orca 38 sailboat review

• 2020 Sailing Schedule
• What to Expect
• Certification
• About the Boat
• Reserve Your Berth
• Onboard Advisor
• Upcoming Engagements
• Women’s Sailing Conferences
• Speaking Topics
• Fees and Availability
• About Nancy Erley
• Circumnavigation
• Testimonials
• Photo Gallery
• Nancy’s Sailing Blog
• Nancy Erley, Captain of Two World Circumnavigations
• Sailing Instruction

When she decided she wanted to sail around the world, she chose Tethys and three friends joined her as financial owners of the boat. As captain, Nancy completed her US Coast Guard 50-ton Master of Oceans & 100-ton Master Near Coastal licenses, Advanced Ham radio license Ki7dp, ISPA Instructor Evaluator Ocean and PADI advanced SCUBA. After the first circumnavigation in 1995 Nancy bought Tethys from the other owners and started teaching women full-time. For nearly 40 years, she has shared her love of boats and sailing with other women- as teacher, advocate and international public speaker.

Nancy Erley led two voyages from Seattle around the world aboard her Orca 38 sailboat, Tethys. “As the skipper of an all-woman crew, Nancy fashioned a circumnavigation that should go down in the record books as one of the soundest, most seamanlike journeys in the modern cruising era. Like all competent voyages, Tethys circumnavigation was notable for its lack of disasters.” George Day, publisher Blue Water Sailing magazine.

In 2006 Nancy was presented with the Leadership in Women’s Sailing Award sponsored by BoatUS and the National Women’s Sailing Association. The award honors a male or female who has built a record of achievement in inspiring, educating and enriching the lives of women through sailing.

In addition to teaching women sailing aboard Tethys, Nancy holds a yacht salesperson license and acts as a buyer’s representative to find the right boat for each individual. “The truth is that I just love boats,” admits Nancy Erley. And if you stand within earshot or her sea stories, you will begin to believe you love boats.

Carla M. Dole, CTC. Maiden Voyages magazine

Members: Sign in Here --> Members: Sign in Here Contact Us

Email This Page to a Friend Preview: The Three Boats I Lust After (and Why)

January 1, 2012

I’m lucky. Boat lust led to some amazing adventures with nothing to hide from my mother. Naive to boats just two short decades ago, my love of Quarter Horse curves transferred to beamy double-enders and land winds that came sweeping down the plains led to sea winds blowing across on long ocean swells. Double-enders are the boats that first caught my eye, flamed a passion, and continue to hold my heart to this day. From a first sail on an Eric Jr.  to a circumnavigation on an Orca 38 , (think Colin Archer) to my first experience owning a boat, the Danish Spidsgatter Pax , lust turned to love for double-enders and still makes my world go ‘round.

Eric Junior, designed by William Atkin

It might have been my flexing knees on the dock that started the flashback, or maybe it was the shape of that beamy boat with the bow and stern cleated to a piling. Whatever it was, the first time I swung my leg ovr a lifeline, coiled a line and left a harbor, I was flooded with metaphors of my Oklahoma childhood on a ranch. Go figure. Boats resonated because I grew up on horses and in the wind. When this beamy Atkin double-ender pulled a little away from the dock as I started to get aboard, I reacted the same as with a horse that leans away as you step in the saddle. I knew that boat wasn’t going far, wouldn’t buck too hard, and once aboard would rock gently back to center, buoyant beneath me, responsive, an easy ride.  That proved true for a first sail and later, for a six month upwind passage from Australia to Hawaii. Crossing the terrible Tasman Sea, we were hove-to for 10 of 19 days, and having two pointy-ends is a mighty comfort with southern ocean swells smacking from any angle, day after day. Childhood bliss and a primal urge for survival were clearly mixed together, no doubt, in my “lust” for the Eric Jr. [Kaci, does this boat have a name, and if so, can we add it?] 

. . . sign up to the right to get immediate access to this full post, plus you'll get 10 of our best videos for free.

Get Free Videos & Learn More Join Now!! for Full Access Members Sign In

GET THIS FULL POST!

