Ericson/34T Info and Pictures

[startup]

Hi there,

Does anyone have additional documentation, info, and most importantly PICTURES of the Ericson 34T?

Best

 

[Bearbearbear]

Hi!

i have a 34X, racing sister to the 34T. The two boats were quite similar save for the deck and rig. It also turns out they’re quite rare. What do you want to know, what do you want to see?

cheers,
Bear

 

[Loren Beach]

Hi!

i have a 34X, the 34T’s racing sister to the 34T. The two boats were quite similar save for the deck and rig. It also turns out they’re quite rare. What do you want to know, what do you want to see?

cheers,
Bear

Local architect used to race one on the Columbia named "The Point", and instead of spelling it out there was a huge exclamation point (!) painted on the transom. Late 70's era, as I dimly recall. These was/is also a sister ship recently anchored out, over on the Willamette, being used as a live aboard.
That is a rare model.

 

[Bearbearbear]

Local architect used to race one on the Columbia named "The Point", and instead of spelling it out there was a huge exclamation point (!) painted on the transom. Late 70's era, as I dimly recall. These was/is also a sister ship recently anchored out, over on the Willamette, being used as a live aboard. That is a rare model.

Wow! That's so cool!All I know about my boat is that it lived at Granville Island for a long time after a failed electric-inboard conversion. I had heard about a sister ship in the Seattle area, but no more than that really.

-Bear

 

[bgary]

Local architect used to race one on the Columbia named "The Point"

Random and nugatory bit of trivia....

...that "point" would periodically break off from the transom (either while racing or docked), it was mostly bondo, and when it broke off it would leave a blunt end about an inch across. Turns out that little "point" had a surprisingly significant effect on the water flow off the back of the boat - when it was intact and sharp, the flow was clean, but when it was blunt you could see water curling up and being dragged up the back of the transom.

We felt that in order to be as competitive as possible, we needed to keep that point "sharp", just like it is important to keep the trailing edges of foils nice and sharp. Hey, might just be the difference in a close cross in a hotly-contested race, who knows.

So part of our pre-race routine was to get out the can of bondo and a small file and shape that point into a dagger-sharp point. We convinced ourselves that it was part of "no excuse to lose".

(lol

 

[Bearbearbear]

So part of our pre-race routine was to get out the can of bondo and a small file and shape that point into a dagger-sharp point. We convinced ourselves that it was part of "no excuse to lose".

(lol

whats it like to race competitively on a 34X? Windward performance is supposed to be legendary, and I’d imagine that she’d surf pretty easy with the chute out.

-Bear

 

[bgary]

whats it like to race competitively on a 34X?

Upwind, the boat was a rocket. relatively bendy rig with running backstays provided lots of room to tune the sail-shape for the conditions, aided (at least in the 70s) with hydraulic headstay and backstay, so you could pump the whole rig forward in breezy conditions to balance the boat and reduce weather helm. The boat also LOVED having a double-head rig in close-reaching conditions: a big (160%?) "jib-top" (a high-clewed genoa), with a genoa-staysail set inside it to create a double-slot effect... super effective.

Offwind... yeah, the big spinnaker was fun (and, bloopers!), but, as with most IOR designs of the day, it had a very hard time getting out of its own wave-pattern. Boats of that era aren't designed to plane, so in breezy conditions they don't really get up and boogie, they just pull a big quarterwake along behind them. If there was a good swell, yes, you could get some momentary surfing action, but in southern California it was rare to get those kinds of conditions.

Back in the day (tm), there was a lot of "ton-class" racing in southern California (IOR half-tonners, 3/4-tonners, 1-tonners, 2-tonners...). The 34 was designed to be competitive in the 3/4-ton division, and did very well, even against custom boats. Raced a lot against Peterson-34s, a few Davidsons, even a hot little rocket from Brit Chance named "Eclipse", and the ericson did very well. Plus, much better "manners" than a lot of the more radical IOR designs of the day.

Fun boats.

 

[Bearbearbear]

Offwind... yeah, the big spinnaker was fun (and, bloopers!), but, as with most IOR designs of the day, it had a very hard time getting out of its own wave-pattern. Boats of that era aren't designed to plane, so in breezy conditions they don't really get up and boogie, they just pull a big quarterwake along behind them. If there was a good swell, yes, you could get some momentary surfing action, but in southern California it was rare to get those

Fun boats.

Wow, incredible! I’ve been looking for a blooper, sailmakers seem disinterested in making them nowadays. I’ve heard of people using them to cruise on old IOR boats with great success.


-Bear

 

[Bearbearbear]

Fun boats.

I was wondering as well, what would you say her hull speed averaged out to?

-Bear

 

[bgary]

what would you say her hull speed averaged out to?

Gosh, no idea. That's asking for info from some brain-cells I haven't heard from in for a long time. Plus I was usually at the other end of the boat.

Sailboatdata.com says the LWL is 28.87, using the classic formula that means the theoretical max hull-speed is around 7.2 knots.

 

[Bearbearbear]

Sailboatdata.com says the LWL is 28.87, using the classic formula that means the theoretical max hull-speed is around 7.2 knots.

Ah shucks! I've calculated the theoretical hull speed too, it would've just been neat insight if you remembered! C'est la vie!