Association Forum

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

Catalina 250 Specific Forum

Water Ballast versus Wing Keel & Older versus Newe

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format Mode:

Format:

Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON

Smilies

Check here to include your profile signature.
Check here to subscribe to this topic.

T O P I C R E V I E W
zeil	Posted - 07/08/2021 : 09:28:08 For sure nothing new for old hands but for us, who only experienced the water ballast version of the Catalina 250, here are some first impressions now that we own both types and will have to make a decision which of the two we will favor more... First impressions Water ballast versus Wing keel WK Boarding while boat is on the trailer requires an additional short ladder WK Wheel somewhat obstructing when boarding from the swim ladder Wk Love the extra headroom... Johanna can stand up straight WK Appreciate full access of the aft berth and "swinging", companion way steps Wk Takes more to tow/stop the extra weight and is more prone to winds but presents no problems for "heavier", tow vehicle Wk Cabin appears overall to be more spacious
17 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
csmcg	Posted - 12/27/2021 : 11:30:54 I started a thread in the general sailing forum (apologies if it is in the wrong place) describing our situation and choices regarding WK vs WB. I would really appreciate any thoughts folks might have. Regards, Chris
csmcg	Posted - 12/27/2021 : 11:23:47 MacGregor Yachts became Tattoo Yachts in Stuart, Florida. https://tattooyachts.com/ I can't tell if Tattoo is really an active company or not.
zeil	Posted - 10/02/2021 : 16:08:34 Interesting to know that about equal numbers of wing and water ballast boats were produced Having crewed on a C25 it not surprising to me that they were produced in such high numbers prior to the C250 series. It was after all, like all Catalinas, well designed, built and is appreciated by its owners. Wonder if anybody has stories of some long distance ocean cruising with C25 There is and IMHO will, always remain a market for these versatile petit cruisers even though markets may wish a foot or two more to include greater comfort the fact remains that the size breathes economy, fun and versatility.
Stinkpotter	Posted - 09/30/2021 : 21:10:05 quote: Originally posted by zeil Any idea how many wing keelers were made or as a percentage of the water ballast production Did other manufacturers continue producing trailarable 25ft boats when Catalina ended the C250 production in 2019?... Hunter, McGregor etc Our Boat Search can give you some samples from which you can extrapolate WK vs WB. From that sample, it appears more WK's were made than WBs, and only a few C-250s were made in their last couple of years. A little over 1000 were made in the full run, compared to >6000 C-25s in fewer years. I recall there were some years when over 700 C-25s were built. So "the handwriting was on the wall..." MacGregor has closed its doors, Hunter makes nothing between 15' and 31' (...graffiti on the wall.), and Com-Pac offers a 23' Pilothouse that I'll charitably say is for a very boutique audience. (Com-Pac made some lovely little cruisers!) The marketplace seems to be divided between "sport boats" and cruisers with standing headroom, centerline queens, and wet showers--and toward powerboats with three 300 hp outboards.
zeil	Posted - 09/30/2021 : 08:49:09 Any idea how many wing keelers were made or as a percentage of the water ballast production Did other manufacturers continue producing trailarable 25ft boats when Catalina ended the C250 production in 2019?... Hunter, McGregor etc
Stinkpotter	Posted - 09/28/2021 : 20:05:32 quote: Originally posted by SailAway David Crosby (WK #614) and I (WB #649) sail together and even though both boats were built in 2002, we have noticed many differences between them... ...like one is a WB and the other a SK. From the rubrail up and the rubrail down, they are different boats (except the basic hull form), each with advantages and disadvantages. The WB is for trailering, and offers lower draft for the ramp, lower stance and lighter weight on a trailer, less headroom, and is more tender (leading to Catalina not rigging it for a genoa). Catalina almost immediately dropped the 250 fin keel and tall rig options, I suspect due to concerns over tenderness and the perceived market move toward lighter mid-sized sailboats as well as the real move away from small, "affordable" cruising sailboats, which ended the C-250's run, with no successor.