Get Immediate Access, Plus 10 of Our Best Videos

• Email Address

• Forum Listing
• Marketplace
• Advanced Search
• About The Boat
• Boat Review Forum
• SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Nauticat 38 for offshore sailing. Thoughts?

• Add to quote

I have sailed a Nauticat 37 (sloop rigged). But not a 38. I checked some pictures on yachtworld and there are some similarities. The teak rails are nice and sturdy, but once past a beam reach I found that an outboard barber hauler was necessary to prevent chafe on the jib sheet. The pilot house does result in a high centre of effort in the main which can lead to tenderness. The one sailed had a tall rig as well. The hydraulic steering was a little tricky. You have to remember to transfer control. Engine access was via the saloon floor. There were two layers to remove. The floors are secured well. The workmanship was great.  

Some time back we had a NautiCat owner on board SailNet and they were in the main positive about their boat but I seem to remember two points. 1. The sliding doors posed an insurance issue for offshore use. 2. One of the owners found the motion unacceptable. Again from memory only but I seem to recall something about the height of the aft deck being the problem. I dare say that era NC would be something of a motor sailor in light airs but for the coconut run should be fine though maybe sailing ability would be more of an issue once you are tromping around Australia and/or heading home. As I said I'm going off my somewhat faulty memory from days past. User was maybe TrueBlue ? They havn't posted here for some years but do a search of that name and have a read. Someone else has a Nauticat as well don't they ?  

I will add stuff as it comes to mind. The showers drain into the bilge - not wise in my opinion.  

erkk .... why oh why would anyone do this ? The smell is gonna get you. My only other thought is that before we bought our current boat we did seriously consider a pilot house/deck saloon albeit not Nauticats themselves and one of the major reasons for not going PH was heat through those big windows. For the PNW I'd not argue and would almost certainly go PH but not for the tropics.  

Nauticat's construction quality is top notch and the interior woodwork is absolutely beautiful. I've never sailed one but there have been a few in to the marina here and the owners tend to love them (the 38's, well, actually all of them). Like TD I recall an owner of a 38 that posted regularly here but can't remember the name, I'll do a search and see if I can find something. There has been a NC 38 in a storage yard between the Sw. slough and Anacortes (south side of Hwy 20 just west of the topsoil place) for years, I keep looking at it wondering if it will ever see the water again. edit: the owner I was trying to remember was "Christyleigh" and also as TD mentioned "TrueBlue".  

I forgot about SailBoat Data ..... duh. Your formosa has an SA/D of 13.59, the Nauticat 38 13.67. Not much difference it seems though. NAUTICAT 38 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com FORMOSA 41 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com What a great site that is.  

Thanks Fuzzy! Great insight. I guess another part of the equation is that the one we're looking at has air-con and a genset. Neither of which I would pay a dollar to add, and I don't really like air-con but then again, when I was in The Isa I did use it to cool down my flat before going to sleep. Sleeping in the hot is not my favorite. If it does take running the genset all day to mitigate the window issue, that would not please me but since the boat has it, I'm sure I'd fire it up from time to time. I suppose I should have looked at the data before asking too many questions. Nice coincidence that the SA/D ratios are the same. Don't hardly need to know what the numbers mean now because they're the same for both boats. I think I could be happy with most of the Nauticat issues and quirks, and while I'm not afraid of windows offshore, the big doors do still give me pause.... but then again, aren't nauticats common boats to be seen circumnavigating the downwind routes? MedSailor  

