"rhys" wrote in message
...
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...

Every C&C I've been on had hatch problems, but fixable.

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.

Hmm... actually, my experience has been that they do fine. I've sailed on
the 40, 38, 36, and 34 of various ages and general conditions, but that
wasn't a problem I observed.

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.

I believe in sea trials.....

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/

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 06:05:10 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:

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.

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

You raise an interesting point there. A boat that is well suited for
living aboard is not necessarily the right one for crossing oceans. I
agree with your other point that so few people actually cross oceans
in small sail boats that it does not make sense to purchase a boat for
that purpose unless you are really going to do it.

Most people get a very quick reality check after spending a few days
going to windward on the open ocean, and quickly change their mind
regarding the "right" boat.

In article ,
Wayne.B wrote:

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 06:05:10 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:

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.

You raise an interesting point there. A boat that is well suited for
living aboard is not necessarily the right one for crossing oceans. I
agree with your other point that so few people actually cross oceans
in small sail boats that it does not make sense to purchase a boat for
that purpose unless you are really going to do it.

Most people get a very quick reality check after spending a few days
going to windward on the open ocean, and quickly change their mind
regarding the "right" boat.

Personally, I'd choose a boat that has the least flaws for the 90% of
what we do over one that had the best sailing qualities. The right set
of sails can make any reasonably-strong boat acceptable, even if not
ideal.

To my mind, being able to live together aboard the boat is a primary
consideration, mostly because my lady isn't sure she could stand being
with me 24/7 in such a confined space -- and let's acknowledge that even
a 60' cat can get pretty small for two.

We did quite well on a 25-day trip, but knowing that we *were* returning
might have helped. From what I've heard and read, it's only after a year
or so on an open-ended cruise that a crew really knows whether they can
live aboard in harmony.

The other aspect of liveaboard is that long distance cruisers spend
90-95% of their time on the hook by actual survey (Cornell, at least).
Understanding what's required to enjoy that vs. what would be nice can
only be gained by doing. [In the tropics, dryers are the #1 most-useless
addition, closely followed by ovens.]

--
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/

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 00:41:20 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:

The other aspect of liveaboard is that long distance cruisers spend
90-95% of their time on the hook by actual survey (Cornell, at least).

And another 5 to 8% is spent under power. Here in SWFL it's more like
5 to 10%.

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 06:05:10 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:


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.

That's why I suggested a Contessa or a Westsail. But I also said "go
and see", even though, having taken out a sister ship in 40 knots of
Lake Ontario (which is harsh weather with square, three/four metre
pounding waves, not long swells or rollers), I would question the
amount of exhaustion a boat of this type might dish out.

Having few ways to comfortably "park" in a blow would be a bigger
problem than most of the more or less remediable ? issues, like
stronger hatches and small tankage.

I will say one thing: I would take a 25 year old C&C over most of
today's production boats. Those big cockpits and companionways and
wide saloons would give me the heebies in a high sea.

R.