Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sailed on one for WIRW a few years back.  Nice boat.  The boat had been raced hard but still looked to be in great condition.  I wouldn't hesitate to buy one if you can find one. 

This boat had symmetrical kites and in breeze it took two people to do the pole.  The smallest person on the boat had no trouble bringing the class 100% headsail in in decent breeze.

The boats are a trifle underpowered in light air because of the non-overlapping headsail.  

I sailed on a different one with asymmetrical kites a few times.  The kites are so large in that case that gybing was not a lot easier than doing the pole on the symmetrical boat.  Getting the big kite around the forestay was a bit tricky.  

Not a good short-handed boat if the kites are symmetrical.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, port tack said:

Pros cons ?   Looking for a more comfortable boat for fun racing.  How are they holding up?   I did search.  Flame away.

Thanks

Why bother when there are so many significantly better designers than Tim Jackett.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like maybe you I supose?  Tim has designed for C&C/Tartan for many, many years.  Rob Ball obviously thought him qualified...Last time I raced at Key West, the C&C 115 in our class beat both of the Beneteau 40.7s and all of the J/109s.  Does that make Bruce Farr and Rod Johnstone less better than Tim Jackett?

Serious question:  What do you think makes someone more or less "better" as a designer of sailboats?  

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Crash said:

Like maybe you I supose? 

Serious question: what's wrong with you? Why do you magnify a simple difference of opinion into a death cage match with "two men in one man out" ?

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had my 115 since 2005.  It is a good, solid boat that I would recommend.  We use it mostly for racing, but have cruised with it also.  The boat can compete with other boats in its ratings band very nicely.  I have found it requires 6 to sail competitively, as you need a good bowman, mastman, two trimmers, main trimmer, and skipper.  Having a good mainsheet trimmer is the key to making the boat go.  We only fly asym spinnakers and can either tack it to the bow, if shorthanded, or use a pole.  It is not a good boat if you want to double hand, as the large wheel makes it difficult to move forward from the helm position.  However, my wife and I can handle it just fine for cruising.  It is a bit sticky in light winds due to the 105% jib, and we are adding a Code Zero to alleviate that issue.  If comfort is an issue, it has a very nice interior, one that will make your significant other happy.  It is a true racer/cruiser, not a flat out racer.  I have had no major issues with the boat, just the normal nit picky stuff that always crops up.  If you want to have a good race boat, but one that is also cruiser friendly, you can't go wrong with the 115.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, glass said:

Serious question: what's wrong with you? Why do you magnify a simple difference of opinion into a death cage match with "two men in one man out" ?

Sorry, you’re right, that was “internet snarky” and uncalled for.  I apologize.  But the question re Tim Jackett stands. Which designers do you think are “significantly “ better, and what, in your opinion, makes a designer better or worse?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Crash said:

Sorry, you’re right, that was “internet snarky” and uncalled for.  I apologize.  But the question re Tim Jackett stands. Which designers do you think are “significantly “ better, and what, in your opinion, makes a designer better or worse?

I can't help you if you can not see  potential problems when an egotistic owner of a boat building company appoints himself as the chief designer.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, glass said:

I can't help you if you can not see  potential problems when an egotistic owner of a boat building company appoints himself as the chief designer.

Like Frank Butler?  Or Rod Johnstone?

And Tim Jackett was their chief designer well before he became management.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The are pretty boats with great interiors and seem to sail well. Some of the Jackett designed C&C's had delamination problems in the epoxy  hull. Its fairly well documented on the internet. We had a 99 at our club have a structural delamination failure and the insurance company totaled it. I believe it was aft of the keel The guy only owned it for a year, but never had a survey done before he bought it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Crash said:

Like maybe you I supose?  Tim has designed for C&C/Tartan for many, many years.  Rob Ball obviously thought him qualified...Last time I raced at Key West, the C&C 115 in our class beat both of the Beneteau 40.7s and all of the J/109s.  Does that make Bruce Farr and Rod Johnstone less better than Tim Jackett?

Serious question:  What do you think makes someone more or less "better" as a designer of sailboats?  

 

That was most likely "Primal Scream" a very successful 115, which has won KWRW, CRW and other major regattas. They were a pretty strong program 10 years ago. Are they still around? I have a friend who bought a 115 a couple years and could use their tuning numbers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've raced on @Goatish's 110. It's setup with big A-Kites and not symmetric kites. It also had a big overlapping (150-155%) Genoa.

I find it a being in a bit of a transition from the older masthead C&Cs and a modern fractional rig and hull shape. It felt sticky in light air even with the genoa but it was always a joy once you could get the kite up on a reach or run. Slammed a bit more than I would like for a cruising boat upwind and I've heard some complaints about the transom slapping in a wavy anchorage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, glass said:

I can't help you if you can not see  potential problems when an egotistic owner of a boat building company appoints himself as the chief designer.

So...what your saying is you either can't or won't actually answer my question?  OBTW, the owner of Tartan is Marine Manufacturing Group, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Seattle Yachts International.  They bought Tartan/Legacy in April of 2020.  I believe prior to that the owner was Steve Malbasa who bought the company in 2010...

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Squalamax said:

That was most likely "Primal Scream" a very successful 115, which has won KWRW, CRW and other major regattas. They were a pretty strong program 10 years ago. Are they still around? I have a friend who bought a 115 a couple years and could use their tuning numbers. 

That was indeed Primal Scream @ KWRW 2008.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Crash said:

So...what your saying is you either can't or won't actually answer my question?  OBTW, the owner of Tartan is Marine Manufacturing Group, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Seattle Yachts International.  They bought Tartan/Legacy in April of 2020.  I believe prior to that the owner was Steve Malbasa who bought the company in 2010...

Apparently you still have not learned not to piss into the wind.

I doubt that your idol Tim Jackett ever made it into the Top Ten Sailboat Designers List.

 

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a Top Ten Sailboat Designers List?

To the OP.  Caveat Emptor  The following comments were made after surveying a 2003 C&C 99: 

Upon hauling the vessel it was discovered that there was major keel stub/keel box damage.  The keel stub an integral part of the hull structure was noted to be fractured at the root forward section and movement was visible when the keel portion of the ballast package was moved.  Some hull panel flexure adjacent the keel stub was also noted.

Further discovery was effected by removal of the cabin sole.  It was found that the keel floor reinforcement system had become detached from the hull panel and keel stud/sump.

The following comments were made after surveying a 2013 C&C 101:

Visual observation of the keel studs immediately revealed visible movement of the hull skin as the vessel heeled under dynamic loading.  It was clearly evident that the hull skin/ was moving in concert with the keel studs as a direct result of the loads of the keel installation.  The Grid structure was not being properly utilized to distribute the loads of the keel as was the design intention.  All loading was clearly centralized to the hull skin.  Fracturing of the Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic laminates was also observed and clearly seen to be working under sailing loads.  As the sailing sea trial continued water was observed weeping in via several of the keel studs.  The sailing sea trial was concluded and the vessel returned to the slip.

Now that said, I am sure the above does not apply to all C&C yachts although the QC seems to have been hit and miss in my experience and I know of a C&C 115 that has been raced well in SoCal with good results.  I don't know what condition the keel structure is in though.

Good luck.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 'Bacco said:

 Some of the C&C's had delamination problems in the epoxy  hull. Its fairly well documented on the internet. We had a 99 at our club have a structural delamination failure and the insurance company totaled it. I believe it was aft of the keel The guy only owned it for a year, but never had a survey done before he bought it.

I looked at a 115 but the "newness" and unknown longevity of epoxy type hulls scared me away. How, other than your example, have they generally held up? (if you know)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, glass said:

Serious question: what's wrong with you? Why do you magnify a simple difference of opinion into a death cage match with "two men in one man out" ?

Are you new here?

Oh, wait...

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as longevity and build quality, I really don't think these are bad boats. I have a '99 110, and have had 0 problems with the construction of it, other than the fact it (and all 110s) were delivered well over listed displacement. It would appear that the 115s are a lot more accurately listed, and that those extra 2 feet of length really help the boat sail to its rating.

If set up correctly, I cannot imagine one of these to be hard to sail short handed as I often sail my 110 with a sprit single handed with full A kites without a problem. I would not want to run a symmetric kite on one though if no crew available, as the extra long standard pole would make gybes a handful.

For a comfortable racer cruiser, you really can't go wrong with one, they are a nice yacht like boat inside, while still feeling relatively modern, and having all the amenities a cruiser could want, and they are fun to sail when the wind is up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, glass said:

I can't help you if you can not see  potential problems when an egotistic owner of a boat building company appoints himself as the chief designer.

Like George Cuthbertson?

7 hours ago, Hitchhiker said:

There is a Top Ten Sailboat Designers List?

To the OP.  Caveat Emptor  The following comments were made after surveying a 2003 C&C 99: 

Upon hauling the vessel it was discovered that there was major keel stub/keel box damage.  The keel stub an integral part of the hull structure was noted to be fractured at the root forward section and movement was visible when the keel portion of the ballast package was moved.  Some hull panel flexure adjacent the keel stub was also noted.

Further discovery was effected by removal of the cabin sole.  It was found that the keel floor reinforcement system had become detached from the hull panel and keel stud/sump.

The following comments were made after surveying a 2013 C&C 101:

Visual observation of the keel studs immediately revealed visible movement of the hull skin as the vessel heeled under dynamic loading.  It was clearly evident that the hull skin/ was moving in concert with the keel studs as a direct result of the loads of the keel installation.  The Grid structure was not being properly utilized to distribute the loads of the keel as was the design intention.  All loading was clearly centralized to the hull skin.  Fracturing of the Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic laminates was also observed and clearly seen to be working under sailing loads.  As the sailing sea trial continued water was observed weeping in via several of the keel studs.  The sailing sea trial was concluded and the vessel returned to the slip.

Now that said, I am sure the above does not apply to all C&C yachts although the QC seems to have been hit and miss in my experience and I know of a C&C 115 that has been raced well in SoCal with good results.  I don't know what condition the keel structure is in though.

Good luck.

Sounds like it discovered a rock. I realize no other boats would have sustained any damage, so this must be a bad build.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked at three 115s in the last year. Ended up buying something else, but overall the boats seemed like a decent bang for the buck. One of the boats I looked at had a serious grounding incident. Not sure if I've ever seen so much carbon laid into a keel stub before.  I was looking for the sprit version. Wasn't to many available. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ishmael said:

 

Sounds like it discovered a rock. I realize no other boats would have sustained any damage, so this must be a bad build.

Fuctifino looks to to be an appropriate location for you. Certainlyreadingcomprehensionislacking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hitchhiker said:

Fuctifino looks to to be an appropriate location for you. Certainlyreadingcomprehensionislacking.

Ummmmmm..... I think there was a bit of purple font missing from his post, that probably didn't need to be there for the rest of us, but maybe you needed it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rain Man said:

Ummmmmm..... I think there was a bit of purple font missing from his post, that probably didn't need to be there for the rest of us, but maybe you needed it?

  Learjet for me.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hitchhiker said:

  Learjet for me.  

I think he was saying "if you hit a rock and damage the laminate, you can't blame it on the build" in a facetious way.  The survey report does not make it clear whether the boat did or did not hit a rock.  It may not have, which would then make the damage a build or design issue, but it wasn't explicitly stated.  

The fact that there was a fracture at the stub root at the front of the keel suggests a grounding more than a build issue.  Hope this explanation helps clear things up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rain Man said:

I think he was saying "if you hit a rock and damage the laminate, you can't blame it on the build" in a facetious way.  The survey report does not make it clear whether the boat did or did not hit a rock.  It may not have, which would then make the damage a build or design issue, but it wasn't explicitly stated.  

The fact that there was a fracture at the stub root at the front of the keel suggests a grounding more than a build issue.  Hope this explanation helps clear things up.

Again, reading comprehension is the current cause of loss in this thread. Nowhere was it written that a bulb or keel bottom section sustained a grounding impact, Primarily because they were not.

The text was deliberately edited.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...
48 minutes ago, Willie B said:

Can the laminate be repaired by rebedding the keel or does it need to be retabbed?  Very interested in the discussion.

In the case of the C&C 99, the entire internal grid structure needed to be re-adhered or re-tabbed to the hull shell on the interior. 

In the case of the 101 the entire keel sump area had to be reinforced with new floors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...