I certainly don't know these boats well but a couple of general observations. I think we saw a few (not necessarily 38's but in that range) of these in the Caribbean and maybe one between Panama and South Africa, can remember where though. Don't assume that your route means you are safe from nastiness. We were knocked down in 50+ knots in French Polynesia. You need to know whether the windows are designed to take that sort of abuse. I talked to a guy who builds Oysters and he said the tempered glass windows they have now are stronger than the hull. Was this true in the 70s/80s? I have no idea but would want to know. About the doors, try to picture a good part of the local ocean landing on the deck - most often forward, but could be from anywhere, After the bath you have six inches of water running down the leeward decks. Where does it go? How long does it take to drain? and Is there is an issue with the doors? I don't know these boats well enough to even suggest an answer. Is the one you are looking at a ketch or cutter? In general ketches are not as good going downwind as single-masters and when you add the very low SA/D ratio it becomes very problematic. Think about various downwind rigs (two poles for example, but even then the sail area with a ketch is small), or some form of spinnaker. Heating from the sun could be an issue, but I assume you could almost always have one door open. It can be very hot in places (northern Oz being one and we were there mid-winter) and I don't think you want to rely on the a/c too much. At the very least it will mean carrying lots of jerry cans of fuel from the nearest gas station since most places do not fuel docks. I looked at one of these boats on YW and it had 90 gal of fuel which does not seem to be much for a boat that may have to motor quite a bit and may use the genset quite often.  

A shower that drains into the bilge is easily fixed with a blivet on the end of the drain hose, or installing a shower pan and sump. Heat coming in big glass windows, also fixed easily by applying 3M Crystalline or similar window film, which can cut something like 98% of all IR radiation through the glass, with or without any extra visible tint. Great stuff. But a Nauticat is what it is, no matter what you do to it. Gobs of room, up and down, for the length. Which will mean gobs of windage and motion, as it will on any boat. My impression is that they're really built as comfortable harbor boats which also can conveniently transport themselves under engine or sail, but they're designed for the destination and not the journey. Of course a single-level more conventional design is going to mean either less accommodation space, or a steeper marina bill for the extra length. But I think if I were crossing the Pacific and the Equator, and then circumnavigating Oz, I'd want a more conventional cruising boat aimed at the best experience (comfort, safety, speed) at sea, rather than one built for comfort in harbor. The Nauticat 38 - information for cruising sailors Says capsize ratio 1.51, fwiw.  

Thank you for your thoughts. I never bothered to school myself on the numbers of boat comparison. I always wondered about their utility. So, I assume 1.51 for a capsize ratio is bad?? I would think that all the boyancy of that huge pilothouse up top would help keep you from going over, but only if the doors held, and that's a pretty big if.... As nice as the floating house we're looking at may be, the broker just emailed me the recent survey and it appears that it has lots of blisters. For a boat that is at the upper upper upper end of my price range, I would want turn-key and then some, not a project.... MedSailor  

A few threads for your browsing enjoyment: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/boat-review-purchase-forum/42985-nauticat-36-she-blue.html http://www.sailnet.com/forums/boat-review-purchase-forum/41444-nauticat.html http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/10625-pilothouses.html  

I cruised parallel to a Nauticat 38 in 12-15' head seas for about 35 miles. What a beautiful thing to watch ! Those waves did not bother that boat at all.  

I'm recalling some items as fuzzy is, some of the nauticats while very nice boats, are not ment to be sailed open ocean. IE they only have the european class B not an A rating. Probably a good to great boat for around here in the salish sea, but not in the middle of the ocean! I know one person that had one sink under them in a storm off of SF bay area IIRC. There was an article in 48 north. Not that one should use this ONE sinking as an example of the lack of great sailing, build quality of a boat. If it were me, I would look at this VERY careful. For probably the same coin, there is a Jeanneau SO49iP at marine servicenter that has been to oz and back, and probably ready to go again. Only needs an enclosure. Marty  

Medsailer, You should go to the Nauticat website to see the difference in the 2 lines of Nauticats. Mine and True Blue were the 'Traditional Pilothouses" = Boxy. The other totally seperate line looks more like the "Deck Salon" type of boats being offered by everybody now. Much sleeker and good sailers but with a - Full Pilothouse - not just a raised salon. Also they Don't have the sliding side doors like mine so they are A - Ocean Rated unlike mine at B. Price is going to be your problem - it's obscene ! You may be able to find a 38-42 foot (same boat just listed differently) 86 - 90 somewhere near your price range but I just took a quick look and Nope.  

