• Untitled Document

    Join us on March 29rd, 7pm EST

    for the CBEC Virtual Meeting

    All EYO members and followers are welcome to join the fun and get to know the guest speaker!

    See the link below for login credentials and join us!

    March Meeting Info

    (dismiss this notice by hitting 'X', upper right)

Differences between E32-3 and E35-3 1985-1986

ashyer

Member I
I'm looking to buy a 32-3 or 35-3 and would like to ask what the main differences besides slight size difference are because they look almost identical. I've seen about three 1985 and 1986 32-3s and like them. I'm looking at a couple 35-3 soon but have only seen pictures. If all is equal, I guess I'd go for the larger E35 over E32. I know smaller can sometimes mean cheaper ownership expenses. Has anyone been on both boats that can give some perspective on what to consider when deciding given the condition of the two boats is about the same? Are there any design benefits to the 32-3s?
 

Christian Williams

E381 - Los Angeles
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
The biggest consideration between the two is state of maintenance and equipment list. That is, how much dough to fix them up.

Beyond that, the 35 is bigger, with more effect on sale price than ongoing ownership costs. Both are suitable for singlehanding or short-handed sailing.

But condition is everything--along with a dutiful owner, soon to be P.O. (Previous Owner). His attention, or lack of it, will be your companion in maintenance as long as you own the boat.
 

ashyer

Member I
The biggest consideration between the two is state of maintenance and equipment list. That is, how much dough to fix them up.

Beyond that, the 35 is bigger, with more effect on sale price than ongoing ownership costs. Both are suitable for singlehanding or short-handed sailing.

But condition is everything--along with a dutiful owner, soon to be P.O. (Previous Owner). His attention, or lack of it, will be your companion in maintenance as long as you own the boat.
Thanks Christian. I have to rely on a survey before buying but I've seen some pretty poor condition 32s. I'm being patient waiting for something that isn't a complete restoration project. Most 32s and 35s I am looking at have some level of deck core issues. I'm wondering if this is just something that you need to accept with a 30 year old Ericson at this point as long as the mast and chain plate structure isn't compromised.
 

Christian Williams

E381 - Los Angeles
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
I think the decks of most Ericsons are OK. I would avoid a spongy deck, which a boat in the "above average" survey category doesn't have.
 

ashyer

Member I
Thanks. Would a single soft spot on a deck or elevated moisture reading be reason to pass on an otherwise good condition Ericson? Most of the Ericsons I'm looking at have some level water leaking in from the mast and evidence of water previously leaking from the ports in the wood. One has a deck core issue which I'll look into more.
 

Christian Williams

E381 - Los Angeles
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
Keel-stepped masts normally leak rain into the bilge (through halyard ports). Leaking portlights cause damage to cabin veneer, but it's cosmetic. Such portlights need to be rebedded, a task most of us do ourselves.

Saturated deck core is what I'd avoid simply because its a DIY challenge and often the repair is obvious to the eye.

Moisture readings by instrument need skillful interpretation by an expert surveyor, and for me require confirmation by other means.
 

Bolo

Contributing Partner
Just a bit of advice about a “wet deck“. The balsa core in my E32-3 (1987) just below the binnacle got wet from water intruding at the binnacle guard mounts on the floor of the cockpit. Noticed it from below, in the engine compartment, which you need to access on a E32-3 by removing the panel behind the engine cover that runs along side the quarter berth. To see that area you need to be laying on your right side with a good flashlight in hand. My delaminated deck needed to be cut out, without going through the top cockpit fiberglass layer, and then all the wet core removed and then replaced with new dry balsa. Then new fiberglass added to the bottom to cover it all. I live 2 hours from my boat and this sort of project intimidated me a bit back then (about 8 years ago) so I had a local Annapolis fiberglass expert handle the job which was expensive but a good investment because I also had the old binnacle refurbished at the same time.

I’m guessing that all the years of crew grabbing hold of the binnacle guard loosened things up enough to allow water intrusion plus who knows how it was all caulked. So, check this area throughly on the boats you examine because I think this could be a problem area on boats as old as our Ericsons.
 

Kevin A Wright

Member III
I think I looked at both the 32 and 35 when I was looking to upgrade about 8 years ago. I ended up buying a 1986 35 - 3. If I remember the 32 had the head in the aft stbd quarter and it was not tall enough for me to stand up in (i'm 6'). I also think the dining table wrapped around the mast. In the 35 the head was amidships on the port with a separate head and shower and I could fully stand in both. The dining table drops down to become basically a queen sized bed for a couple or a mess of kids. Those were the two design feature differences I remember. And the head was the killer for me.

Of course if you find a 32 that was only sailed on Sundays in freshwater by a little old lady......

Good Luck!

Kevin Wright
E35 Hydro Therapy
 

Kenneth K

1985 32-3, Puget Sound
Blogs Author
As a 32-3 owner, I often compare/contrast my boat with the 35-3. On the interior, it seems that the extra 3ft went primarily into the shower (port side) and an extra hanging locker in the starboard side of the V-berth (with the associated extra floorspace in front of it).

I would say the shower in the 32-2 is mostly unusable, so this might be an improvement in the 35. As for the extra space in the V-berth, I can stand and change clothes in my 32-3 with the v-berth door closed so I'm not sure if the extra space here is that helpful. An extra hanging locker is always a bonus.

While 10% longer (3ft), the 35 is 33% heavier at 13,000# versus the 9800# 32. Despite this, it's SA/Disp and Disp/L numbers are essentially the same as the 32, as it carries 20% more sail area (597 sq ft vs 497). With a 21hp diesel in each, I wonder if the 35 might be a little on the underpowered side with the stock engine.
 
