New Nordic Tugs 26 Announcement - A post from SENTOA

Old Dog: You know this much better than me: All boats are a compromise......
Length, Beam, Seaworthiness, Ease of towing and launching, Headroom, Fuel Consumption, Weight, Style and Beauty, Fine Finishing, Price, Upkeep, Wife's Approval, Inboard/Outboard, Sail vs Motor, cost of leaving in water and on and on. In my old age, also full of boats, the C-Dory 22 is a good compromise. Toland's upcoming version also looks good. Zelpha
 
OK, here's my comments. We're a month into our summer cruise on Journey On, which is a 25' C-Dory, which is used for cruising, not fishing. Our third summer cruising this boat. And in addition, we've cruised on 25' and 36' sailboats. And I have some comments on this discussion, for what it's worth.

First of all, lets remember that we're talking about 25'/26' power boats. For Pete's sake, the bathroom at home has more floor space than any of these boats. and a better head. So for cruising, they're all the same: cramped, and we have to accept that. All the shifting around of berths, heads, galleys is going to leave them cramped. Judged on volume, the C-Dory is equivalent to the Ranger, which is equivalent to the Nordic, unless there is something about volume I've missed.

Next is performance. The Ranger and Nordic are diesel powered boats, the C-Dory uses an outboard. However when the C-Dory cruises at the same speed as the two other boats, it's gas mileage isn't bad. In cruising we travel at 7-8 knts, and enjoy the scenery. And, with the C-Dory, when we need to, such as the winds are coming up, we can travel. So the C-dory is the only boat which offers stability at hull speed and planing speeds.

Last is the construction. I assume the hulls are somewhat equivalent. God knows we've tried to break the hull on Journey On, especially in the last few weeks, but she's come through. I also assume that the other two boats are equally well built.

Thus the construction difference is in the inside and above the hull, and I think this is where lies the real difference. The C-Dory is certainly plain, and they haven't employed any cabinet makers inside the cabin. The Ranger is a step up in the accouterments, and I'll bet the Nordic is even better. Of course all this adds weight, which isn't important at hull speed but counts when you're planing as well as when you're towing. and that C-Dory is heavy enough.

Now, the C-Dory prices have increased since we bought Journey On, but I'll bet they're still less than a Ranger and at $200K for a cheaper Nordic, much less than one of those. And it's easy to trailer.

So, each of those boats are good boats, each offers something different, but in the end they all can do the same thing, which is cruise comfortably. I can spend a lot of time cruising on a C-dory, and for me that's the best.

Boris
 
Well, from another 25 owner, we, too, feel it's the right fit for us. But, there is a real world difference between the boats discussed. As 25 owners, we see the volume difference between our boats and the 22s... that extra foot of beam makes a significant difference. Same with the Ranger and the Nordic - that extra beam is going to make the Nordic 26 feel like a lot more boat. We spent a night on the dock at Olga with a Nordic 26 and visited with those folks. Neat boat... and a lot of boat for its length. They were very interested in how we used our boat, especially the trailering aspects.

If I were in the market for a trailerable tug, it would be the Ranger, no question. But if it's going to stay in the water in one place, that changes the equation.

As with most purchases, you pay your money, you make your choice. Both nice boats. Anyone here mulling over that decision? :wink:
 
Nope, we have concluded we are very happy with Daydream, and anything else would be a waste of the Anderson family resources!


JamesTXSD":zv4rhfz3 said:
As with most purchases, you pay your money, you make your choice. Both nice boats. Anyone here mulling over that decision? :wink:
Click to expand...
 
Here's a bit of spec information that might shed light on the relative construction of the 3 boats being discussed: Length: Nordic 26'-4"; R25 24'-7"; CD25 25'-5". Beam: Nordic 9'-6"; R25 8'-6"; CD25 8'-6". Displacement(weight): Nordic 6800#; R25 5750#; CD25 4200#(appx.). Draft: Nordic 32"; R25 26"; CD25 ?. They are obviously very different boats, in ways far beyond the type of cabinetry installed. The overarching rule is that as long as everyone is happy with the boat they choose for themselves then everything is cool! Cheers, Mike.
 