• ?            
• 173.8K members

Top Contributors this Month

• New Sailboats
• Sailboats 21-30ft
• Sailboats 31-35ft
• Sailboats 36-40ft
• Sailboats Over 40ft
• Sailboats Under 21feet
• used_sailboats
• Apps and Computer Programs
• Communications
• Fishfinders
• Handheld Electronics
• Plotters MFDS Rradar
• Wind, Speed & Depth Instruments
• Anchoring Mooring
• Running Rigging
• Sails Canvas
• Standing Rigging
• Diesel Engines
• Off Grid Energy
• Cleaning Waxing
• DIY Projects
• Repair, Tools & Materials
• Spare Parts
• Tools & Gadgets
• Cabin Comfort
• Ventilation
• Footwear Apparel
• Foul Weather Gear
• Mailport & PS Advisor
• Inside Practical Sailor Blog
• Activate My Web Access
• Reset Password
• Pay My Bill
• Customer Service

• Free Newsletter
• Give a Gift

How to Sell Your Boat

Cal 2-46: A Venerable Lapworth Design Brought Up to Date

Rhumb Lines: Show Highlights from Annapolis

Open Transom Pros and Cons

Leaping Into Lithium

The Importance of Sea State in Weather Planning

Do-it-yourself Electrical System Survey and Inspection

Install a Standalone Sounder Without Drilling

When Should We Retire Dyneema Stays and Running Rigging?

Rethinking MOB Prevention

Top-notch Wind Indicators

The Everlasting Multihull Trampoline

How Dangerous is Your Shore Power?

DIY survey of boat solar and wind turbine systems

What’s Involved in Setting Up a Lithium Battery System?

The Scraper-only Approach to Bottom Paint Removal

Can You Recoat Dyneema?

Gonytia Hot Knife Proves its Mettle

Where Winches Dare to Go

The Day Sailor’s First-Aid Kit

Choosing and Securing Seat Cushions

Cockpit Drains on Race Boats

Rhumb Lines: Livin’ the Wharf Rat Life

Re-sealing the Seams on Waterproof Fabrics

Safer Sailing: Add Leg Loops to Your Harness

Waxing and Polishing Your Boat

Reducing Engine Room Noise

Tricks and Tips to Forming Do-it-yourself Rigging Terminals

Marine Toilet Maintenance Tips

Learning to Live with Plastic Boat Bits

• Sailboat Reviews

Morgan 38/382

Charlie morgan's hurrah becomes ted brewer's success story becomes today's pseudo-classic..

We receive many requests from readers to review certain boats. Almost without exception, the requests come from owners of the boat suggested. Few boats have been the object of more requests than the venerable Morgan 38. At first blush, it is difficult to determine which Morgan 38 we ought to address, as two distinct designs were built since the first one appeared 22 years ago. After some thought, we decided to trace the history of both as best we could, including also the Morgan 382, 383 and 384.

The Morgan 38 was designed in 1969 by Charlie Morgan. He had founded Morgan Yacht Company in St. Petersburg, Florida, in 1965. The Morgan 34 was his first production model. A hometown boy, he had made a name for himself in the 1960 and 1961 Southern Ocean Racing Conference (SORC), winning with a boat of his own design called Paper Tiger . While not a formally trained naval architect, Morgan demonstrated his skill with a variety of designs. Many of these were keel/centerboard models, owing to the shoalness of Florida waters. Seventy-nine were built before production halted in 1971.

In 1977, the Morgan 382 was introduced, designed by Ted Brewer, Jack Corey and the Morgan Design Team. According to Brewer, the boat was loosely based on the Nelson/Marek-designed Morgan 36 IOR One Ton. The most obvious difference between the 38 and 382 was the elimination of the centerboard and the addition of a cruising fin keel (NACA 64 012 foil) with skeg-mounted rudder. They are two completely different designs from two different eras in yacht design.

In 1980, the 382 was given a taller rig and called the 383. About 1983 the boat underwent other subtle changes, now called the Morgan 384. The rudder was enlarged and the interior modified. In its three versions, the Brewer model registered about 500 sales.

The company changed ownership several times during this period. It went public in 1968, was later bought by Beatrice Foods and then Thor Industries. Presently it is owned by Catalina Yachts, who built just 24 38s (three were kits) before discontinuing production in 1986.

