Looking for opinions on whether or not one thinks that a C&C 33 is
capable of handling big oceans. The C&C has a fin keel drawing 5.5'
with a free standing spade rudder. Should making a transatlantic
passage even be considered?
Thanks for any advice and/or opinion.
Rob

On 28 Dec 2005 11:13:00 -0800, wrote:

Looking for opinions on whether or not one thinks that a C&C 33 is
capable of handling big oceans. The C&C has a fin keel drawing 5.5'
with a free standing spade rudder. Should making a transatlantic
passage even be considered?

=========================================

Probably not.

It's certainly a decent boat depending on condition and equipment, but
it wouldn't be my first choice. It was built as a coastal
racer/cruiser in the 1970s and is quite competent at that although
outdated. If in totally original condition, the engine, deck coring
and rigging should all be regarded as highly suspect at this point.

Others will no doubt disagree, but I personally regard 40 to 45 feet
as about the minimum for halfway comfortable offshore cruising. Other
than length, the other qualities I'd look for are heavy displacement,
redundant systems, quality construction reputation, strong hatches and
ports, small cockpit, simple rig, longer keel and a deep bilge.

In article .com,
wrote:
Looking for opinions on whether or not one thinks that a C&C 33 is
capable of handling big oceans. The C&C has a fin keel drawing 5.5'
with a free standing spade rudder. Should making a transatlantic
passage even be considered?
Thanks for any advice and/or opinion.
Rob

I would say, that given the boat is seaworthy (including possibly some
upgrades, has the proper equipment, and the skipper/crew is up for it,
then a qualified yes. C&Cs, depending on the boat, year, condition,
are great boats.

A lot of qualifications, but that's typical for all boats.




--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

In article ,
Wayne.B wrote:
On 28 Dec 2005 11:13:00 -0800, wrote:

Looking for opinions on whether or not one thinks that a C&C 33 is
capable of handling big oceans. The C&C has a fin keel drawing 5.5'
with a free standing spade rudder. Should making a transatlantic
passage even be considered?

=========================================

Probably not.

It's certainly a decent boat depending on condition and equipment, but
it wouldn't be my first choice. It was built as a coastal
racer/cruiser in the 1970s and is quite competent at that although
outdated. If in totally original condition, the engine, deck coring
and rigging should all be regarded as highly suspect at this point.

Others will no doubt disagree, but I personally regard 40 to 45 feet
as about the minimum for halfway comfortable offshore cruising. Other
than length, the other qualities I'd look for are heavy displacement,
redundant systems, quality construction reputation, strong hatches and
ports, small cockpit, simple rig, longer keel and a deep bilge.

I would definitely take these comments with a big grain of salt. C&Cs
have a fine reputation as seaworthy boats (given all the usual
suspects). Sure, it would be nice to have something in the 40-45 foot
range, but lots and lots of smaller boats cross the pond with no
problems whatsoever.

Saying that all the stuff should be regarded as highly suspect isn't
saying much since all boats should be looked at with great care before
making a crossing commitment. Anything less is just foolish.




--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On 28 Dec 2005 11:13:00 -0800, wrote:

Looking for opinions on whether or not one thinks that a C&C 33 is
capable of handling big oceans. The C&C has a fin keel drawing 5.5'
with a free standing spade rudder. Should making a transatlantic
passage even be considered?
Thanks for any advice and/or opinion.

This is very, very dependent on condition of the boat and rigging and
condition of the crew. C&C 33s are old coastal boats frequently run
hard as club racers. If in freshwater, they probably have original
rigging, which you'd want to switch up to 1/4" or better, 5/16th for
open ocean work.

You'd also want to replace original sheaves and running rigging.
Offshore is no place to untangle a halyard.

The coach-house is borderline in my opinion in strength for heavy
weather, and the fixed plexiglass portlights will NOT take a boarding
sea in a blow. Similarly, the bunks are not commonly rigged for sea,
nor is the galley ideal.

Being more racer than cruiser, the C&C 33 would sail close-hauled
well, but she's tender and the motion would be tough on the crew. I
would also question the suitability of the compainway hatch (usually
plexi or plywood drop boards, the size of the scuppers, the smallish
main for downwind work and the boat's parsimonious cargo space and
tankage. Lastly, a lot of them still have Atomic 4s, and you simply
can't carry enough gas on a C&C 33 (safely, at least) to run the
alternator to keep your batteries charged on a three week or worse
crossing. Even with a smaller-sipping diesel, the tankage (usually 20
gallons or less) will not suffice.

My point of view is from owning a very similar (but even narrower)
C&C-designed Viking 33 with a near identical sail plan and layout.

I have always maintained that while my boat is strong enough to
survive a blow, it might kill the crew G. I would take my boat to
Newfoundland, or to the Caribbean, unquestionably, but it's just not
the right boat for the Atlantic. Better you should borrow a Contessa
26 or a Westsail 32...proven, if plodding, offshore designs that will
get you there with no glamour, maybe, but plenty of security.

YMMV,
R.