Last edited:

bgary

Advanced Beginner
Blogs Author
... ask what the main differences besides slight size difference are because they look almost identical.

The interiors are virtually identical. The major differences are a that the 35-3 has a distinct shower section in the head, and a larger hanging locker on the other side. Oh, and a larger wine-locker :p Berths, galley, etc, are very similar in size, and with about 6" more beam the space feels a little more open.

E32 vs E35.JPG

Beyond that, for me and the kind of sailing I enjoy, the biggest difference was weight. The 35-3 is about 30% heavier, and (to me) the 32-3 feels more lively under sail. But I would have happily chosen a 35-3 if I hadn't been able to find my 32....

$.02
Bruce
 

peaman

Sustaining Member
If I remember the 32 had the head in the aft stbd quarter and it was not tall enough for me to stand up in (i'm 6'). I also think the dining table wrapped around the mast.
This sounds like the 32-200. 32-3 has forward head and dinette table aft of the mast.

Biggest difference I see in general layout of 32-3 versus 35-3 is that luxurious separate shower, and a proper entry arrangement for the head in the 35-3. The significance of either depends entirely on taste, and intended use.
 

ashyer

Member I
As a 32-3 owner, I often compare/contrast my boat with the 35-3. On the interior, it seems that the extra 3ft went primarily into the shower (port side) and an extra hanging locker in the starboard side of the V-berth (with the associated extra floorspace in front of it).

I would say the shower in the 32-2 is mostly unusable, so this might be an improvement in the 35. As for the extra space in the V-berth, I can stand and change clothes in my 32-3 with the v-berth door closed so I'm not sure if the extra space here is that helpful. An extra hanging locker is always a bonus.

While 10% longer (3ft), the 35 is 33% heavier at 13,000# versus the 9800# 32. Despite this, it's SA/Disp and Disp/L numbers are essentially the same as the 32, as it carries 20% more sail area (597 sq ft vs 497). With a 21hp diesel in each, I wonder if the 35 might be a little on the underpowered side with the stock engine.
I got to see a 35-3. It was identical in layout except for the shower like you pointed out. The v-berth seemed to be the same size as the 32-3's I've looked at. Maybe some extra overall space in the interior but it was hard to notice going on memory of the last 32-3 I was on.
 

Prairie Schooner

Jeff & Donna, E35-3 purchased 7/21
The quarter berth on the 35-3 is a cozy double while it looks like in the 32-3 in the above images it is a definite single. When we were boat shopping I was hot for an aft cabin. Not gonna change boats, but I'd still like to see what the aft cabin in the 34's is like.
 

ashyer

Member I
Keel-stepped masts normally leak rain into the bilge (through halyard ports). Leaking portlights cause damage to cabin veneer, but it's cosmetic. Such portlights need to be rebedded, a task most of us do ourselves.

Saturated deck core is what I'd avoid simply because its a DIY challenge and often the repair is obvious to the eye.

Moisture readings by instrument need skillful interpretation by an expert surveyor, and for me require confirmation by other means.
By saturated deck core, to what extent do you mean? Any water intrusion or to the point where it's causing soft spots/delamination? I've heard it's rare to find boats of this age without some detectable water intrusion to the deck. I have the previous survey for the ericson I'm looking at. It was done 2 years ago. It shows some water intrusion around some of the stanchions and other hardware. The surveyor reports that the deck is in overall good condition with some water intrusion in places. Further, that all percussion testing is still good, it doesn't need to be immediately repaired but should probably re-bed these areas in the next year to stop water intrusion.
 

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
I would advise re-bedding all (!) deck penetrations on any boat where: 1) the boat is 30 years old and this has not been done, or 2) the meter and the hammer tell you of areas of moisture, or 3) both..... :(

When the deck core is dry, the work goes pretty fast, and the result is a solid strong deck for another 20 or 30 years. You gain true peace of mind and you preserve your resale value for someday.
 

dhill

Member III
I looked at and visited several Ericson 35-3s as well as a 32-3 and and some Ericson 38s (original layout). All three were great boats. Beyond the dedicated shower in the 35-3 (and 38), there are subtle differences in additional storage and the feeling of space. The Ericson 35-3 is also a bit faster (PHRF 123 vs 156). I ended up with a 1987 Ericson 35-3, which is the right size for us. With each increase, the extra length and beam is noticeable and there are more drawers and cabinets. The v-berth and settees are pretty similar in size - the differences appear elsewhere. A few extra inches in the galley, some extra inches in the cockpit, etc. I think the engine access is the best in the 32-3.

I have the Universal M25XP in my boat, 23 hp vs 21 hp, which was new for the 1987 model year. It leverages my basic 2-blade fixed prop to produce a speed of about 6.5 knots. If you scale back to about 6 knots, it uses only 0.4 gallons per hour.

My surveyor said that about 80% of boats this age have elevated deck moisture and about 20% have soft, spongy decks. I am working on rebedding everything to prevent moisture intrusion. Key problem areas are the anchor locker, dorade vents, and surrounding areas. Solution to wet decks is to replace the core, either from above (very difficult/impossible to seamlessly match the original non-skid) or from below (tear up headliner and work against gravity, messy, work around bulkheads). If I need to do anything, it will be from below as my non-skid is still in excellent shape and resurfacing the entire deck can be very expensive.

Example of resurfacing deck after core replacement (in this case, the entire deck):

Example of core replacement from below (much smaller area to replace):

Hope this helps! I don't think you can go wrong with either choice.
Dave
 
Top