Niagara 35 or Alberg 37?

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by DNS1324

If I do? Well.... euh... no, not really, I don't. As I mentioned, we don't yet have much experience with sailboats. We were told that C&C were sailboats initially designed for racing and that they may be more sporty to handle than other cruisers. We were told (I'm not making a claim here), that they require more constant sail adjustments and more attention. C&C are presented as being "high-performance" sailboats with "proven race-winning hull". I'm assuming that handling such a Formula 1 boat may require some technical skills and some experience that we don't yet have. We were recommended that a C&C might not be the best option for us for a first sailboat with the intention we have. Performance is not really a criterion for us. Thanks for your comments.

"designed for racing"? "Formula 1 boats"? "may require some technical skills and some experience that we don't yet have."? "performance is not a criterion"?

My God, who have you been listening to? Must be a broker.

So what do you want, a boat designed to be a slug? Which will not turn when you turn the helm? A boat which will not perform? The nautical equivilent of a Checker Marathon?

I don't care which boat you select, but you are being led by the nose., and if you accept these statements and go that direction you will give up the most rewarding aspect of sailing, that being on a boat which can sail and which is enjoyable while sailing it.

And if you think that for beginners, a boat which will not turn when the helm is turned, or go upwind when you need to, or back up under power, or one on which you cannot feel the wind or the helm, is better for a beginner, then just get a tub.

[SV Siren]

For a good writeup on the Alberg 37, the just printed Good Old Boat Magazine, for this month has a review on the Alberg 37. On your newstands now. If you contact them and are not a subscriber, they will send you a copy for free, just ask them. It's one of my favorite rags to read full of useful articles and stories.

https://goodoldboat.com/

[double u]

they sure overheated the waterpump on the Alberg's Yanmar! ...burned the paint! if this didn't do some damage somewhere else?
Be aware, that on boats that old you will be in for an extensive & expensive refit before you take off, otherwise you will be "sailing from port to port to make repairs!" (which to a certain degree you'll be doing anyway, of course. With old equipment just much more so)

[DNS1324]

Originally Posted by double u

they sure overheated the waterpump on the Alberg's Yanmar! ...burned the paint! if this didn't do some damage somewhere else?

Good observation! I see exactly what you mean on the photo of the ad. I hadn't paid attention to that detail. Thank you. We'll ask about that.

Originally Posted by double u

Be aware, that on boats that old you will be in for an extensive & expensive refit before you take off, otherwise you will be "sailing from port to port to make repairs!" (which to a certain degree you'll be doing anyway, of course. With old equipment just much more so)

Thanks for the advice. We're willing to do some refits on an older boat but we're definitely not looking for a "boat project". So we'll have to be careful with our choice and try not to be fooled and tempted by low prices.

[DNS1324]

Originally Posted by SV Siren

For a good writeup on the Alberg 37, the just printed Good Old Boat Magazine, for this month has a review on the Alberg 37. On your newstands now. If you contact them and are not a subscriber, they will send you a copy for free, just ask them. It's one of my favorite rags to read full of useful articles and stories.

https://goodoldboat.com/

Thanks but I don't think that issue is yet available online. They latest issue presented is still the January/February one that does not cover the Alberg 37. I'll keep checking. It will certainly become available very soon. Thanks!

[double u]

@ Alberg's waterpump: we've seen ext &p)ensive damage on a 3GM30 from overheating: it had 2crooked con-rods apart from badly scarred cylinders & pistons.
@"project-boat": to get a weekender/coastal cruiser ready for bluewater will require a sizeable investment, even if you don't have to replace any original equipment. In 2018 we purchsed a 7 year old very lightly used boat (weekending & holiday-coasthopping) & took her from France to Tahiti. Even though we are quite frugal people we worked flat out for 2 months & invested 25-30% of the purchase price again in equipment such as windvane, Solarpanels, Bimini, 2nd mainsail, top-down furler, new batteries (just to be on the safe side), galley footpump, new (& longer) anchorchain, bigger anchors led-cabin-lights, offshore liferaft, etc.etc. -

[DNS1324]

Originally Posted by double u

@ Alberg's waterpump: we've seen ext &p)ensive damage on a 3GM30 from overheating: it had 2crooked con-rods apart from badly scarred cylinders & pistons.
@"project-boat": to get a weekender/coastal cruiser ready for bluewater will require a sizeable investment, even if you don't have to replace any original equipment. In 2018 we purchsed a 7 year old very lightly used boat (weekending & holiday-coasthopping) & took her from France to Tahiti. Even though we are quite frugal people we worked flat out for 2 months & invested 25-30% of the purchase price again in equipment such as windvane, Solarpanels, Bimini, 2nd mainsail, top-down furler, new batteries (just to be on the safe side), galley footpump, new (& longer) anchorchain, bigger anchors led-cabin-lights, offshore liferaft, etc.etc. -

Thanks for your comments. Our total budget is around 100,000$ CAD. The boats we're considering are within, say, the 50,000$-75,000$ CAD price range. So, if needed, we'd be ready to put a few tens of thousands more in refits and equipments as long as it's not too major and doesn't require 2 years of work (e.g. life raft, dinghy, solar panels, sails, full enclosure, batteries etc etc). The boats we're considering are already well-equipped and are presented by their owners as being "ready-to-sail". But we'll see. Visit and survey will really tell. Thanks for the 25%-30% estimate of what we could expect to add.