The first Morgan 38 was a development of the highly successful 34, which Morgan called a “beamy, keelcenterboard, CCA (Cruising Club of America)-style of yacht. We had a good thing going and didn’t want to deviate; we found little interest in those days in keel boats. Centerboards have their own sorts of problems, but there’s an awful lot of thin water in the world, and safe refuge and quiet anchorages are mostly in shoal water.”

The boat has a long, shoal keel drawing just 3′ 9″ with the board up. The rudder is attached and there is an aperture for the propeller. “Beamy,” in 1969, meant 11 feet. The waterline was fairly short at 28 feet, but the overhangs give the hull a very balanced and pleasing profile. The stern is pure Charlie Morgan—a finely proportioned shape that is neither too big nor too small. In profile, the angle between the stern (which interestingly is a continuation of the line of the backstay) and the counter is nearly 90 degrees. It’s a trademark look.

Sloop and yawl rigs were offered, which was typical of CCA designs. The rig has a lower aspect ratio (the proportion of the hoist to the foot of the mainsail) than later designs, including the Brewer-designed 382. Yet this is a very wholesome rig for cruising. Owners responding to our questionnaire said the boat balances very well.

Owners of the 382 and subsequent permutations seemed less pleased. They didn’t rate balance as highly, noting most frequently the difficulty in tracking (keeping the boat on a straight course) when sailing off the wind (not uncommon with beamy fin keel designs; it’s a trade-off with speed, pointing ability and maneuverability). Others said that they raked their masts forward to improve balance. One thought the problem was caused because the rudder was slightly undersized. Still, these owners liked the way their boats sail.

The rig, of course, isn’t the only difference between the Morgan and Brewer designs. The latter has a foot wider beam—12 feet—and a longer waterline. Two keels were offered, the standard five-foot draft and an optional deep keel of six feet. Displacement jumped a thousand pounds to 17,000 despite a reduction in ballast from 7,500 pounds to 6,600 pounds. Centerboard boats, naturally, require more ballast because it isn’t placed as low as it is in a deep fin keel boat.

The look of the 382 is much more contemporary. The rake of the bow is straighter, as is the counter, which is shorter than the original 38 as well. Freeboard is higher and the windows in the main cabin are squared off for a crisper appearance.

Construction

The hulls of the early 38s were built of solid fiberglass and the decks of sandwich construction. Some 382 hulls were cored, others not. A variety of core materials were used, mostly Airex foam. The lamination schedule was your basic mat and woven roving, with Coremat added as a veil cloth to prevent printthrough.

Both designs have internal lead ballast, sealed on top with fiberglass.

The early 382s did not have the aft bulkhead in the head fiberglassed to the hull, which resulted in the mast pushing the keel down. All boats “work” under load, and bulkheads bonded to the hull are essential to a stiff structure. Anyone who has a boat in which major load-bearing bulkheads are not attached to the hull should do so before going offshore. To its credit, the company launched a major recall program.

The owners of all Morgan 38s, as a group, note the strength of the boat. One said he hit a rock at 6 ½ knots and suffered only minor damage. Very few problems were mentioned. The owner of a 1981 model, however, said he “drilled through hull at waterline and was surprised at thinness of glass on either side of the Airex: 1/8” inside, 1/16″ outside.” With the stiffness that sandwich construction provides, not as much glass is required; still, protection from collision and abrasion would recommend greater thickness outside. Brewer, incidentally, discounted the report.

Interestingly, Hetron-brand fire-retardant resin was used for a time, prior to 1984; if you recall, this was blamed for the many cases of reported blistering on the early Valiant 40s. About half of the 382 owners responding to our surveys reported some blistering, none serious.

The attached rudder of the early 38 is stronger than the skeg-mounted rudder of later models. But we do prefer the skeg configuration to a spade rudder, at least for cruising. A problem with skegs, however, is the difficulty in attaching them strongly to the hull. One owner said his was damaged in a collision with a humpback whale, but that is hardly normal usage!

