Re: Stus-List Thanks for the replies
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-cc-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 CC world. Careful of those comparisons. Our 1990 Canadian built CC 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 CC 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 CC's from Tartan. They are definitely race oriented so the weight will surprise you if you're coming from the Sabre/Tartan/original CC 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
Re: Stus-List Thanks for the replies
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 CC's from Tartan. They are definitely race oriented so the weight will surprise you if you're coming from the Sabre/Tartan/original CC 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
Re: Stus-List Thanks for the replies
They are definitely race oriented so the weight will surprise you if you're coming from the Sabre/Tartan/original CC world. Careful of those comparisons. Our 1990 Canadian built CC 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 CC 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 CC's from Tartan. They are definitely race oriented so the weight will surprise you if you're coming from the Sabre/Tartan/original CC 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
Stus-List Thanks for the replies
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
Re: Stus-List Thanks for the replies
You will love any of the later CCs. They all sail very well Have fun looking. Looking is the best part! Spending is the worst Mike Halifax -Original Message- From: CnC-List [mailto:cnc-list-boun...@cnc-list.com] On Behalf Of Bradford Baker via CnC-List Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 3:31 PM To: cnc-list@cnc-list.com Cc: Bradford Baker Subject: Stus-List Thanks for the replies 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
