11' must be an error in the data on Sailboatdata.com http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=4370
JOHN KRETSCHMER in Sailing Magazine, from February 2001 said "Either the optional 5-foot shoal-draft or 8-foot deep-draft keel is available." http://sailingmagazine.net/article-416-c&c-121.html Bob Perry, also in Sailing Magazine said much the same thing "Three keels are available drawing 8 feet; 6 feet, 6 inches; or 5 feet." http://svpaws.net/Site/Resources_files/Perry%20Design%20Review%3A%20C%26C%20110%20Express.pdf A few more sources: http://svpaws.net/Site/Resources_files/Top%2010%202.jpeg http://svpaws.net/Site/Resources_files/Brochure%20specs.pdf On 29 July 2015 at 18:27, John Pennie <j...@svpaws.net> wrote: > 11' keel? > > John > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Jul 29, 2015, at 4:29 PM, Ken Heaton <kenhea...@gmail.com> wrote: > > "They are definitely race oriented so the weight will surprise you if > you're coming from the Sabre/Tartan/original C&C world." > > > Careful of those comparisons. Our 1990 Canadian built C&C 37/40 XL has a > displacement of 15,900 lbs, of which 7,200 is lead in the 8' deep keel, so > our boat, less the keel, displaces 8,700 lbs. > > A 1999 C&C 121 has a displacement of 14,100 lbs, of which 5,500 > is lead in the 11' deep keel. 8,600 lbs without the keel. 100 lbs is not > much difference and if our keel was 11' deep we could likely get away with > only 5,500 lbs. of lead too. > > True, the older ones were heavier... > > Ken H. > > On 29 July 2015 at 17:10, John Pennie via CnC-List <cnc-list@cnc-list.com> > wrote: > >> Did the same thing, looked at several J's before coming to my senses and >> jumping on the 121. We use her as a fast cruiser and occasional racer. The >> only real negative with the Tartan built boats was the interior varnish. >> They opted to save a few dollars per boat and use an interior grade finish >> with limited uv tolerance. They also had some issues with the first epoxy >> hulls around 2002 but you would think any issues on a particular boat would >> have surfaced by now. >> >> Really like all of the C&C's from Tartan. They are definitely race >> oriented so the weight will surprise you if you're coming from the >> Sabre/Tartan/original C&C world. >> >> Having owned a Sabre 386 I can tell you they are not even in the same >> league in terms of performance. Beautiful construction however. >> >> John >> >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> > On Jul 29, 2015, at 2:31 PM, Bradford Baker via CnC-List < >> cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote: >> > >> > In response to my questions about later models C & Cs. We’re not >> planning any racing, but as an ex-racer I’d rather have something that’s >> faster and handles better. >> > Draft is a consideration, but we’re o.k. with anything up to 6.5' >> > We’ve looked at a lot of Js in the same size range as well. >> > Originally lookes at Sabres which were certainly well built but much >> slower based on PHRF data. >> > >> > In Tampa Bay, where I'm thinking that Mother Nature always bats last. >> > >> > Bradford W. Baker >> > bradba...@mac.com >> > 8308 Old Town Drive >> > Tampa, FL 33647 >> > 813-528-3291 >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > >> > Email address: >> > CnC-List@cnc-list.com >> > To change your list preferences, including unsubscribing -- go to the >> bottom of page at: >> > http://cnc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/cnc-list_cnc-list.com >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Email address: >> CnC-List@cnc-list.com >> To change your list preferences, including unsubscribing -- go to the >> bottom of page at: >> http://cnc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/cnc-list_cnc-list.com >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Email address: CnC-List@cnc-list.com To change your list preferences, including unsubscribing -- go to the bottom of page at: http://cnc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/cnc-list_cnc-list.com
