Catalina 42

[Captain Robbie_d]

I'm looking at buying one of these with the tri cabin pullman berth setup but I've heard Catalina had osmosis problems until 1989 and that the hull was modified in 95 to be wider aft. The price difference between an 89-94 boat is pretty big compared to post 95 boats..anybody have one of these or have any first hand knowledge about them?
I need to get one soon...
Thanks
Robbie

[GordMay]

Please don’t take offence at the observation that:
anyone who “needs” to get a boat (especially ‘soon’) is a mark awaiting victimization.
Respectfully,
Gord

[SailAway]

Not sure what your purpose in owning a C42 is, but will guess you wish to cruise some distance with it.

The C42 does what it was designed and built for very well. It is a nice daysailing and weekending boat for protected waters. The 3 cabin version works for those attempting to jam casual guests aboard for an overnight. It does not do much more than this.

The layout of the tri-cabin/ pullman berth version of the boat limits any available stowage space and makes this a very poor liveaboard boat. Having two cabins aft makes for two SMALL cabins and NO storage space in that area. The pullman may be attractive from one point of view, placing the head in the forepeak makes it pretty much useless underway and in a rolly anchorage. The pullman berth is smaller than the vee berth version. Not sure about ventilation.

Further to the tri-cabin layout, if I remember correctly, the position of the nav sta in the forward part of the salon makes it pretty much useless as well. You would generally not route many of the electronics from there and certainly will not be talking to the helmsman from there.

I personally find the dinette settee arrangement to also be a poor choice for a long distance cruiser. Most cruisers do not spend any time sitting down at the dinner table. They are more likely to wedge themselves into a cozy spot with their legs up and lounge. Longer, straight settees or L shaped settees facilitate this, not the design of the C42.

Finally, there have been a few reports of C42's being sailed offshore (not many). Several reports by delivery skippers have indicated that these boats 'work' in a seaway. The bulkheads ...at least in one such report...came lose and moved somewhat. The hull does not seem to be stiff enough for most offshore work, even a jaunt to the islands. This of course could be anecdotal...just a few boats amoung many happier customers...hard to tell with so few used offshore.

The C42 is a price boat designed and constructed for the average sailor ...a sailor who will use her carefully and sparingly.

Just an opinion, but do some real due diligence before diving in. In boating, you usually get what you pay for.

[Starbuck]

The original poster doesn't mention in what way the boat is to be used. Captain Robbie_d simply asked a question about osmosis, not about the suitability of this boat for offshore work. If he wants to turn the thing into a floating oyster bar, it's his own business.

He specifically asks for first-hand knowledge. Hopefully someone will have some information that is helpful to him.

[SailAway]

I think a few of us thought this might be a semi-interesting thread, with open discussion welcome. Are you the net police for posting correctness?

Catalina's are pretty well known, since they are the second largest builder of sailboats in the US, if not the world. They would hardly be a large production builder based in the US if their QC wasnot at least decent. Being an average builder they have an average rep for average issues with average every day osmotic blistering. This was obviously improved upon the advent of vinlyester resins used in production (in the early to mid 90's, as I am sure you know).

Anyone serious about a catalina may invest the few bucks it takes to get Practical Sailor's review of the 42...or just go to any WM and read it for free if too cheap. THAT at least would contain SOME objective information.

Asking for any individuals experience with osmotic blistering on a boat built in such large numbers is a little like asking someone in LA what the weather is like in NY. Variables such as heat, age, haul outs, salt vs fresh water etc etc etc etc will effect blistering to the degree that any anecdotal information from personal experience is of no value....IMHO. Given that the hulls are solid glass, and you have the chance to survey the boat, one would think the boat you purchase should experience nothing but cosmetic blisters....easily worked on by the owner.

As for first hand knowledge....who hasn't owned a catalina?

I think robbie has posted his intentions elsewhere...and that is at least a little bit more interesting discussion than blistering on a 1989-1995 catalina.

There are a lot of things to be concerned and informed about with regard to buying a catalina....as with any boat. In this case, those issues far and away outpace blistering as items of concern.

And that is from first hand experience.

