to buy an Ericson. I am a happy Bristol 29 owner on the ChesBay, with a family of 4 (kids 7&8), wanting to upgrade to the 33-35 ft. range for cruising and daysailing. I have narrowed it down (don't ask me how) to the E35 MKIII, or the tartan 33. Why I like these in particular is a long story, but aside from build quality and good sailing characteristics in both light and heavy air, I like the wheel steering aft in the cockpit, a generous quarter berth and very comfortable cockpit seating/living for crew and friends. I am teetering on the edge, having found a sweet T33 in Solomons that is VERY well kept. But there is an Ericson 34 just across the dock that keeps calling my name. Someone talk me down, and convince me that the Ericson is as good or better.....
-
Untitled Document Join us on March 28th, 7pm EDT
for the CBEC Virtual Meeting
EY.o March Zoom Meeting
All EYO members and followers are welcome to join the fun and get to know the people you've met online!
See the link below for login credentials and join us!
(dismiss this notice by hitting 'X', upper right)
I think it depends on the sails (size of forsail), in summer on SF bay it is always 25-25+ and reefing is often required ( I use a 100% jib). Winter it can be very calm and sometimes I notice that 10-15 kts seems like a sweet spot for the ericson (change to 125% jib) Less than 10kts it gets a bit sluggish.
NateHanson
Sustaining Member
I'll give the caveat that I am not directly familiar with the E35 or T33, but from seeing other models from both builders, I think I'd give the edge to the Tartans for general build quality. Not by much, but just a teeny bit. <ducks to avoid horned helmet>
I think that between such similar boats, I'd probably be swayed largely by how well each boat had been taken care of. Less time catching up on deferred maintenance - more time sailing!
Good luck. They sound like great choices, and should give you a nice turn of speed compared to the Bristol.
I think that between such similar boats, I'd probably be swayed largely by how well each boat had been taken care of. Less time catching up on deferred maintenance - more time sailing!
Good luck. They sound like great choices, and should give you a nice turn of speed compared to the Bristol.
Nate,
I concur concerning the build quality. What keeps nagging at me is space. While the T33 is really well designed, it is still a 33 ft boat, and it looks like it might be tight when all four of us are below decks. It does not have a U shaped dinette which could be dedicated to projects or homework if needed. The E35 seems to have just the little bit more space that might make the difference between feeling cramped and feeling cozy. I might be very wrong, and i should say that I have not yet been on an E35. I'm looking for one close to home to inspect.
I concur concerning the build quality. What keeps nagging at me is space. While the T33 is really well designed, it is still a 33 ft boat, and it looks like it might be tight when all four of us are below decks. It does not have a U shaped dinette which could be dedicated to projects or homework if needed. The E35 seems to have just the little bit more space that might make the difference between feeling cramped and feeling cozy. I might be very wrong, and i should say that I have not yet been on an E35. I'm looking for one close to home to inspect.
Shadowfax
Member III
Go For The Space
I raised 2 kids on our E34 and I'd would not want to have done it on anything smaller if you are planning any thing beyond a day trip. BTW the E34 is 34' 10" so it is as large as the 35III as you are looking at and bigger then the Tartan. I'd get the boat with the best layout for your needs which is the biggest cockpit and biggest main cabin you can get and still sleep people with a degree of privacy. This will be even more important as the kids get older. They are all good boats and good sailers, but you will crave the space with company and especially with company and the kids
I raised 2 kids on our E34 and I'd would not want to have done it on anything smaller if you are planning any thing beyond a day trip. BTW the E34 is 34' 10" so it is as large as the 35III as you are looking at and bigger then the Tartan. I'd get the boat with the best layout for your needs which is the biggest cockpit and biggest main cabin you can get and still sleep people with a degree of privacy. This will be even more important as the kids get older. They are all good boats and good sailers, but you will crave the space with company and especially with company and the kids
NateHanson
Sustaining Member
Yeah, I can certainly see the advantage of the E35 layout. The traditional interior can feel pretty short on space, compared to an L- or U-shaped dinette. On the other hand, there's no replacement for a great midships pilot berth on an overnight sail, and both layouts of the T33 appear to incorporate one or two.
