Tartan 34
Katie Hamilton
a Tartan 34? I'm looking for a cruising sailboat
and have always admired the design and layout.
Anything you can tell me will be appreciated.
Thanks, Katie
Steven Fisher
Katie Hamilton <katie.h...@housenet.com> wrote:
>Anyone have good or bad experience owning
>a Tartan 34? I'm looking for a cruising sailboat
>and have always admired the design and layout.
>Anything you can tell me will be appreciated.
Someone looked at a 1976 or so Tartan 34, and found quite a number of 2" or so
blister areas on the boat. He brought up that while blisters can be fixed on
the hull, any blisters in the centerboard trunk might be hard to detect and fix.
-steve
Andrew Falcon
(Katie Hamilton) wrote:
I don't own one, but I've sailed on one a fair amount (actually a Tartan
33, which is virtually the same boat). It has good performance upwind,
considering its shoal draft Scheel keel. Not spectacular off the wind. It
has a lot of sail area, so light air performance is good, but it can be
overpowered in heavier air. Nice layout, and it seems well built, though I
haven't had to deal with maintenance/repair issues. Tartan certainly has a
good reputation. As a coastal cruiser, it's a good candidate. But, if your
plans include going offshore, I would suggest a closer scrutiny of the
boat. The capsize screening formula is at best a rough approximation of a
boat's offshore safety, since it only considers displacement and beam, but
it's somewhat higher for the Tartan, which is a light, beamy boat
(remember that nice interior layout?) than is recommended offshore. Since
the boat is shoal draft, it is also less likely to get the ballast down
low enough to compensate for these two factors than a deep keel boat (I
don't know if Tartan made a deep draft version). This doesn't mean that
it's a poor choice offshore, just that it might be, and you would want to
look more carefully at the boat if you intend to use it outside coastal
waters.
Dan Pfeiffer
You sure your talking about the same or nearly same boat?
The Tartan 34 had a swing keel and not a Scheel keel. Or at least
I dont think it ever was made with a Scheel keel (which is a fixed
keel). And the 34 isn't that wide is it? I think the 33 may be a
completly different boat.
On the 34, I have a friend with one and it has been a wonderfull boat
for him. And Paractical Sailor reviewed it quite favorably.
-DHP
Doug LeBon
pfei...@humboldt.kent.edu (Dan Pfeiffer) writes:
> In article <afalcon-3001...@afalcon.gsfc.nasa.gov>, afa...@gsfc.nasa.gov (Andrew Falcon) writes:
> |> In article <95012618...@housenet.com>, katie.h...@housenet.com
> |> (Katie Hamilton) wrote:
> |>
> |> > Anyone have good or bad experience owning
> |> > a Tartan 34? I'm looking for a cruising sailboat
> |> > and have always admired the design and layout.
> |> > Anything you can tell me will be appreciated.
> |> > Thanks, Katie
> |> >
> |> > katie.h...@housenet.com
Katie,
When I was looking for a boat, I viewed a Tartan 34. Nice Boat! It was
one of the boats to beat in the local wednsday night races, I was told.
The one I was looking at was in the mid to late 70's. It had some deck
delamination or gel coat problems at the forward trunk location but was
repaired. The only thing I didn't like was the Atomic 4 sitting in the
middle of the floor of the main cabin. Oh, and the price! So I chose
the Morgan 34 with its classic lines and shallow draft.
Andrew Falcon
Pfeiffer) wrote:
> You sure your talking about the same or nearly same boat?
> The Tartan 34 had a swing keel and not a Scheel keel. Or at least
> I dont think it ever was made with a Scheel keel (which is a fixed
> keel). And the 34 isn't that wide is it? I think the 33 may be a
> completly different boat.
> On the 34, I have a friend with one and it has been a wonderfull boat
> for him. And Paractical Sailor reviewed it quite favorably.
>
> -DHP
There may be more than one Tartan 34. However, the Tartan 33 was also sold
as a Tartan 34, slightly longer overall, but with identical waterline
length, sail area, displacement, beam, interior layout, and, yes, Scheel
keel. I know this because I have looked at both boats in my ongoing boat
search. I think the boats I looked at were built in the 1983-1985 time
frame, so a 1976 Tartan 34 is probably a different boat. Now I'm going to
have to dig out the old listings and see if I can figure this out.
Peter Smith
>|> In article <95012618...@housenet.com>, katie.h...@housenet.com
>|> (Katie Hamilton) wrote:
>|> > Anyone have good or bad experience owning
>|>
>|> I don't own one, but I've sailed on one a fair amount (actually a Tartan
>
>You sure your talking about the same or nearly same boat?
>The Tartan 34 had a swing keel and not a Scheel keel. Or at least
>I dont think it ever was made with a Scheel keel (which is a fixed
>keel). And the 34 isn't that wide is it? I think the 33 may be a
>completly different boat.
Tartan built two different 34's. The first, designed by S&S in the late
1960's was like a grown-up Tartan 30 but with a swing keel. This is the
boat that Dan is speaking of. It was built from maybe 1968-1977, and
shared the early Tartans' tank-like construction. Unfortunately, the
swing keel cost it the 30's nice upwind ability.