Thanks

[Starbuck]

(Rolls eyes)

[GordMay]

From The Catalina 42 Review ~ by Jack Horner: http://www.boatus.com/jackhornor/sail/catalina42.htm

"... The construction of the Catalina 42 is not without its faults but is as sound as any similarly priced and sized boats and better than some. The hull is constructed of a solid laminate of fiberglass and resin with no core materials. The hull is fitted with a structural fiberglass liner that incorporates the cabin sole as well as berth and furniture foundations. The deck is a cored composite with fiberglass and ¾" end grain balsa wood. Where deck hardware is installed and ½" plywood is used instead of balsa wood. The deck and hull are joined in a shoebox fashion flexible adhesives and stainless steel nuts, bolts and washers on eight-inch centers. There is an aluminum rub rail with vinyl insert fastened at the deck to hull joint with stainless steel screws.

Even though Catalina has been using a vinylester resin barrier coat since 1995, there have been some reported cases of osmotic blistering of post as well as pre 1995 models. In most cases repairs have been taken care of under warrantee (5 years) ..."

You might also lurk/troll the “Catalina 42 International Association Forum”
http://catalina42.org/wwwboard/wwwboard.html

FWIW,
Gord

[Starbuck]

Thanks, Gord, for posting something to the point that avoids irrelevant armchair knowledge. I'm sure Captain Robbie_d was looking for information along this line when he broached the question.

We would all do well to follow your example.

[Salacia]

I have a 1996 Catalina 42 with the pullman and the 3 cabin layout. At the end of August we're setting off from BC to Mexico and eventually the South Pacific. Although this is my first offshore trip the boat is already a seasoned professional having travelled to Australia.

From my experience, and the experience of the previous owner, I differ with sailaway's assessment of the boat. In fact, the layout is well suited to living about and to extended cruising. True, we don't need 3 sleeping cabins. We have left one aft cabin (starboard in our case) as a guest cabin. The Port aft cabin has had the foam removed and has been converted to storage with a bin system built in. I have seen this used to great effect on other 42's - Moonspun in particular. If you still need additional storage there are many unused voids under the cabin sole that can be accessed with strategically placed floor hatches.

Many enhancements have been made to Salacia. You can check them out in the photo album about the boat at at www.salacia.ca.

Getting directly to your questions... The MKII (95+) does have a wider stern, larger cockpit, larger cockpit lockers, and several other small modification below. I found the MKII's to have a generally updated feel. Yes, there is a price difference so you'll have to determine the best choice for yourself.

I am not an authority on blisters on these boats. I hauled 2 weeks to do the bottom ago saw no blisters.

I have cruised and raced all my life on a wide variety of boats from Melges 24's and up and am very pleased with the sailing characteristics of the 42. She's heavy and no speed demon in light air but in anything over 10 knots she's a lot of fun. I am especially happy with her solid behaviour in heavy air (30knots+).

The wife is thrilled with the layout down below - especially the openness of the pullman berth. Our last boat had an aft cabin which was nice, but the pullman made it look like a cave!

Good luck on your hunt!

[John Drake]

Well, I have not been able to join the others here sitting in their armchairs for some time, but as a long time member of this terrific forum I always thought it a place where new posters were welcomed.

Also that more often than not, threads do meander quite a bit.

Pursuant to CAPTAINROBBIED's original post, the MK II model of the Catalina 42 (post 1995/96) incorporated quite a few changes, not just a wider stern (for more space in the aft cabins). One was the addition of tubing for wire runs between the liner and hull. This was done because flexing caused significant chafe in those wires on the previous model. And of course vinylester was used in the gelcoat, as Gord verified, to help further ward off osmotic blistering.

My opinion, FWIW, would be that the MKII is indeed a worth the extra cost. This is not from a suitability for offshore use point of view, that is not an issue, but a cost view. The improved model should have fewer maintenance and repair issues and thus simply a lower cost of ownership.

My best to all.

John (you need not use any title's for me)

[Captain Robbie_d]

John D good to see you again...boards appear to be boards and we don't alwys agree..but I think your right and the MKII is worth holding out for.

All,
Thanks for the interest in the post. I was also hoping to find one for sale sans broker..I need one but also want a decent price, decent boat. I plan on alternating Captained Charters(yes I am one, OUPV Coastal to 150 miles out) in the VI's (or almost anywhere)with liveaboard..so one guest cabin turns storage when living and cruising as Salacia pointed out this works well. Indeed invariably on cruising boats quater berths seem to become storage lockers. Otherwise the boat can hold 6 guests as well as any in this size range. The boat is 3000 lbs heavier than the Beneteau 41 which in some form makes the bulk many charter fleets(Moorings in Particular) and are used in oceans all over the World so I'm going with the midweight, keel stepped mast Catalina over the Bene 41.. I'd love a Hylas but am missing the extra 200K any other suggestions are appreciated but it must be a newer model roomy boat for the charter end of it.... Over 42 feet single handing as needed becomes difficult and maintenance cost skyrocket..