I'd think either would be fine for cruising around up here. You certainly want to do your best not to go flying into a ledge at 7 knots, but I don't think the possibility is reason not to have an externally mounted keel. I wouldn't want to sail with a real high-aspect keel, that could really stress the hull at the front and back of the keel in the case of a grounding, but the reality is that a well-built boat with a moderate fin keel takes the occasional bump just fine.
The E has a spade rudder, but the tartan probably has a skeg, is that right? That seems to be more common on Tartans. That will help avoid grounding damage, and (perhaps more importantly) makes it hard for a pot warp to get stuck between the top of the rudder and the hull. I find pot warps to be a much more common concern than running aground. There are plenty of ledges, but in my experience they are well charted, and (even this far east) well marked. Pay attention to where you are, and grounding should be less common than in the shifting sands of the Chesapeake, for instance.
One thing I like about the Tartans, is that they have a removeable headliner, with battens, allowing full and easy access to the underside of the deck for maintenance and additions.
Where do you think you might move to? We just moved up to Ellsworth from Boston a little over a year ago.
I'd think either would be fine for cruising around up here. You certainly want to do your best not to go flying into a ledge at 7 knots, but I don't think the possibility is reason not to have an externally mounted keel. I wouldn't want to sail with a real high-aspect keel, that could really stress the hull at the front and back of the keel in the case of a grounding, but the reality is that a well-built boat with a moderate fin keel takes the occasional bump just fine.
The E has a spade rudder, but the tartan probably has a skeg, is that right? That seems to be more common on Tartans. That will help avoid grounding damage, and (perhaps more importantly) makes it hard for a pot warp to get stuck between the top of the rudder and the hull. I find pot warps to be a much more common concern than running aground. There are plenty of ledges, but in my experience they are well charted, and (even this far east) well marked. Pay attention to where you are, and grounding should be less common than in the shifting sands of the Chesapeake, for instance.
One thing I like about the Tartans, is that they have a removeable headliner, with battens, allowing full and easy access to the underside of the deck for maintenance and additions.
Where do you think you might move to? We just moved up to Ellsworth from Boston a little over a year ago.
Last edited:
Attributes of the 35-3
I have a 1985 35-3 and my slip neighbor has a Tartan 33. Both are great, well built boats. And both our boats are in great shape and well cared for. Of course, I think my 35-3 has the edge over the Tartan 33
. Interior lay out is more comfortable and the E35-3 is one of the few boats in that size class that has a separate shower stall. I also think we have more ventilation. As for sailing, the E35-3 is an awesome sailing boat in both light and heavy air. We've sailed nicely across the Chesapeake Bay in 5-6 knots of wind. And when the wind gets up, the boat reefs nicely and is stable and well behaved. The boat inspires confidence. And once, on our way to Wye Island, we caught and passed our Tartan 33 neighbor who we'd seen about a half mile a head of us. Seriously though, you can't go wrong with either of these fine boats.
I have a 1985 35-3 and my slip neighbor has a Tartan 33. Both are great, well built boats. And both our boats are in great shape and well cared for. Of course, I think my 35-3 has the edge over the Tartan 33
. Interior lay out is more comfortable and the E35-3 is one of the few boats in that size class that has a separate shower stall. I also think we have more ventilation. As for sailing, the E35-3 is an awesome sailing boat in both light and heavy air. We've sailed nicely across the Chesapeake Bay in 5-6 knots of wind. And when the wind gets up, the boat reefs nicely and is stable and well behaved. The boat inspires confidence. And once, on our way to Wye Island, we caught and passed our Tartan 33 neighbor who we'd seen about a half mile a head of us. Seriously though, you can't go wrong with either of these fine boats.NateHanson
Sustaining Member
Ooh! A shower stall! That's no small potatoes! Two points for the Ericson!
(I read this after posting, and it sounded kind of sarcastic - so I'm editing to point out that I'm dead serious. A nice shower makes my wife VERY happy.)
(I read this after posting, and it sounded kind of sarcastic - so I'm editing to point out that I'm dead serious. A nice shower makes my wife VERY happy.)
Last edited:
When we spent that boat-less year shopping, one of the boats we wanted to like was the T-33. Problem was that it lacked headroom for me, at 6'2", and boats like the E-35-3, E-34-200, and the O-34 that we did buy do have enough headroom for me.
