll want or need it won't be close to an ULDB anymore. As for the price, I'd guess Contessa isn't as well known a name in California, at least not the 34, and the economy isn't helping.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Keeping an IOR boat by the lee is a good way to death roll. If you are really talking about sailing to distant Pacific Isles (and not simply to Catalina) Then this would be a really poor choice. These boats are priced that cheaply because they are essentially obsolete as race boats, very poor cruising boats, and there are few things more obsolete as an obsolete race boat. 

Frankly, there is nothing even remotely ULDB about the Contessa 34. These were not expecially light boats for a race boat of that era. A 34 foot ULDB of that era would have been a bit more than half that weight. 

I have never heard that Contessa used resin infusion. I think Contessa went out of business before this technology was perfected. 

Jeff


----------



## attorneyjim (Feb 17, 2010)

Alright, I'm fairly well convinced this is not the right boat. the search goes on.
thanks for the info.


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

The Contessa OOD34 was injection-moulded, probably the first leisure boat to be build that way. It was designed by Doug Peterson.
You can read more here OOD 34 Online
While I think JeffH is generalizing a bit too much about IOR boats (the Contessa's built to race that rule are way better boats than other IOR's of that era) he is right that the overlapping genoas are a bit of work. (He's also extremely knowledgeable, so consider his opinion first  ).
The 34 is not the best design in terms of stability etc. but some have been cruised far and wide (but that is true for many designs). So for a cheap cruiser, personally I would do it - if you have money for something better suited for bluewater, you should dismiss this (as you seem to have already).

Edit: I just realized that Jeff already gave some of this information -


----------



## contessa34 (Mar 1, 2010)

*Ood34*



attorneyjim said:


> I'm looking at a 1979 Contessa 34 (yes 34, not a 32). I don't know much about this design except that Jeremy Rodgers (sp?) owned one of these and it's supposed to be a good open water racer. The one I'm looking at was stored for a long time and has recently seen just a little bit of use and seems to be in good shape. In fact, the new sails are probably worth more than the asking price of the entire boat.
> My main question is this: This hull has ribbing built into it (original build), which is good, however, the process created a deformation in the hull such that the ribbing is clearly visable on the outside of the hull. Broker calls this "beer canning" and claims the survey says it does not effect the performance of the hull. The broker says the effect is only above the waterline but I haven't confirmed this yet.
> Anyone know if this is a problem, other than cosmetic? Are you familiar with this design? Anything else you can tell me?
> One last thing: this is an ultra light OOD with _some_ live-aboard accommodations. I want to eventually use it for open water cruising. Is this a good choice?
> Thanks, Jim


Hi Jim, I owned and raced an OOD 34 for 13 years, and I never found a better boat. This Peterson-Design is still a very competitive performer on the race course, even under the current racing currencies here in Europe. We became vice-champion in our ORC-regionals in 2007, and booked countless trophies in several races in the netherlands and the uk over the years. The visibility of the ribs on the outer topsides of the hull is a common appearance for OOD´s, the british call it the "hungry-dog effect". It is pure cosmetical, the structure of the boat ist extremely solid, thanks to its unique construction method of injection moulding. Using a vacuum for curing results in a super stiff jet lightweight hull that holds its shape even in extreme conditions. Add the benefits of using epoxy-resins, very uncommon in those days, osmosis ist unknown among the OOD 34 fleet. For cruising, the boat might be a bit spartan below decks, but has excellent seagoing capacities, we tested her in several long distance cruises and offshore races. If you are going to race her, make sure you keep the boat light and the rigging pretty tight, the OOD 34 will be unbeatable in medium to heavy conditions, especially upwind. Good luck.


----------



## sahara (Dec 15, 2006)

These boats needed a lot of weight on the rail - when powered up for racing. Cruisers don't usually sail that way. They were broaches looking for a place to happen on a powered up spinnaker reach. Cruisers don't do that, either. They also rolled badly downwind under an oscillating spinnaker - another thing cruisers avoid. 

A lot of the bad behavior of IOR boats occurred mainly when they were being pushed hard. Cruisers should reef early and often. 

