Rob's comments are very interesting and lead me to believe that the "MK1" was a 
custom racer/cruiser version of the 1 tonner. I would guess that not many of 
these were built. I also am starting to believe that we all own the production 
version (MK2 if you want) of the 38. I don't think C&C ever made any 
distinction of mk1 or mk2 on these boats. Rob's comment about the beam 
measurement is a puzzler to me, all the literature lists the beam as being 12', 
not 12.79' but it definitely is a wide boat. I also have always been puzzled by 
the hull numbers, Rick's early 1976 is hull #47 and my 1976 is #100; that's an 
unbelievable number of boats to be built in less than a year. They didn't build 
that many 30's in a year! Rob also commented that he didn't think they built a 
100 of the production 38 (Mk2) and that fits with the sailboatdata figure of 98 
boats built. Looks to me like they skipped a bunch of hull numbers (shortly 
after Rick's boat). I can't think of a good reason to do that but it may 
explain why the whole mk1/mk2 thing evolved. The more I think about this the 
more convinced I am becoming that the Mk1 was a custom racer/cruiser version of 
the 1 tonner and starting in 1975 C&C introduced the production 38 which what 
we all own. 
James Taylor
S/V Delaney
1976 C&C 38 (Mk?)
Oriental, NC

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: David via CnC-List 
  To: CNC CNC 
  Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 9:07 AM
  Subject: Stus-List FW: C&C 38 mk1 vs mk2m Response


  To Jim and all C & C 38 owners...

  See below from the "wise old C &C designer"



  David F. Risch
  1981 40-2
  (401) 419-4650 (cell)




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: [email protected]
  To: [email protected]
  Subject: RE: Stus-List C&C 38 mk1 vs mk2
  Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 08:24:58 -0400


  I can’t figure out what 38 Mark 1 and Mark 2 are  . . . .



  I’m getting old you know  , . . . and I don’t have Jim’s e-mail address  . . .



  The comments he makes don’t fit my impression of the two 38’s that I’m 
thinking of . . .



  To me the Mark one was an IOR One Ton hull made into a racer cruiser . . .



  The Mark Two was the first design I did entirely on the computer and it 
is/was wildly different from the Mark One, and it is the widest boat (for its’ 
size) that I ever did, so the comments don’t fit . . . 



  The beam on Mark1 is 12.16 and the Mark 2 is 12.79 . . .



  So, there must be two versions of the original 38, that I’m forgetting, and a 
change of rudder and ballast is a realistic possibility – but the beam would be 
the same on both, and for sure the two keels cannot be that different.  I show 
the ballast as being 5980 lb. for the Mark 1 . . .



  So – I’d like more details . . . . I am quite sure we did not build even a 
hundred of what I think of as the mark 2  . . . .





  Cheers,



        Rob Ball
        Chief Design Engineer
       

       
        Edson International
        Tel 508-995-9711
        Fax 508-995-5021
        Email: [email protected]
       

        www.edsonintl.com
       





  From: David [mailto:[email protected]] 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 4:32 PM
  To: Rob Ball
  Subject: FW: Stus-List C&C 38 mk1 vs mk2



  Rob,

  Forgive the last sentence  but could you shed some light on the topic below.

  Thanks in advance.

  David F. Risch
  (401) 419-4650 (cell)



  > Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:23:57 -0700
  > To: [email protected]
  > Subject: Re: Stus-List C&C 38 mk1 vs mk2
  > From: [email protected]
  > 
  > When I was buying my 38 Mk 2 (hull #132) recently, the prior owner told 
  > me the difference between the mk1 and mk2 was a deeper rudder and more 
  > keel ballast on the mk2.
  > He said those adjustments were made to try to provide better downwind 
  > control in broachable conditions.
  > 
  > Sailboatdata.com seems to at least partially back him up though their 
  > numbers are confusing. They have the mk2 with 6800 lbs of ballast 
  > compared to the mk1 with 4400. Yet they both are listed with 
  > displacements of 14,700. The other difference they show is a slightly 
  > beamier mk1.
  > 
  > I agree that if the designs were even mildly different, the PHRFs would 
  > likely reflect that and don't. So I probably just complicated this 
  > search for Hoffa's remains but the subject has puzzled me as well, so 
  > thought I'd throw in what I'd heard.
  > 
  > I wish there was a wise old C&C designer on this list to resolve such 
  > mysteries.
  > 
  > Jim Lynch
  > 
  > Alcyone
  > 1977 38-2
  > Olympia, Wa
  > 
  > 
  > ---
  > This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus 
protection is active.
  > http://www.avast.com
  > 
  > 
  > _______________________________________________
  > This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album
  > 
  > Email address:
  > [email protected]
  > To change your list preferences, including unsubscribing -- go bottom of 
page at:
  > http://cnc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/cnc-list_cnc-list.com
  > 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Total Control Panel
             Login
             
       
                    To: [email protected]
                   
                    From: [email protected]
                   
             Remove this sender from my allow list
                   
             
       
              You received this message because the sender is on your allow 
list.
             
       





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album

  Email address:
  [email protected]
  To change your list preferences, including unsubscribing -- go bottom of page 
at:
  http://cnc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/cnc-list_cnc-list.com

_______________________________________________
This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album

Email address:
[email protected]
To change your list preferences, including unsubscribing -- go bottom of page 
at:
http://cnc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/cnc-list_cnc-list.com

Reply via email to