The Tartan 33 was the "cruising" version of the Tartan Ten, sharing its
light weight, deck-stepped mast, and fractional rig. It was built
maybe 1977-1983. The only 33 I've sailed on is still in fine shape,
but the Practical Sailor article of a few years ago noted more than a
few that have had structural problems which were attributed to light
scantlings.
The second Tartan 34 was an outgrowth of the 33, but built more heavily
and with more beam and hence more room below. It looks rather like the
33, with the same coachroof and cockpit coaming, but it masthead rigged.
Built maybe 1985-1990. They were made with a fin keel and a Scheel keel,
but I don't think there was a centerboard version. Nice boat, similar
in form and function to the Sabre 34-II.
--
Peter Smith -- psm...@wellspring.us.dg.com
Data General Corp., Westboro, Massachusetts (for whom I do not speak)
Andrew Falcon
Okay, I found the listings. The Tartan 33 and Tartan 34 are identical
boats, except that the Tartan 33 is 33'8" LOA and the (1985) Tartan 34 is
34'5" LOA. Both boats are: 28'10" LWL, 11' beam, 4'5" draft, 10,000 lb.
disp., 4,400 lb. ballast. I assume that changing the LOA was either a
marketing decision or that Sparkman & Stephens decided that the sheerline
could be improved with a redrawing. If there was a previous model Tartan
34, which wouldn't surprise me at all, I would expect that you are
correct, and it is less beamy, since boats were formerly much narrower
than they are today.
At any rate, I have no idea whether the capsize screening formula is even
remotely accurate, since it doesn't take into account ballast, depth of
keel, waterline length, mast height, or, indeed, anything but displacement
and beam. But it comes out to 2.04, which is greater than two and
therefore considered suspect offshore. I would at least want to
investigate further on this point before buying the boat if I intended to
leave coastal waters with it.
As for Practical Sailor, the editorial staff is so fond of Tartans and
Pearsons that I take their reviews of these boats as somewhat less
objective than their other boat reviews. After all, Dan Spurr owned two
Pearsons and currently sails a Tartan, and few boat owners are entirely
objective about their own boats. At any rate, as I pointed out in my
original post, the Tartan 33, which I have sailed quite a bit on, is a
good coastal cruiser with a fair turn of speed and a nice interior layout,
which is why I looked at it and the Tartan 34.
Peter D. Engels
(Peter Smith) wrote:
> In article <3gjbto$s...@ns.mcs.kent.edu> pfei...@humboldt.kent.edu (Dan
Pfeiffer) writes:
>
> Tartan built two different 34's. The first, designed by S&S in the late
> 1960's was like a grown-up Tartan 30 but with a swing keel. This is the
> boat that Dan is speaking of. It was built from maybe 1968-1977, and
> shared the early Tartans' tank-like construction. Unfortunately, the
> swing keel cost it the 30's nice upwind ability.
That "swing keel" was actually a centerboard, which lowered through the
fixed keel. When the centerboard was down, the Tartan 34's upwind ability
was quite good-certainly equivalent to any other sailboat of that period.
With the 'board up, windward ability was poor, due to the draft of four
feet. But why would you ever sail to windward with the centerboard up?
Pete
--
Pete
Arnold Shore
the relationship between the newer 33/34 and the T-10, IMHO.
But! The 34 resembles an earlier Tartan, which I own (or maybe I've
misdescribed that relationship.), the Black Watch, a 37-footer which
resembles the "real" 34, and was designed by Ted Hood, my favorite
designer.
Truth to be spoken, the boat is correctly called the Tartan 37 -- which
is often confused with the newer S&S-designed 37. The hull also appeared
as the Little Harbor 37 and the Hood 37.
I'd really like to hear from anyone with knowledge of this "real" T37.
Not a lot of us around, but it's a sweet boat, lovely lines, and with many
modern features. These include a T-shaped cockpit which lets me trim all
sails from the helm, and a hydraulic centerboard lift.
I'd like to hear from anyone with knowledge or interest in this model.
She's a doll!
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Signature? I don't need no steenkin'
ash...@access.digex.net | signature!
| awww, Arnold Shore, Annapolis, MD
| (410) 849-8721
Katie Hamilton
Well I'm back from Sail Expo, (it was terrific) and convinced
a Tartan 34 is the boat for me. Over the next month I have a few
more to look at, so am trying to arrange travel time to see them.
Will keep you posted. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts.
katie hamilton
Katie Hamilton
Hi Mike,
Well, I'm back. Interesting (and scary) story about your knock down.
Sounds like the boat was very seaworthy when you needed it.
Do you sail out of Milwaukee now? We sailed out of Chicago for many
years before moving to the Chesapeake.
I'm supposed to be working so I gotta run. Talk with you later.
Katie
blacks...@gmail.com
Wayne B
Yes, some of it is even boating related.
All of the older Tartans including the 34 had pretty good reputations
for build quality and cruiseability. That said, they are older boats
and subject to the usual caveats. Of the newer monohulls that I see
out cruising the boondocks, Beneteaus seem to be very popular.