zeil	Posted - 09/27/2021 : 17:11:34 Seems the likable full acrylic smoked companion sliding hatch must have been standard or offered as an option since our 2000 came with it. Another improvement made was to include in the hull gel coat "sling", placement locations And adding a cockpit mounted traveler
TakeFive	Posted - 09/27/2021 : 10:52:42 Earlier boats (including my prior 1998 boat) had an all-acrylic companionway hatch (smoked color). At some point after 1998 they switched to a non-skid fiberglass hatch with a small square insert of smoked acrylic. Also, the previously mentioned coaming step appeared somewhere between 1997 and 1998 model years, based on the boats that I observed. Sometime after 1998, Catalina also changed the size and shape of the outboard motor well on the starboard side. I think they made even bigger changes to this in the MkII version. Does anyone know exactly when the MkII version appeared? It seems like Catalina ended production only a year or two after that. Also, there were a very few fin keel specimens produced, and I think there were also a few tall mast versions. The latter was probably not a good idea because the boat tend to be over-canvassed even with the standard mast height. I know a couple of you prefer a 135 genoas, but I think there's a reason the vast majority were delivered with a 110.
SailAway	Posted - 09/27/2021 : 09:23:19 David Crosby (WK #614) and I (WB #649) sail together and even though both boats were built in 2002, we have noticed many differences between them. One of the issues I have is the jib tracks. The tracks on David's boat extend more forward than mine do. With the jib cars all the way forward, David is able to get really good shape on his jib. I am unable to get my jib cars far enough forward to get good shape. When sheeted in, the top half always seems to be luffing. I have a 110% and I believe David has a 100%.
Stinkpotter	Posted - 09/26/2021 : 13:12:12 quote: Originally posted by zeil Few "older versus newer" observations... Several of the differences Henk describes are what I recall of the differences between WK and WB from the beginning, like shrouds and spreaders. Early on, I believe only the WK offered a 135% jib, enabled by the different standing rigging. A few things are changes made to the deck/cabin mold in the Mk II version (not sure when) when the windows were reconfigured. But it's good to be aware of differences and changes--they can add value beyond a simple difference in age.
Steve Milby	Posted - 09/24/2021 : 18:59:21 quote: Originally posted by zeil Few "older versus newer" observations Newer 1) shrouds placed farther inboard... stronger? weaker? more awkward? 2) shorter spreaders... I haven't sailed that version, but the inboard shrouds and shorter spreaders should enable you to trim the jib closer inboard, and that should enable the boat to sail a bit closer to the wind.
zeil	Posted - 09/24/2021 : 18:43:10 Few "older versus newer" observations Newer 1) shrouds placed farther inboard... stronger? weaker? more awkward? 2) shorter spreaders... for easier mast raising 3) deck extended jib car tracks for use with 135% or larger jibs 4) entree coaming step from shore to cockpit 5) stern cat seats 6) propane tank in coaming locker 7) door handle to head improved 8) galley cup & dish holder added 9) mast raising system from anchor locker to trailer 10) block attachment plate below mast tabernacle added 11) closed cell foam cockpit cushions, seats, etc. 12) extra set of gudgeons for stern mast carrier and rudder 13) fresh water tank inlet located in anchor locker
wm36	Posted - 08/03/2021 : 19:25:11 I am on and off my trailer a couple times a year, so the WB is a winner for me. Would love the head room but I have enough "stories" from the boat ramp with my WB. Can't imagine the extra depth needed for the WK.
Stinkpotter	Posted - 07/09/2021 : 19:54:12 Am I seeing that right--about 13" more cabin headroom? I had always heard it was about 5", as it appears on the aftberth comparison. That's HUGE!
GaryB	Posted - 07/08/2021 : 19:16:10 I'd go for the headroom every time.
islander	Posted - 07/08/2021 : 17:12:23 WK=No lifting mechanism or water ballast tank maintenance. That alone gets my vote.
DavidCrosby	Posted - 07/08/2021 : 16:00:13 I had posted these pictures many years ago. Reposting since the topic is fitting: Aft Berth - top of cushion to bottom of cockpit. My lovely bride showing the difference in headroom. Measurements showing difference in headroom.

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.