[C320-list] Seaworthiness

Sat Apr 21 17:04:19 PDT 2007

I think it was late 1994 production of 1995 models and around hull #250.

> [Original Message]
> From: John Frost <john at frostnet.net>
> To: <catalina at thehares.com>; C320-List <c320-list at catalina320.com>
> Date: 4/21/07 2:27:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Seaworthiness
>
> When did the newer bilge design cut into production?
>
> Best Regards,
> John
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: c320-list-bounces at catalina320.com
> [mailto:c320-list-bounces at catalina320.com] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Hare
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 10:43 AM
> To: 'C320-List'
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Seaworthiness
>
> Hi Don,
>
>   Your hull is not the newer bilge design.  The problems you state don't
> really exist on the hulls after the bilge was added.  True, that some of
the
> limber holes are not as large as they should be and debris could clog
them.
> But if anyone's planning on the stock bilge pump to keep a boat this size
> floating in the event of major water inflow, that to me is the real joke.
> If you want a dry boat, you have to do the things necessary to keep water
> out in the first place.
>
> On our hull, the boat doesn't have the same grid design as yours.  Many of
> the hulls of your age have already had the factory recommended stringer
mods
> made, and either GFO or PSS added to keep the inside dry.  It's not really
> that big of a problem, unless you choose not to do the aforemenioned.
>
> Cheers!
> -Jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: brer at adelphia.net [mailto:brer at adelphia.net] 
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 10:49 AM
> To: C320-List
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Seaworthiness
>
> I must commend you on taking an early 320 more than a few feet from the
> dock. The bilge system in these is an absolute joke. Any water that leaks
> anywhere on this boat goes under the floor pan, not the so called bilge.
The
> only water that does go to this so called bilge is from the stuffing box,
> but be careful if the hoses that enter are not sealed, the water will leak
> OUT of the bilge. Who in their right mind would design a boat with this
joke
> of a bilge? And yes, I bought one of these follies, my bad for not
checking
> the bilge system out, but I never in my wildest dreams would believe
someone
> would design something like this. Looks to me like Frank and the boys need
> to get out of the boat business and design bathtubs. So anyone thinking
> about buying an early 320 think again or you will be removing the sole and
> drilling holes to get the water out. Seaworthiness? You be the judge. But
> Larry I'm glad you had a good trip sounds like fun.
>
> Don  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---- Larry Frank <WindSwept at stx.rr.com> wrote: 
>
> =============
> I sailed my 320 across the Gulf of Mexico from Texas to Veracruz, MX in a
> regatta during the summer of 2006.  That trip and others in the Gulf of
> Mexico along the Texas coast in the in rather snotty weather have helped
me
> form opinions about the 320s seaworthiness.  My observations:
>
> 1.  Good seamanship trumps all other considerations.  Or said another way
in
> any boat bad decisions or poor preparation can and probably will lead to
> problems and disaster.  
>
> 2.  Tracking is a weak point.  Big seas on a beam or broad reach push the
> rather broad stern around rather easily.  Proper sail balance is critical.
> I have the wing keel; perhaps this is better with the fin.  Anyways,
> steering by autopilot in large seas is not effective.  Manual steering
will
> wear out crew quickly.  Could a wind vane be mounted?  
>
> 3.  Fuel capacity is low.  Most people carry jerry cans and while this
> works, it is less than optimal.
>
> 4.  Structurally, the hull and rigging, if properly maintained will take a
> licking and keep on ticking.  I never had problems or concerns here, and
> have had complements from knowledgeable and experienced crew on this
point.
>
> 5.  Open transom is a huge plus, at least in my opinion.  When we
purchased
> WindSwept, this was a concern to me.  After getting pooped going downwind
in
> 35 knots and big seas in the gulf and watching the water drain out in a
> couple of seconds, I completely changed my opinion of this feature.
>
> 6.  For serious offshore work, some modifications and additions to the
basic
> 320 are prudent.  What you need to do will somewhat be a function of what
> model year you have since Catalina makes improvements in design as a model
> matures. 
>
> I believe the person who told you "you might want a larger boat" was
> completely accurate.  I'd like a larger boat too for this type of sailing.
> However, the question should be can you do what you want to do in the boat
> you have now?  Unless you own the Queen Mary, there are always larger,
more
> capable boats.
>
> Larry
> Wind Swept Catalina 320 #246
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: c320-list-bounces at catalina320.com
> [mailto:c320-list-bounces at catalina320.com] On Behalf Of Robert Seastream
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 3:02 PM
> To: C320-List
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Seaworthiness
>
> I've often wondered why, not long ago (~20 years) people did crossings in
> ~25 foot boats, yet these days upwards of 40 feet is indicated.
>
> Recently, while discussing going to Bermuda in my 320 (off list), I was
told
> I might want a larger boat like the above.
>
> Bob Seastream
> 'Intuition' hull 906
>
>
> On Apr 19, 2007, at 9:12 AM, pat reynolds wrote:
>
> > If any have wondered about ocean crossing on a 320, it would probably 
> > be safer than the google map directions for a new york to paris, 
> > france trip, particularly direction # 23 at www.google.com
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
>
>