I would say that the construction engineering and general quality is about equal. Still -- kind of like comparing apples to oranges in this one case because the E-35-3 is a larger boat. A truer comparison would be to the Holland-designed Ericson 33.
I found one excellent URL for T-33 info:
http://www.tartanowners.org/models/t33profile.phtml
The E-35-3 is a much roomier boat -- Space is Good. Expecially when you can still have excellent speed under sail.
Loren
I would say that the construction engineering and general quality is about equal. Still -- kind of like comparing apples to oranges in this one case because the E-35-3 is a larger boat. A truer comparison would be to the Holland-designed Ericson 33.
I found one excellent URL for T-33 info:
http://www.tartanowners.org/models/t33profile.phtml
The E-35-3 is a much roomier boat -- Space is Good. Expecially when you can still have excellent speed under sail.
Loren
Last edited:
All,
Thanks for your good input. I agree that the headliner on the T33 is a great advantage, and its one of the things I really like about the boat. The other is the great access to the engine. Three sides and a sump area below to access from the main cabin. How about on the E34/35? Also, of course, price plays into things. The cherry T-33 goes for about what a medium, good condition E35-3 is going for. The really good E34's seem less common to find. Many somewhat well used. Have you seen the one in Deltaville with the teak decks? I was sorely tempted for a while, but too many risks involved.
Thanks for your good input. I agree that the headliner on the T33 is a great advantage, and its one of the things I really like about the boat. The other is the great access to the engine. Three sides and a sump area below to access from the main cabin. How about on the E34/35? Also, of course, price plays into things. The cherry T-33 goes for about what a medium, good condition E35-3 is going for. The really good E34's seem less common to find. Many somewhat well used. Have you seen the one in Deltaville with the teak decks? I was sorely tempted for a while, but too many risks involved.
Last edited:
Yes - it is. During the summer, most of what we have on Puget Sound is light air - and she handles it wonderfully. I used to single hand my 35-3 after work on a regular basis. At times I would just roll out the head sail (a 120 I believe), and would pass others who had everything up (annoying them, I'm sure).
The 35-3 is also small enough for one to muscle at the dock - but can easily entertain a group as well. Wonderful boat...
//sse
ps: I moved your thread to the Design forum due to content, etc...hope you don't mind...
Sean,
thanks for moving the thread. This is the better spot for it. Now, for a last question....The E34 design, with the aft cabin and head....How do you all feel about that layout? Does it make the overall cabin seem more cramped? I generally agree with Don Casey when he advocates as open a floorplan as possible for the cabin, especially on long cruises. But with growing kids, who like thier own space I could see the value. And what about the head being so close to the galley? Thoughts?
thanks for moving the thread. This is the better spot for it. Now, for a last question....The E34 design, with the aft cabin and head....How do you all feel about that layout? Does it make the overall cabin seem more cramped? I generally agree with Don Casey when he advocates as open a floorplan as possible for the cabin, especially on long cruises. But with growing kids, who like thier own space I could see the value. And what about the head being so close to the galley? Thoughts?
Chris A.
Member III
Boats
Bardo,
Lots of good points w/ all the models being discussed. We had a Tartan 33 under contract before rejecting it after survey- eventually purchased an E34. Also made an offer on a Sabre 34 (Mark I) which is worth considering in this size / price / quality range.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned in this thread is that the Tartan 33 has a balsa cored hull, as opposed to the solid glass hulls on the E boats. Although this doesn't have to be a problem, it's a major opportunity for one and the reason we rejected the Tartan that we were so excited about (wet core beneath the waterline).
I think the engine access on the E34 is quite good- as good as the T33.
I was also accustomed to the traditional (forward) head location but have found the aft head an easy adjustment to make. It makes for an excellent wet locker when descending from the cockpit and doesn't affect the feel of the galley at all IMO.
The salon has always struck me as a little "stubby" on the E34 since the companionway and salon are shifted a bit forward. It's really more an aesthetic sense of proportion rather than feeling cramped, however, and the aft cabin is very nice if kids / guests want the privacy. Also the bridgedeck is really large and makes a great seat under the dodger. I think the simple traditional layout (head forward, quarterberth aft) is still the most appealing to me, but the wife and kids liked the "creative use of space" better on the E34.