Pat Anderson":1wiauc8r said:
Nope, we have concluded we are very happy with Daydream, and anything else would be a waste of the Anderson family resources!


JamesTXSD":1wiauc8r said:
As with most purchases, you pay your money, you make your choice. Both nice boats. Anyone here mulling over that decision? :wink:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That was kinda my point, Pat. The discussion is interesting, perhaps even fun... but in the end, it's not going to affect many of us. 8)

Take care of the eye, my friend.

Best wishes,
Jim
 
Weight is a topic I can't resist. First, I built spacecraft, and if it was too heavy, it wasn't a spacecraft. If you were over the allowance, weight could be worth $10,000/lb. Also, I raced motorcycles and the lighter the easier it was to ride. The bikes I rode went from 320# down to 220#, and boy did I enjoy that as I got older.

The same doesn't necessarily apply to boats. We sailed a Catalina 36 to Tahiti, which weighed (bare, no provisions, fuel, etc.) 7 tons. Other boats that went with us weighed twice as much, for the same length. We got there a couple of days earlier, but they were probably more comfortable. So you pays your money and takes your choice. Half way across we wanted more weight, say the Queen Mary.

As for the weight of a C-25, light is good for planing and towing, bad for bouncing. I've weighed Journey On (actually the boat and trailer,) and I found that the !@#$ thing weighs about 7000# ready to cruise. I don't know where anyone gets those advertised weights, but I suspect that's a bare hull or wishful thinking. Add motors, batteries, fluids, interior, etc. And of course, Judy has become adept at packing the inside for cruising, and that weighs a lot. I'm on a weight reduction program now. Weight affects both fuel use and performance, more so in a planing boat than a semi-displacement hull.

So of the three boats, weight reflects their style more than saying if one is better than another. ALL are good small boats.

Boris
 
I might point out that Doryman's post was:
"I asked him if the new 26 would be the same as the old 26 and he said it would be popped from the same molds but it would be finished much plainer on the inside than the old ones due to the increased cost of labor and materials. I asked him how he felt the 26 would line up against the Ranger 29 and he said that the Nordic was built much better and that the Ranger was designed to appeal on the basis of its lines rather than its quality. I know that Skip is related to the Nordic builder family,"

I assume that the "Ranger 29" was not a typo--and that we know very little about the Ranger 29 (but perhaps the dealers know much more than has been released).

From the little I have heard; the Ranger 29 will be a wider beam, and not trailerable without a wide load permit--again, it is very difficult to compare a 24 foot boat, a 26 foot boat and a 29 foot boat, all with different beams. I doubt that we will really have an answer to this question until both boats are seen side by side and we see sea trials.

We have long distance cruised boats from 20 to 62 feet in length--and certainly agree that there is a huge difference in both comfort and ammenities. Volume of livable area is what makes the difference, not necessarilly the length. The C Dory 25 certainly is one of the best "small" boats I have owned--and for what it is, and what it is designed for, it is s surperb boat. I am looking forward to seeing the Ranger 29, as well as the New Nordic Tug--but will stick to the 25 for our trailering West Coast travels.
 
Have been enjoying some nice NW weather on the water (without the laptop) and am a bit behind on this discussion. Like James TXSD, I find it interesting although it's unlikely to change any opinions. Thank goodness there are a fairly large number of choices out there since when it comes to boating, there is no "one size - fits all". About the only thing we could all probably agree on is that various sized C-Dorys, C-Rangers and Nordic Tugs are all good boats for someone.

A comment or two about previous posts.

Thanks to Westward for providing some data. The unfortunate part is that it all may be somewhat meaningless since there does not appear to be any real standardization when it comes to measuring boats. Something as simple as LOA (length overall) is muddied by the fact that some manufacturers include the bowsprit if the boat has one and others don't. So even something as simple as how long is it? - may not be consistent boat to boat. You certainly can't depend upon the name since some manufacturers of boats include the swim platform and others don't. (Some like the Camano change their definition which makes it even more interesting - the Camano 29 is now a Camano 31). And weight. Displacement and weight are not equivalent. Displacement is a theoretical calculation by the designer - nobody ever measures it for real. As long as it is done consistently for large boats, it has some uses and value. For the recreational small boat, it is rather useless. For a trailerable boat, it might prove worse than useless since if you're deciding on a tow vehicle, you need to know what the boat (and trailer) weigh - not the theoretical displacement of the boat.

