Heh..... here is the sailcalc comparison between a Sea Sprite 34 & the
Nordica 30. I believe the Nordica 30 has a 180 PHRF. I think the telling
factor lies in the displacement to LWL which places the Sea Sprite in the
very heavy cruiser class at over 400.

Performance Comparison LOA Sea Sprite 34 34.08

Nordica 30 29.49

LWL Sea Sprite 34 24.26

Nordica 30 25

Beam Sea Sprite 34 10.4

Nordica 30 9.77

Displacement Sea Sprite 34 13208

Nordica 30 10220

Sail Area Sea Sprite 34 535

Nordica 30 502

Capsize Ratio Sea Sprite 34 1.76

Nordica 30 1.8

Hull Speed Sea Sprite 34 6.6

Nordica 30 6.7

Sail Area to Displacement Sea Sprite 34 15.32

Nordica 30 17.06

Displacement to LWL Sea Sprite 34 413

Nordica 30 292

LWL to Beam Sea Sprite 34 2.33

Nordica 30 2.56

Motion Comfort Sea Sprite 34 32.9

Nordica 30 28.57

Pounds/Inch Sea Sprite 34 902

Nordica 30 873


"Maxprop" wrote in message

I'll grant that CCA-type boats were relatively common in the 40s and 50s,
but not today. She never fails to attract compliments and photographers
like flies every time she's on the water. And at the dock. Her curving
sheerline and aesthetic overhangs never fail to draw praise and smiles.

That would be a serious mistake if you chose to race against my boat in,
say, a fin keel Catalina 34 with a PHRF of 144. My boat tends to sail
with C34s upwind and beats them easily off the wind or downwind. My boat
placed second in her class in the Chicago-Mac. Her rating of 190 is a
gift.


The Nordic isn't the prettiest of the canoe stern boats, but it is better
looking than, say, something with a horrendous, big-ass swim platform.

Max