[C320-list] Upwind performance

[Andrew Santangelo]

Though a fin keel C320 does fine against the C&C.

Andrew Santangelo

C320 "Dawn Treader"
#333
San Francisco, CA

J22 "Blitzkrieg"
Elephant Butte, New Mexico



On Apr 3, 2013, at 6:14 PM, bkuether at comcast.net wrote:

> Wing keel 320 compared to a 32 C&C?
> 
> That’s a joke right?
> 
> I had a C&C.  I could sail that boat damn near straight into the wind.
> 
> Not so much with the Catalina.
> 
> I bought the Catalina to be comfortable for the family, and NOT be the (completely) last boat to the anchorage.    Its actually not terribly slow. Helps to have a folding prop  :)
> 
> The C&C would be there first and all the beer would be gone by the time the rest showed up.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Rick Thompson
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:46 PM
> To: Catalina 320 Owners
> Subject: [C320-list] Upwind performance
> 
> Hello everyone,
> My wife and I are seriously considering purchasing a C320 for cruising and racing phrf on Lake of the Woods, Ontario.
> We just sold our first keelboat , a Mirage 25,  the past week.
> 
> We like the huge interior and  2 separate cabins and swim transom.
> 
> Because LOW is in the Canadian shield there are definite low water  hazards. Most are well charted.
> 
> I was wondering if you racer/ cruisers could give me feedback on the C320 performance with both wing and fin keel?
> I've also noticed that the Catalina's seem to be heavier than similar length boats, also. Heavier construction? More material due to carrying more beam?
> Upwind performance is important because LOW has many islands so you  always seem to be beating the wind to get around them.
> How would the performance of a C320 compare to say a C&C32? The C&C has a similar phrf at 150, narrower beam and lighter at about 9800lb.
> Of course it's the older traditional design, without the open transom, 2 cabins etc.
> Thanks,
> Rick Thompson
> 
> R Thompson =