[C320-list] 1996 vs. 2000

[Jeffrey Hare]

There's one very huge (in my opinion) advantage to the large aft cabin
hatch...

At anchor in the middle of the night, I can simply push open the hatch,
stand up, look around to see where I am.  If we're still where we should be,
I sit back down and go to sleep.  Otherwise, it's one step up through the
hatch and I'm on deck.  No need to climb over the wife, remove hatch boards
and walk outside to see that..

Can't beat that convenience... :)

-Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: David J Gleason [mailto:djgleason1 at juno.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 6:27 PM
To: c320-list at catalina320.com
Cc: c320-list at catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] 1996 vs. 2000

Mike:

I go along with Adam on getting more boat for the money on the older model.
I purchased a 94 in 99 and turned down a 96 model as there was then a 10,000
difference.  That difference is now probably only 1,000. 
As for the difference in airflow in the aft cabin, I solved that by
installing a fan.  I took out the door that opens into the area where the
steering quadrant is located and put in a reversible 3 speed fan.  I leave
one of the stern locker lids propped open and get great airflow in warm
weather.  I put up a small plastic shield over the opening so I do not get
water into the boat when it rains.

Dave Gleason
Proud Mary, #1150

On Tue, 15 May 2007 21:14:38 -0700 "Adam Weiner"
<esquirecatering at rcn.com> writes:
> I personally would take the older boat (I happen to have a 1996) and 
> use the 20k difference to tweak the boat the way you want it, not the 
> way Catalina has changed it.  For example, a new electrical panel 
> (which is a slight problem on the 1996) can be replaced for a few 
> hundred dollars, the teak grab rail by the sink can be purchased at 
> West Marine for under $20.  The better airflow in the aft cabin is 
> only an issue if you stay on board often in warm areas.  Replumbing 
> the fridge is not really a major issue, and for 20k in savings I can 
> really put up with awkward light switches.  The problem of the shallow 
> bilge was resolved with a PSS prop seal.
> 
> However, 20k could buy you a lot of new electronics, sails (you didn't 
> mention the condition for either boat of the sales), a cruising 
> asymmetrical and all the hardware, etc. and still have over 10k left 
> over for your cruising kitty.
> 
> By the way, you are probably more likely to negotiate the price down 
> more on the older boat.
> 
> Something else that you didn't mention is: how long do you intend to 
> keep the boat.  When I bought mine in was seven years old and I 
> planned on keeping it for 25 years.  Thus, resale was not an issue.  
> If you plan on keeping it for a relatively short period of time than 
> the newer boat may have a higher resale value.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: c320-list-bounces at catalina320.com 
> [mailto:c320-list-bounces at catalina320.com] On Behalf Of 
> jonvez at comcast.net
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 11:50 AM
> To: C320-List
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] 1996 vs. 2000
> 
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> First of all good luck...They really are great boats. Here is my two 
> cents and strictly personal preference:
> 
> At the end of the day, this is a personal choice with the factors of 
> cost, shape of the boat etc. being the ultimate factors--but I don't 
> think you can make a 'wrong' decision here.
> 
> I would go for the newer boat and try to negotiate down that big $ 
> difference for the following reasons:
> 
> 1) One of the nice things about Catalina is that they are regularly 
> upgrading and tweaking aspects of the boat from year to year. So the 
> 2000 will have some improvements garnered over the previous 4 years.
> 
> 2)Age is an enemy of all of us, and boats are no different. Sounds 
> like the '96 wasn't used that much and that's not necessarily a good 
> thing.
> You would have to check for what shape everything from hoses to 
> gaskets to pumps and even hardware bedding is like on both boats. Idle 
> time can be worse than regular usage.
> 
> 3) Engine hours. I would be curious to see if an engine mechanic would 
> actually find the engine with more hours 'healthier' than the one 
> hardly ever used. Diesels require regular use and we are often guilty 
> of underusing our engines (those pesky sail things :)).
> 
> --On the other hand the 96 will probably represent better value from 
> the depreciation perspective, the price difference is pretty 
> significant at this point, and there is no 'bad year' for our 
> 320's--they're all great...
> 
> .....Good luck
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jon Vez
> 
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "Mike Paris" <mikepxx at adelphia.net>
> 
> > I'm looking into purchasing a C320 (my first boat). I'm seeking
> input
> > as to
> > potential problems of going with an older boat (1996) vs. a
> somewhat
> newer one
> > (2000). The 1996 has less than 100 hours on its engine and the
> 2000
> has
> > approximately 350 hours. The difference in price is $20k. Are
> there
> some common
> > problems that I should be looking for? What other considerations
> should affect
> > my choice? Of course I'll be having a survey performed once I make
> a
> preliminary
> > decision. Thanks! 
> 
> 
>