[John Drake]

Hi Robbie

Good to see you again too. I have been following some of your postings and glad we can chat again here.

As always my comments are an opinion meant not for debate (though i am happy to) but to add a single data point among the others for your own consideration. Knowing what you had in mind and knowing the production boat market, I tend to think of value...both from a resale and depreciation point of view. I don't think any of us really have the cash on hand to lose 50-75k over the course of boat ownership. When considering production boats valued at well over 100k, this IS a possibility. I am sure you know that my comments hope to mitigate that for you to the greatest possible extent.

Insofar as a charter biz is concerned, customers also look for value. Nice, larger cabins can generate more revenue and better word of mouth marketing (the best kind). That may be one consideration when comparing the Bene and Cat....not having looked at both, I could not comment...but throw this out for you to think about.

All the best. And as always, I am around anytime if you would like to chat.

Hope this helps

Best

John

[Captain Robbie_d]

Good point.. always having been an older full keel heavy displacement kind of guy buying cheap fixer uppers.... new light weight expensive scares the hell out of me..like if I'm bashing to weather between St Thomas and St Croix or back from the Spanish Virgins is the hull going to start oilcanning and crack???
Or the mast start pumping with the hull flex and I lose the rig...
The C42 has a keel stepped mast and at 20500lbs is one of the heavier 42s' out there..it's actually heavier than a Hylas 42 so I think I'm going to be ok on this...Ok Pray I'm going to be ok on this...OH GOD WHAT AM I DOING?? QUICK FIND ME A 78 FIXER UPPER FOR 20K!!!

I've been on both the Bene and Catalina and the Bene is roomier
but the above makes me want the C42

[Sofa King Fishy]

Originally Posted by SailAway

Not sure what your purpose in owning a C42 is, but will guess you wish to cruise some distance with it.

The C42 does what it was designed and built for very well. It is a nice daysailing and weekending boat for protected waters. The 3 cabin version works for those attempting to jam casual guests aboard for an overnight. It does not do much more than this.

The layout of the tri-cabin/ pullman berth version of the boat limits any available stowage space and makes this a very poor liveaboard boat. Having two cabins aft makes for two SMALL cabins and NO storage space in that area. The pullman may be attractive from one point of view, placing the head in the forepeak makes it pretty much useless underway and in a rolly anchorage. The pullman berth is smaller than the vee berth version. Not sure about ventilation.

Further to the tri-cabin layout, if I remember correctly, the position of the nav sta in the forward part of the salon makes it pretty much useless as well. You would generally not route many of the electronics from there and certainly will not be talking to the helmsman from there.

I personally find the dinette settee arrangement to also be a poor choice for a long distance cruiser. Most cruisers do not spend any time sitting down at the dinner table. They are more likely to wedge themselves into a cozy spot with their legs up and lounge. Longer, straight settees or L shaped settees facilitate this, not the design of the C42.

Finally, there have been a few reports of C42's being sailed offshore (not many). Several reports by delivery skippers have indicated that these boats 'work' in a seaway. The bulkheads ...at least in one such report...came lose and moved somewhat. The hull does not seem to be stiff enough for most offshore work, even a jaunt to the islands. This of course could be anecdotal...just a few boats amoung many happier customers...hard to tell with so few used offshore.

The C42 is a price boat designed and constructed for the average sailor ...a sailor who will use her carefully and sparingly.

Just an opinion, but do some real due diligence before diving in. In boating, you usually get what you pay for.

I know this is an old thread, but what complete BS! 23,000lbs. Loaded cruising weight, A-rating for offshore, and solid glass with glassed in stringers from the hull down, and over-rigged standing rig all the way around with a collision bulkhead, and keel stepped mast to a LEAD keel. The C42 Mk2 is a very well made production boat that is easy to sail , maintain & work on. I don’t even reef the main until 20 knots. Wonderful vessel- over 1000 made.

[Training Wheels]

Is this a record, resurrecting a 15+ year old thread? [emoji2]