Thataway is right to steer the conversation back to the boats quoted in the earlier post that generated this discussion - neither of which has been built yet. They may not even prove to be comparable.

Having spent some more time recently on my Nordic Tug, I will, however, stick firmly with my earlier comments. It's the details - the fit and finish; the precison and clear labeling of all wiring, plumbing, pumps and parts; access; it's redundancy; and on and on. It's experience and it's aiming at different market but the result in my mind is a higher quality product. We're not talking a Rolls Royce versus Yugo difference here - both of which fundamentally do the same thing - it's the difference between two good boats for different people with different uses in mind. As James TXSD says, you pays your money, you takes your chances.
 
Bob Austin wrote: "We have long distance cruised boats from 20 to 62 feet in length--and certainly agree that there is a huge difference in both comfort and amenities".

Bob,
How does the C.D Tomcat 255 fit in this discussion?
 
Old Dog: I'm curious as to your description and observations re the handling and seakeping of your Nordic 26. I've heard different things about this over the years, but have never really heard from someone who actually owned one. I assume the new 26 will be like the old if they're "popped out of the same molds" as indicated previously. I would also encourage input from Rosborough RF246 owners here. Many of us dream of something a bit bigger and more heavily built for the longer excursions we hope to take in the future. Thanks, Mike.
 
GaryK asks how the Tom Cat 255 fits in the discussion (I assume size and "cruisability"). I look at the Tom Cat and C Dory 25 as being very comperable boats, with a slightly larger bunk on the Tom Cat, a better ride and faster boat over the CD 25, but not really directly comperable to the trawlers. In my opinion, the Tom Cat has a better ride in any seas up to 3.5 feet than any trawler near this size (and even up to that of a 42 foot trawler we owned). The CD 25 is slower, but is certainly equal a cruising boat for coastal work.

After our several months on the 25 this summer, Marie had a list of several items she would desire in a small cruising boat--these included a 3 burner gas stove with an oven, and a stall shower. The Ranger 24 or Nordic 26 do not have these--you have to go the Nordic 32 to get this (I don't know what the Ranger 29 will have, but if it has these two features, we would be interested in buying one).

Most of our boats have been sailboats, but our two pilothouse motorsailors (46 and 62 feet) were similar to trawlers--but more effecient. We also owned a 30 foot Carver which had a single diesel--had a stall shower, the three burner stove and oven, plus an aft cabin as well as a foreward good size cabin....a lot of boat for the size--and we also owned a 42 foot trawler, which again has much more space and amenities than any 26 foot boat.

The Speed, ride and large bunk are what sold us on the Tom Cat. (we find that the head in the Tom Cat is slightly easier to shower in than the CD 25). But again--a lot of difference between the slower trawlers--and certainly less effecient in the use of fuel--which is certainly one of the real pluses of the small trawlers.
 
thataway":24mmkfaw said:
I assume that the "Ranger 29" was not a typo--and that we know very little about the Ranger 29 (but perhaps the dealers know much more than has been released).
Click to expand...

No -- I started my conversation with Skip by asking him when I would be able to see the Ranger 29 and he said, at the SBS. That's when I asked him how it would stack up against the new Nordic 26.

Too bad I will miss the intro of the Ranger 29, as I will be on the Gulf Coast then.

Warren
 
Thanks Bob, I thought you would be the person to compare the Tomcat with the other, under 30' cruising boats. We have loged over 6000 mi. with our Tomcat. Two trips from Anacortes Wa to SE Alaska. The Tomcat is a very comfortable boat for two and manageable for three. It's speed is very desirable when making those long open-water crossings. Usually taking advantage of the three hours of flat water at day break. As you pointed out it handles three foot seas very well. ( on a beam reach it excells ), It has the option to slow to eight to ten knots and achieve trawler economy. Compared to monohulls of simular size, the cabin space appears much larger. If one is looking for a trailable cruising boat under 30' with extreme versatility the Tomcat should be considered.
Garyk
 
Back
Top