I agree with the post that said condition would probably make the difference for me in choosing between these models. I have some experience on the E35-3 and this is a very nice boat that has a different layout for you to choose if you prefer it.
All the best in your search!
Bardo,
Lots of good points w/ all the models being discussed. We had a Tartan 33 under contract before rejecting it after survey- eventually purchased an E34. Also made an offer on a Sabre 34 (Mark I) which is worth considering in this size / price / quality range.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned in this thread is that the Tartan 33 has a balsa cored hull, as opposed to the solid glass hulls on the E boats. Although this doesn't have to be a problem, it's a major opportunity for one and the reason we rejected the Tartan that we were so excited about (wet core beneath the waterline).
I think the engine access on the E34 is quite good- as good as the T33.
I was also accustomed to the traditional (forward) head location but have found the aft head an easy adjustment to make. It makes for an excellent wet locker when descending from the cockpit and doesn't affect the feel of the galley at all IMO.
The salon has always struck me as a little "stubby" on the E34 since the companionway and salon are shifted a bit forward. It's really more an aesthetic sense of proportion rather than feeling cramped, however, and the aft cabin is very nice if kids / guests want the privacy. Also the bridgedeck is really large and makes a great seat under the dodger. I think the simple traditional layout (head forward, quarterberth aft) is still the most appealing to me, but the wife and kids liked the "creative use of space" better on the E34.
I agree with the post that said condition would probably make the difference for me in choosing between these models. I have some experience on the E35-3 and this is a very nice boat that has a different layout for you to choose if you prefer it.
All the best in your search!
Our O-34 layout is almost the same as that of the E-34-200. We really (!) like the aft head. We have a large forepeak berth and it is great to have the head far away from the sleeping area. (There is not ever really enough privacy on any boat under 50' but this layout maximises what there is.)
Having a hanging locker aft in the head is nice on a rainy day or a wet passage to pevent tracking water all through the interior, too.
Our galley is on the opposite side of the aft part of the interior from the closed head door... no problem at all.
Your kids might like the separate aft cabin area -- kids often want some "space of their own." (And, so do mom and dad!)
Good luck,
Loren
Chris A,
Your remark about the balsa core on the T33 hull disconcerted me. I had not realized that. The boat I am currently looking at (and still may buy) has some blisters on the hull, which become more ominous knowing that it has a wood core. The survey will tell of course, but I am hesitant to even offer on the boat if there is an increased chance that I will have difficult moisture problems with the hull. The scales are tipping toward the E34/35...
Your remark about the balsa core on the T33 hull disconcerted me. I had not realized that. The boat I am currently looking at (and still may buy) has some blisters on the hull, which become more ominous knowing that it has a wood core. The survey will tell of course, but I am hesitant to even offer on the boat if there is an increased chance that I will have difficult moisture problems with the hull. The scales are tipping toward the E34/35...
A large Tartan 33 site does indeed confirm that the hull is cored. I applaud the engineering that goes into this construction (on any high end boat) and the stronger stiffer hull that results --- and am equally concerned about core saturation as all those cored hulls age to 20 or 30 + years. We have seen some extensive hull rebuilds ($$$) around here in older J Boats and some other brands with coring. In theory there should never be any water ingress if the thru hulls are glassed in solid...and yet... and yet... I know of boats that must have had an old impact in the outer hull laminate and that un-noticed crack let water sneek in for a decade until 10 feet of laminate had to be peeled off, wet coring replaced, and new laminate layed up. Lots of labor was involved, and yard time is about $75./hour. I have seen a repair like that reach $10K and beyond.
Goes without saying that we are glad that our '88 boat has a solid layup hull.
Opinions and priorities vary a lot. And as the saying goes: YMMV.
Speaking of that survey, a hammer, in the hands of an expert, will tell you a LOT about the core condition in the hull *and* the deck. So will an up-to-date-technology moisture meter. Get surveyor references. There are few enforceable standards in the survey business. Ask around and take notes. There are some threads on this site about surveys...
Best,
Loren
ps: remember that this opinion is actually worth about what you pay...
Last edited: