Ericson 35 versus Ranger 33

[oldsaltydog]

I am looking at purchasing a Ranger built in 1979
And an Ericson Mk2 35. Both very nice boats
I am leaning towards the Ericson as I feel
It's a better sea boat more displacement and wee bit Beamer.
I would love to hear from anyone who might have some knowledge
On either one of these vessels.
I live in Tasmania Australia and the conditions can be quite
Challenging at times therefore looking for a boat that can be
Quick enough so that I can hold my own at the club on Weekends
and yet stable enough to take on the elements offshore.

[fparry]

Try posting this question over at the Ericson Owners site and see what they have to say about it. ;-)

[oldsaltydog]

Thank You! I will so that

[gjordan]

Search over on the Latitude 38 site. They have written a lot about the Ranger 33. I like both of those boats._____Grant.

[gjordan]

I just noticed a thread over on our Engines and Propulsion forum, titled "Please dont let it be the gearbox". Zeehag has some interesting comments on the Ericson 35. It is worth looking at. Good Luck_______Grant.

[oldsaltydog]

Yea I agree it's not an easy choice as both are
In beautiful condition. Both look sleek and very sexy and
Well balanced boats.
The thing I have noted is that the ballast on the
Ranger is 4500 lbs and on the E35 it's
11904! The draft on the E35 and the Ranger about the same
And the beam on the E35 3" wider. Whether
That means much I don't know. Not sure of the E35 sail area but the Ranger
Is 529sq ft. Still huge diff in ballast. U would have to
Think the E35 would be a better sea boat.
I will check lat 38. Thanks

[gjordan]

Salty dog, the displacement of the Ericson is 11,400lbs, not the ballast. Both the Ranger and the Ericson have 42 to 43% ballast to displacement ratio, so unless the hull shape is very different, they probably handle similar. I forgot to check the sail area to displacement, but I doubt there is a big difference. Good luck with which one you choose._____Grant.

[sailr69]

Originally Posted by oldsaltydog

I am looking at purchasing a Ranger built in 1979
And an Ericson Mk2 35. Both very nice boats
I am leaning towards the Ericson as I feel
It's a better sea boat more displacement and wee bit Beamer.
I would love to hear from anyone who might have some knowledge
On either one of these vessels.
I live in Tasmania Australia and the conditions can be quite
Challenging at times therefore looking for a boat that can be
Quick enough so that I can hold my own at the club on Weekends
and yet stable enough to take on the elements offshore.

The ranger is faster, especially in light air, the Ericson is more cruiser friendly. your choice

[Gelfling]

Originally Posted by sailr69

The ranger is faster, especially in light air, the Ericson is more cruiser friendly. your choice

I dunno....that E35 is a really quick boat! I will say....I do love the Ericson build. Nice solid deck and hull. When I move up into a bigger boat....I am hoping I stay in an Ericson. Not that it is the 'best' (everyone has a preference) used boat on the market....but it does look like one of the better values.

[Gelfling]

Originally Posted by gjordan

I just noticed a thread over on our Engines and Propulsion forum, titled "Please dont let it be the gearbox". Zeehag has some interesting comments on the Ericson 35. It is worth looking at. Good Luck_______Grant.

Yes! PM Zeehag......she owns an E35 and will give you good info about em. She is top notch!

[psk125]

The Ericson is not quick. The Ranger 33 (Gary Mull design, I believe) is. I would guess that the Ranger could pass the Ericson to leeward in a variety of conditions. The Ranger is a lot narrower, with narrow side decks that may not be fun to run around on. The Ranger is built a touch more lightly, with 'round the buoys results in mind. The Ericson is built a bit more heavily, with cruising more in mind, and has wider decks that will make boathandling operations a bit more comfortable. We've had friends who've had them - they're both nice boats, but they're different from one another.

[Jim Cate]

FWIW, the PHRF ratings are nearly identical: Ericson 35-2= 156, Ranger 33+150. I would say there would be no perceptible difference in overall performance.

Cheers,

Jim

[TaoJones]

I love the Ranger 33 for its quickness and nimble handling. It's like a needle moving through the water, IMO, compared to the E35's more, uhm, generous proportions in terms of displacement. As to whether the Ranger's 9'7" beam makes it unsuitable for a bluewater cruiser, check out the Sailing with Bamboleiro: BANDERAS BAY - Santa Cruz - Puerto Vallarta - Yelapa blog . . . it's a young couple who cruised their Ranger 33 in the Pacific. I think they're currently ashore for awhile in Hawai'i.

I'm not sure where the notion that the E35 is 3" beamier than the R33 came from (it's actually 5"). Whenever I want to know more about a type of vessel, or if I want to compare two or more vessels, I do a Google search using the following search term (for example): "Ranger 33 sailboat data" (without the quotation marks.)

Sailboatdata.com is a valuable resource and well-worth bookmarking for handy reference. I'll save everyone who wants to know the details on the Ranger 33 and the Ericson 35 a little time - here are the links:

RANGER 33 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
ERICSON 35-2 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com

You'll note that the LWL of the Ranger 33 is actually 26'3" compared to the two-foot longer Ericson 35's LWL of 25'10". Where the Ericson has a Displacement/Length of 300.49, that of the Ranger is 259.15, and even though the Ranger displaces 1100 pounds less than the Ericson, its listed sail area is only five square feet less.

For me, I'd choose the Ranger 33, ceteris paribus - but the vessels are so similar that it's hard to see how one could make an "incorrect" choice.

TaoJones

[donradcliffe]

I sailed an E-35 across Monterey Bay one afternoon--a 20 mile broad reach in 20-25 knots. I remember that I had to keep working the wheel way too hard to keep the boat on course--like a full turn on every wave. Its a nice looking boat with decent accomodations, but it is cursed with IOR design influences.

[roverhi]

The Ericson 35 went into production in 1969, the IOR rule wasn't adopted until 1970. The Ranger was also a '69 boat but Gary Mull was head of the IOR committee and undoubtedly designed the R33 along the IOR lines. Neither boat is extreme in design but the Erickson looks more like a CCA boat than the Ranger. The difference in handling might be explained by the size differential in the rudder between the two boats.

As far as racing success, the Ranger was a very competitive design well into the '70s. Never really noticed any of the E35s out there racing with good results. The higher sail area to displacement ratio of the R33 boats alone would indicate that the Ranger would be the better sailing boat. Waterline length also marginally goes to the Ranger 33. The Ericson's longer overhangs might throw that off, however, as her waterline would increase more when healed.

For cruisability, the Erickson is a bigger boat both in displacement and interior volume. Both boats should be more than adequate for a couple to cruise on, however. Construction wise, I'd go lean towards the Ranger. Erickson built good looking boats with large interiors for the time. Still, they were typical 'Sail to Catalina and spend the weekend' boats that were not noted for their robust construction. Several boats, Webb Chiles E37 for one, that were sailed hard in challenging conditions developed hull cracks around the keels. These were all later IOR designs with shorter keels so may not be an issue with the E35. Jensen marine had a reputation for building boats that were plain but built to stand up to hard ocean racing. That was certainly the case with the R33. There was a small fleet of them in Honolulu that were actively competing in our very challenging conditions with no issues that I heard of.