A nicely balanced reply.... I mostly agree, although I think it wouldn't
take that much to fit her for a crossing, given all else is right.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"rhys" wrote in message
...
On 28 Dec 2005 11:13:00 -0800, wrote:

Looking for opinions on whether or not one thinks that a C&C 33 is
capable of handling big oceans. The C&C has a fin keel drawing 5.5'
with a free standing spade rudder. Should making a transatlantic
passage even be considered?
Thanks for any advice and/or opinion.

This is very, very dependent on condition of the boat and rigging and
condition of the crew. C&C 33s are old coastal boats frequently run
hard as club racers. If in freshwater, they probably have original
rigging, which you'd want to switch up to 1/4" or better, 5/16th for
open ocean work.

You'd also want to replace original sheaves and running rigging.
Offshore is no place to untangle a halyard.

The coach-house is borderline in my opinion in strength for heavy
weather, and the fixed plexiglass portlights will NOT take a boarding
sea in a blow. Similarly, the bunks are not commonly rigged for sea,
nor is the galley ideal.

Being more racer than cruiser, the C&C 33 would sail close-hauled
well, but she's tender and the motion would be tough on the crew. I
would also question the suitability of the compainway hatch (usually
plexi or plywood drop boards, the size of the scuppers, the smallish
main for downwind work and the boat's parsimonious cargo space and
tankage. Lastly, a lot of them still have Atomic 4s, and you simply
can't carry enough gas on a C&C 33 (safely, at least) to run the
alternator to keep your batteries charged on a three week or worse
crossing. Even with a smaller-sipping diesel, the tankage (usually 20
gallons or less) will not suffice.

My point of view is from owning a very similar (but even narrower)
C&C-designed Viking 33 with a near identical sail plan and layout.

I have always maintained that while my boat is strong enough to
survive a blow, it might kill the crew G. I would take my boat to
Newfoundland, or to the Caribbean, unquestionably, but it's just not
the right boat for the Atlantic. Better you should borrow a Contessa
26 or a Westsail 32...proven, if plodding, offshore designs that will
get you there with no glamour, maybe, but plenty of security.

YMMV,
R.

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 14:28:06 -0800, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

A nicely balanced reply.... I mostly agree, although I think it wouldn't
take that much to fit her for a crossing, given all else is right.

Well, thanks. C&C 33s are very common at my club and on Lake Ontario
in general, and while they are fine boats and can take 40 knots in a
squall...I just don't think there's enough beef to keep the sea out in
the original configuration. Particularly the portlights and the
hatches...as I am currently replacing these on my similarly aged boat,
I just don't a quarter-inch of 7x 21" plexi staying in its frame if
hit on the beam...

They're fine boats, though...just not equipped for three weeks in the
North Atlantic. Also, being old fin keelers, they don't hove to
particularly well, and you wouldn't want to take on much water in
those flat bilges.

You know something, though? If the choice is between going and not
going, maybe you should hop to St. John's, Nfld. and see how it goes
inshore. If you find it acceptable and the boat well-found enough,
then you can do the 2,000 mile hop to Ireland...which is colder, but
shorter.

R.

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 00:14:51 GMT, Commodore Joe Redcloud
wrote:

The only real issue particular to that model is that the original rudder was a
bit too small for some situations.

====================================

That's true also but I thought Rhys hit the nail right on the head
with his list of issues.

On 28 Dec 2005 12:34:44 -0800, lid (Jonathan Ganz)
wrote:

lots and lots of smaller boats cross the pond with no
problems whatsoever.

===============================

That's true. I know a guy who went round trip in a J-35 one summer.

That doesn't make it the right boat though.

For what it's worth, he bought an Endeavor 42 after that.

In article .com,
wrote:

Looking for opinions on whether or not one thinks that a C&C 33 is
capable of handling big oceans. The C&C has a fin keel drawing 5.5'
with a free standing spade rudder. Should making a transatlantic
passage even be considered?
Thanks for any advice and/or opinion.
Rob

Just to punch up one item: The boat is *probably* strong enough or can
be upgraded so that it is. Is the crew?

Sister ships to our Xan (below) have done the trip, one did it twice. I
have a fair amount of skill and experience and we don't skimp on
upgrades and repairs, so she may be stronger than new.

We won't be doing it soon. There's too much we want to see on this side
of the pond.

My opinion is that too many people get the "right" boat for a trip they
*might* do. My experience is that those who get the boat they can
actually use for the next 5-7 years come out ahead. Few who DO strike
out to blue water do it in the boat they originally thought they *had*
to have.

We got Xan for the what we expected to do in 5 years. A dozen years
later, we've done far more than that and STILL see her serving us well
for the next five. When we need a bigger boat for a weekend or so, we
rent it.

Unless we hit the lottery, we intend to keep Xan until after we've done
at least 3 months in the Bahamas or similar to see if we like living
aboard. (It's scheduled for the next time I'm between jobs, which might
be retirement the way things are going at work, darn it.)

If we decide long distance isn't for us, she'll do just fine at the end
of our retirement home's dock.

In the meantime, our "wish list" for that long distance cruiser has
changed many times and the cruising kitty's building quickly while we're
having a HECK of a lot of fun. There's a lot to be said about not paying
the bank interest and having a tough, simple boat that's cheap to
maintain.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/