This Forum is supported by C&C 27 owners like you whose membership in the C&C 27 Association makes possible this Forum and the accompanying site. Thank you, members, for your continuing commitment.
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
<A href="mailto:pakek@aol.com">PaulAK</A> Hi- I'm considering purchasing an '84 C&C 27 MKIII. It'll be my first boat and will be sailed off the Eastern end of Long Island. I've lookes over alot of postings on this and other sites regaring the 27 and have a basic idea of what to watch for, but any other thoughts on what I should look for when I look at the boat would be greatly appreciated. Thanks,
Last edited by (2003-05-17 23:25:37)
Offline
David Weatherston
If it's an '84, it won't be a Mk III. In fact, it won't even be what we generally refer to as a 27. An '84 would probably be a Mk IV, which is a different boat altogether (distinguished most easily by an outboard rudder).
With any C&C, watch for core delamination caused by water entry (failure to keep fittings caulked). Also, I have seen deckstepped boats from C&C with cracks in the main bulkhead where the door goes through. This was caused by rough usage, so look for other signs of damage.
Offline
TalW
A few clarifications...
Outside of the Great Lakes (& we're not the centre of the sailing universe!), the 80's 27 is indeed known as the Mk III. If you think about it logically, what we call a Mk II is really just a Mk I with a tall rig (that'd be 27-1 TR in PHRFspeak!), the Mk III's really a Mk II (due to it's unique hull, deck, appendages, & rig), & that'd make the 80's boat a Mk III... That's where the confusion comes from!
Most PHRF districts in North America use the ideology I've identified. Confusing? Yep!! David, what exactly do you suggest one call a Mk V if it "won't even be what we generally refer to as a 27"??
Paul, from my observations of 80's 27's (how's that for political correctness?), I'd agree with David's observations. Pay particular attention to the cabintop around the babystay chainplate (between the forward hatch & the maststep), the cabintop near the companionway (which I've seen damage due to flexing on more than one example), & the stanchion bases. Also, be sure to inspect the bulkhead attachment to the hull.
Like many C&C designs, a well maintained (or aggressively priced!) 80's 27 is a good example of a racer/cruiser of it's vintage. It doesn't have the following the older 27's do, but it's a good boat nonetheless!
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Offline
<A href="mailto:pakek@aol.com">PaulAK</A>
Thanks for your replies- both very helpful. When I first saw the listing for the boat, I was confused as well as I had previously seen the production dates and it didn't really make sense to me. I haven't seen it in person yet, so I can't comment on its condition. One question...would this boat still have the tall rig or not?
Offline
<A href="mailto:talwolf@hotmail.com">TalW</A>
All Mk III/V's (ha ha!) had the same rig size:
I=35'6", J=10'1", P=30'6", E=10'9"
FYI, there were 2 different rig configs available. I think both had the same mast size, extrusion, & spreader locations, but one had an additional set of intermediate shrouds (D2's) that went from the spreader tip to a point about halfway up the rest of the mast. I've never heard of a PHRF adjustment for rig type & don't know of an actual comparison between the 2, but I can only imagine that the config with D2 shroud's improve mast stiffness...
The boat's not a light air flyer, but it's OK in 5 knots & fine in 8+ knots...
Cheers,
Tal ../)../)..
Offline
<A href="mailto:jcwente@rogers.com">Jim Wente</A>
Well, I own a 1985 C&C 27 - and we call it a MKV in Ontario! I agree, watch for core rot around the mast, and around the baby stay. Also look for rot at the base of the forward wood bulkhead - when the baby-stay leaks the water runs to the base of the bulkhead. We have MKVs with and without the intermediate shrouds at our club, and it doesn't seem to matter much in terms of performance. C&C did produce a MKV version with a shoal draft which has a shorter rig. They are for cruising only, and will not perform as well upwind.
Look for leaks at the corners of the windows, and check the underside of the cabin top for leaks(there is a peel-away access cover). But don't be put-off by a few problems - they are great boats!
Offline
<A href="mailto:fred.butler@shaw.ca">Fred Butler</A>
If we am to believe this website, there should be no confusion as to whether we are talking about a Mark III or Mark IV, or a Mark V. If it was indeed manufactured in 1984, it must be a Mark V, as the Mark IIIs were produced to 1981 and the IVs to 1982 (see C&C 27 Profile and Description).
If it is a Mark V, it is a completely different boat from all the previous C&C 27, and can't even be fairly compared. It is about one foot shorter LOA and is beamier, length to beam ratio and the sail plan is also totally different (I tried a Mark V genny on my Mark III and it was so much smaller as to be useless). It tends to be faster than the older 27s when the wind pipes up but can be beat handily by the older 27s in light airs.
Both boats, in my mind, are very good and will provide lots of good fun on the water.
Fred
Offline
Pages: 1