[DNS1324]

I’m curious about something that some of you may help me better understand. I’ve come to realize by reading forums like this one and others (some in French too) that many sailors out there seem to make a big deal about the capacity of a sailboat to go well upwind or not. This seems for example to be an important criterion for user "wingssail" (see above) who argues that you’d be better playing in a tub than sailing a boat that "will not go upwind when you need to". On some forums, the argument about this aspect of a sailboat sometimes even seems to turn into a personal level. People are serious about that.

But as a newbie, I wonder, what does that mean exactly «*a boat that will not do upwind*»? What is the criterion for telling whether a boat can or cannot go upwind? I mean, I’m guessing that all sailboats can, to some degree, point upwind, right? But at what point is a sailboat not worth sailing because it «*won’t go upwind*» ?

According to user "wingsail", some boats are so bad going upwind that they’re not worth sailing. But why were these boats even built in the first place? And I’m curious if someone, perhaps wingsail, could list here as examples, say, 3 or 4 sailboats that "cannot do upwind and that should be avoided?

And how much of a criterion should the upwind factor be considered for someone who has no interest in racing but rather aims at leisure cruising and, perhaps one day, at crossing oceans?

And, perhaps most importantly, I also wonder how can we tell beforehand whether a certain boat is good or not upwind? Where can we find this sort of information? I can’t easily find this sort of information, crucial for some sailors, on database such as SailboatData.com.

Here’s some data for the Alberg 37, the Niagara 35 and the C&C 38:
https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/alberg-37
https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/niagara-35
https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/landfall-38-cc

Out of the data, can anyone provide me with some sort of number that would objectively characterize and compare the upwind skills of these 3 boats?

Sorry for so many questions! Any piece of information is welcome! Still learning so much and this is fascinating!

[Greg Mason]

Each sailor has an opinion. Each opinion is valid to that sailor. Your question about upwind sailing is an interesting one, because most global adventures are not upwind. I have sailed to Mexico where Wingsail is now from Canada, there was no up wind sailing on that leg. But a boat that does not point well into the wind is a MacGregor 65. They and other sleds were designed for off wind, downwind sailing and some for specific races. You are not asking about them. Data is data, sailors can over-canvas and get poor performance upwind. Boats can have bagged sails that will not go upwind, or dirty bottoms. Many variations can affect the performance of any boat. Analysis paralysis. Unless you are buying your last forever boat you may not ever hit a grand slam, or a perfect field goal. Just get it through the uprights.

[Jim Cate]

I have sailed to Mexico where Wingsail is now from Canada, there was no up wind sailing on that leg.

But if you should need to return to Canada from Mexico (as many cruisers do), you would indeed have a LONG upwind leg. Thus, upwind ability would become important to you. Point is that while most cruisers strive to design passages that are primarily off the wind, sometimes plans change, forecasts turn out wrong, engines die, emergencies develop and getting to weather becomes a critical ability.

Jim

[AiniA]

Of course it depends a lot on where you want to go and in what season. I have done about 50,000 nm offshore and very little of that was to windward - perhaps a few hundred miles in total. Around the world routes for most people are typically westward in the trade winds. The ability to reach well in all conditions is way more important than ability to windward. My second thought is that there is a big difference in acceptable windward performance for a cruiser and a racer. Since many (most?) race courses have a lot of windward work, pointing ability is hugely important. For most cruisers the ability to go somewhere between a close reach and hard on the wind is all you want.

[Greg Mason]

Hey Jim, you are absolutely correct, if your return comes up following the coast. Many returning vessels from Mexico follow the trades to Hawaii and around the Pacific high to come home. We came home from French Polynesia, so it was a no brainer for us.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Greg Mason

Hey Jim, you are absolutely correct, if your return comes up following the coast. Many returning vessels from Mexico follow the trades to Hawaii and around the Pacific high to come home. We came home from French Polynesia, so it was a no brainer for us.

Well, Greg, in both of our passages from HI to SFO the first thousand miles or so, getting north around the high were hard on the wind, and kinda hard sailing, with developed seas.

So, the oft mentioned "clipper ship" route from Baja to California will usually have at least some windward work involved.

And for those who babble on about RTW with following winds "in the trades", yes, one does hope to do the major passages well off the wind. But, at least for us, cruising includes many shorter trips in and about the island groups that we have visited, and a great many of those have involved going to windward. Thus, for some cruisers, windward performance is of concern. Not perhaps as much as for a racer, where it is paramount in most cases, but still a factor.

Jim

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Well, Greg, in both of our passages from HI to SFO the first thousand miles or so, getting north around the high were hard on the wind, and kinda hard sailing, with developed seas.