I think this would make a great family performance cruiser - nice snug pilot berths for the kids, rig up some lee cloths and they'll be happy. Skip the 150% genoa, too hard to tack anyways. Stick a 110% on a roller furler and go sailing. As a cruiser, you're not really concerned about that last 0.2 kt of boat speed - your slowing down to make the wife comfortable. Great price for a well made boat laid out for offshore sailing.

Try to find bunks that good for sleeping underway on a new production boat. Not gonna happen. The new boats are built for daysailing and entertaining at dock or anchor. This thing is built for sailing.


----------



## contessa34 (Mar 1, 2010)

*No IOR-Boat*

Read a lot in this threat of bad behavior of ior-boats, but it should be made clear that the OOD 34 is not an IOR-boat and truely never was. Right from the beginning it was designed as pure one-design, without a good handicap in mind. So all the ior-features that were responsible for bad habits can´t be found in this boats as hypercritical weight distribution, ior-bumps, internal ballast, small stern sections etc. Indeed the OOD 34 has a rather full underbody aft with clean lines and no distortions. a deep lead keel of 1650 kilos give a mere 44% ballast, wich makes for a very stiff boat compared to most racers ( and cruisers) of that era. Weight on the rail really helps when racing, but for cruising you can go with the No1 genoa up to 18 knots true. Downwind and reaching, she is not the fastest boat around, but pretty steady with no tendencies to death rolls or even cranky behavior.



sahara said:


> These boats needed a lot of weight on the rail - when powered up for racing. Cruisers don't usually sail that way. They were broaches looking for a place to happen on a powered up spinnaker reach. Cruisers don't do that, either. They also rolled badly downwind under an oscillating spinnaker - another thing cruisers avoid.
> 
> A lot of the bad behavior of IOR boats occurred mainly when they were being pushed hard. Cruisers should reef early and often.
> 
> ...


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

But maybe not a good choice for long distance cruising after you load 3000 to 4000 lbs on board. Great coastal cruiser though.


----------



## john treuge (Sep 3, 2018)

I owned this boat, K9110, from 1986 until sold around 2004/5. The original owner was Brigadier Sir Frederick Lindsey Coates BT who entered the boat in the '79 Fastnet and retired before the worst of the storm hit the fleet. When I sold the boat it still had its Fastnet entry plaque as well as one from the Gotland Runt race in Sweden. Contrary to what one respondent assumed, this boat was not sailed across the Atlantic but was shipped from Southampton to San Francisco, below decks on a car carrier that also carried such things as backhoes, Jaguars, etc. For that voyage it sat in a custom made cradle that Jeremy Rodgers made for me in the shape of the hull.

Freddie cruised this boat throughout the area around the British Isles, the Baltic and did a number of cruises to Brittany and the Channel Islands. I sailed the boat primarily in the Bay and a few coastal races. I would note that among other well known owners were Robin Knox-Johnston. For many years, the OOD-34 Class Association was active in racing on the south coast of England. I did an overnight race from Cowes to Alderney as guest crew one summer.

The boat was stored primarily out of the water as I worked in Europe from 1990 on and little time to use it, though when back in California I spent many happy hours maintaining the boat and its gear. Incidentally, a keel bolt modification eliminated the problem cited regarding a keel falling off. Bulldog had that modification done at Jeremy Rodgers boatyard in Lymington. I sold the boat after long and hard thinking about shipping it back to Europe, not having found a berth anywhere within reasonable distance from my retirement home near Sainte Maxime across from St. Tropez. Indeed, the value of the sails was more the final selling price.
The inventory included a new spinnaker from Pineapple never out of the bag, a nearly new fully battened main from Pineapple and four headsails plus storm trysail and jib. Unlike the Peterson 34, Rodgers equipped the OOD-34 with Lewmar 48 3 speed Primary winches, plus halyard winches, on the cabin top and at the base of the mast. It is however, not a boat to single-hand without significant modifications. I also would not consider it a family cruiser for any number of reasons. It is after all, a boat that was designed for One-design racing!

In conclusion, it seemed rather dumb to have the boat unused along with the cost of keeping it that way. I opted to sell it for far less than its value to a seemingly avid sailor with a small budget. By the way, it rated PHRF 114 on the Bay and never was able to sail to that rating.

John Treuge


----------

