Tartan 37 v C and C 37

[Cavalier 32]

Hi All I have reached a very pleasant challenge. I am less than a year away from my dream cruise and have narrowed my dream down From Fantasy (a Najad 390) to reality; the two above. I can't decide. In many basic aspects they are similar. price, availability, size, layout etc. I am a solo sailor, I would like to get some info on comparisons of people who know more than me. How do they compare in the following areas. Blue Water Capability, Build Quality, Known Idiosyncrasies, Longevity, Maintenance Requirements, Weaknesses. I love the C and C internals (lighter and more modern) but the Tartan has that classic timber and an aura of solid. I will be a newcomer to Centreboards as well, sort of seems counter-intuitive to me but.
Although I am in Western Australia, I intend to commence my journey from wherever I find my girl. That is looking like the West Coasts of the US and Canada, the latter is my preferred kick off point. Any advice or guidance will be greatly appreciated.
Cheers for Beers Keith

[LauraleeG]

Hi. I just went through this process and bought a
C+C Landfall 38, 1984. My price point couldnt touch a Tartan, though I know what you mean about the classic, handsome lines.
I am in Canada and C+C's have a solid reputation, so I was confident in my choice.
My Landfall was 50k. A Tartan was double that.
Happy Sailing!!
Laura
Tartans

[steamgoat]

Nice choice, go to the owners forum at. Tartan37.com. Lots of good info there.

[lifeofreilly57]

Both are great boats.
I've owned and failed C&C's and sailed a few tartans.
The C&C's are more to the racer cruiser side while the tartans are just the other side of the coin.
Of course I'm a C&C fan.
They were great sailing performance boats that would sail in anything from light winds to heavy seas. Solid built.
Neither the tartan or c&c will be as sea kindly in a big sea as a heavyweight cruiser but both will handle it.
I sold my custom keeled C&C 38 to buy the Cheoy Lee Pedrick 47 I am currently cruising on in the East Indies and will admit it handled heavy, choppy seas better, but this boat was 40,000 lbs on the lift scale and the C&C was 15,700 lbs.
The C&C would point up to 30 deg this one needs 50 deg.
Both the tartan and c&c will outpoint it all day long.
Inspect both boats in that vintage for deck/hull water issues and keel issues.
A we'll cared for boat should do ok but any one of that vintage will have considerable issues if deck hardware was not rebedded on a regular basis.

[lifeofreilly57]

Sailed not failed. Damn spell correct.

Originally Posted by lifeofreilly57

Both are great boats.
I've owned and failed C&C's and sailed a few tartans.
The C&C's are more to the racer cruiser side while the tartans are just the other side of the coin.
Of course I'm a C&C fan.
They were great sailing performance boats that would sail in anything from light winds to heavy seas. Solid built.
Neither the tartan or c&c will be as sea kindly in a big sea as a heavyweight cruiser but both will handle it.
I sold my custom keeled C&C 38 to buy the Cheoy Lee Pedrick 47 I am currently cruising on in the East Indies and will admit it handled heavy, choppy seas better, but this boat was 40,000 lbs on the lift scale and the C&C was 15,700 lbs.
The C&C would point up to 30 deg this one needs 50 deg.
Both the tartan and c&c will outpoint it all day long.
Inspect both boats in that vintage for deck/hull water issues and keel issues.
A we'll cared for boat should do ok but any one of that vintage will have considerable issues if deck hardware was not rebedded on a regular basis.

[psk125]

For ease of singlehanding, it would seem that the Tartan’s long keel stub might help her track more steadily and be less prone to yawing than the C&C’s fin. Lots of T37 sailors simply leave their boards up: they’re not racing. Both boats have large headsails and smaller mains, which will mean relying upon r/f to safely reduce sail area forward. Make sure the r/f system is bulletproof. Both firms went bankrupt at various times, with likely impacts on build quality. They’re both nice boats, but need to be checked out thoroughly and carefully. Fair winds!

[S/V Illusion]

It’s an often used and tired analogy used when someone asks about boat comparisons to see people convert it into a car comparison so I won’t except to say you are asking the same subjective question.

People who own one brand obviously favor it over others, otherwise they wouldn’t own it.

Stated differently, take each comment here as entirely subjective rather than valid. Inform yourself of the difference directly by research, not the opinions of others whom you don’t know and can’t possibly validate.

[Kxt]

If both boats are on good condition I feel like either one will serve you well. I owned a c&c 38 landfall that I got deep into a major refit. Looking at the guts there were a lot of well thought-out details from the builder. Mast step raised out of the bilge so it isn't sitting in water, chainplate system that eliminated the potential for a deck leak to rust the entire assembly, cabin sole sitting on aluminum cross beams meaning screws weren't going into fiberglass wood and potentially water intrusion. But it also has the main electric panel under the hatchway just asking for water to be dumped on it, rod rigging, fuel tank that you had to basically remove the engine to get to, steering hard to inspect or work on.

In my research I've heard nothing but good things from the tartan 37 as well. I'm sure it has similar plusses and minuses from a design and build level. If I was you and they were equal in price/condition I would pick the one that spoke to me more. Which one when looking at it just calls for you to sail. Also, really look at the age of the rigging. C&c used rod rigging and although it can last a long time when properly inspected , it is expensive and hard to replace. Almost guaranteed to not find a rigging shop in a small country that could do it. Just something to keep in mind. Good luck! Buying a boat is always fun