Jim

AGREED: Our Hanalei to Victoria trip: first several days very closehauled, heeled, bouncy, holding-on every movement we made (esp down below).

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by DNS1324

I’m curious about something that some of you may help me better understand. I’ve come to realize by reading forums like this one and others (some in French too) that many sailors out there seem to make a big deal about the capacity of a sailboat to go well upwind or not. This seems for example to be an important criterion for user "wingssail" (see above) who argues that you’d be better playing in a tub than sailing a boat that "will not go upwind when you need to". On some forums, the argument about this aspect of a sailboat sometimes even seems to turn into a personal level. People are serious about that.

But as a newbie, I wonder, what does that mean exactly «*a boat that will not do upwind*»? What is the criterion for telling whether a boat can or cannot go upwind? I mean, I’m guessing that all sailboats can, to some degree, point upwind, right? But at what point is a sailboat not worth sailing because it «*won’t go upwind*» ?

According to user "wingsail", some boats are so bad going upwind that they’re not worth sailing. But why were these boats even built in the first place? And I’m curious if someone, perhaps wingsail, could list here as examples, say, 3 or 4 sailboats that "cannot do upwind and that should be avoided?

And how much of a criterion should the upwind factor be considered for someone who has no interest in racing but rather aims at leisure cruising and, perhaps one day, at crossing oceans?

And, perhaps most importantly, I also wonder how can we tell beforehand whether a certain boat is good or not upwind? Where can we find this sort of information? I can’t easily find this sort of information, crucial for some sailors, on database such as SailboatData.com.

Here’s some data for the Alberg 37, the Niagara 35 and the C&C 38:
https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/alberg-37
https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/niagara-35
https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/landfall-38-cc

Out of the data, can anyone provide me with some sort of number that would objectively characterize and compare the upwind skills of these 3 boats?

Sorry for so many questions! Any piece of information is welcome! Still learning so much and this is fascinating!

Hi DNS1234, Since you mentioned my views in your comment above I guess I should answer you.

"wingssail" (see above) who argues that you’d be better playing in a tub than sailing a boat that "will not go upwind when you need to".

Well, be careful when quoting someone, and remember that most of what we say is opinion. In my opinion, ability to sail upwind is important, both for my personal enjoyment of sailing and for safety. Some boats are little more than "tubs" to me. But they suit other people's needs, desires, and sailing preferences.

According to user "wingsail", some boats are so bad going upwind that they’re not worth sailing. But why were these boats even built in the first place? And I’m curious if someone, perhaps wingsail, could list here as examples, say, 3 or 4 sailboats that "cannot do upwind and that should be avoided?

I hope I did not say exactly that, but probably I implied it. Some boats are so bad going upwind that I would not much wish to sail them. That does not mean that others would feel that way. Why were they built? Builders aim their boats at a target audience. There are many buyers who value things like traditional looks, or a perception of strength to withstand groundings, or other attributes which do not include overall sailing performance or upwind ability in particular. There is a particular term, "blue water boat" which is used to promote certain types of boats. Comfort is often mentioned or easy motion in a seaway. I reject that these "blue water" boats have either of those advantages. It is just marketing.

3 or 4 sailboats that "cannot do upwind and that should be avoided? Again, I don't think I would have said that, but maybe I did. Whether or not you should avoid a boat that cannot sail well upwind is up to you. Me I like sailing and I like a boat which sails well on all points of sail. What are 3-4 boats that can't sail upwind? Well, you are right. Most sailboats can sail upwind. The point is, how well? How good of upwind performance do you want?

3 or 4 that don't do well upwind: (Boy am I on thin ice here.) I am not going to name names here, too many happy owners who would be willing to kill me or at least defend thier boats.

• Any Spray replica
• Motor sailors with tall cabins, inside steering and small main masts
• Any sailboat with a full length full keel and a keel hung rudder at the stern of the boat and a wide shroud base.
• To a lesser extent, any boat with a cut away full keel, stern hung rudder and wide shroud base and small sail area.

That does not mean they are bad boats or should be avoided. It means that if you love sailing performance, you won't get it from boats of that type, at least not the windward performance.

It's easier to go the other way. If windward performance is imprtant to you look at the hull shape and some of the numbers such as SA./Disp. Look for a fin keel, look for narrow shroud base. Look for a sleek hull with a fine entry. Of the three you mentioned, the Alberg, while a beautiful design and a boat which avoids ALL the bad points I mentioned above, will not go to weather like the Niagra or the C&C. I might love the boat but I would know that it couldn't point like the others. If you buy an Island Packet or a West Sail you can get a fantastic boat which many owners swear by, but it will not sail to windward like a fin keel boat. (But they will go to windward. My friend races each week witrh his Baba30 and does very well). It is all a matter of degree.

Me, I am a purist. So I am not going to give you a "don't buy" list. I'd recommend that you get some sailing experience on many types of boats and decide for yourself.

Photo (The difference is subtle, the Island Packet in the foreground, the Jeanneau to the right, or the Cal20 in the background.They are all going to windward, but after a 10mile beat, there will be a big difference in arrival times, could be hours)