Several owners of later models commented that the mast was a “utility pole,” recommending a custom tapered spar for those inclined to bear the expense.

Other problems reported in our survey were only minor and were corrected by the company. In fact, owners were nearly unanimous in their praise for Morgan Yachts’ customer service.

The layout of the Morgan 38 is quite conventional and workable. In both incarnations there are Vberths forward, private head with shower (separate enclosure in the 382), dinette in main cabin with settee, galley aft in the port quarter area and nav station with quarter berth opposite to starboard. Specifications for the first 38s included “attractive wood-grained mica bulkhead paneling, with oiled American walnut trim.” This was a popular treatment in the 1960s, and practical, but often done to excess. By the 1980s, fake teak didn’t play so well. Owners wanted real wood, and that’s what they got in the 382.

Owners of early 38s complained of poor ventilation (“I added six opening ports, and would like an additional center cabin hatch,” wrote one), short Vberths (“Could be 4″ longer, but I’m 6′ 2.””), and more closet space (from a live-aboard).

Owners of later models mentioned the need for a larger forward hatch to get sails through, a hatch over the galley, larger cockpit scuppers, and Dorade vents.

(Teak Dorade boxes were added on the 384.) They complained of not enough footroom in the V-berths and poor location of the main traveler in the cockpit. (The traveler was moved to the cabinhouse top on the 384.)

Despite these minuses, most owners cite the volume of the interior and many stowage compartments as major reasons for their satisfaction with the boat.

Performance Under Sail

As implied in our comments on balance in the “Design” section of this review, the centerboard 38 sailed beautifully. She is dry and seakindly, stable and relatively fast for her generation. Its PHRF rating ranges from 145 to about 150. The yawl rig is probably not as fast as the sloop, but for the cruising couple, the mizzen sail gives the skipper another means of balancing the boat, as well as a means to fly more sail when reaching if he’s prepared to fuss with a staysail.

The 382 rates between 128 and 150, about 137 on average. The Morgan 383 and 384, which are grouped together, rate a mite lower at 135, on average.

It is not surprising that Brewer’s redesign is faster, even though it’s 1,000-2,000 pounds heavier. This is due to it’s deeper fin and higher aspect rig with the ability to carry larger headsails. There is also less wetted surface. Performance Under Power

The centerboard 38 was powered by the seemingly ageless Atomic Four gasoline engine, though a Perkins 4-107 or Westerbeke 4-107 was available at extra cost ($1,940 in 1969). The early 38s cruise at about 6 ½ knots.

A first-generation Yanmar—the 3QM30—was used on some 382s, and as owners of those engines know, they tend to be noisy and vibrate a great deal. Yanmar engines improved a great deal after the manufacturer redesigned and retooled the entire line. But the most common powerplant was the magnificent 50-horsepower Perkins 4-108. If we were looking for a Morgan 38 to purchase, we’d certainly lean toward one with this engine.

Both designs handle reasonably well under power, as well as most sailboats do, meaning that backing down with a two-blade prop is a necessarily cautious procedure.

A number of owners recommend changing to a three-blade prop, but that will affect sailing performance. One should examine his sailing style closely before making the move.

The Morgan 38, in any incarnation, is a handsome boat that sails well and is built strong enough for most people’s purposes. Some may pause before taking a centerboard boat far offshore, but it has certainly been done—recall, if you will, Carleton Mitchell’s hugely successful racer Finnisterre .

Both centerboard and fin keel versions seem to us to have advantages and disadvantages that are essentially tradeoffs.

On the one hand, we like an attached rudder for cruising, as it provides the best protection from collision with logs and other hard objects. On the other, we recognize the importance of placing ballast low, as in the fin keel version, and we appreciate

Brewer for giving a nice slope to its leading edge so that damage from hitting logs will be minimized. Brewer said that a 382 that passes survey is capable of cruising just about anywhere. “They’ve crossed oceans,” he said.

To our eye, we admit to being fond of the CCA designs with low freeboard and graceful sheer lines. The yawl is a versatile rig that is especially attractive, though it does require more in the way of tuning and maintenance.

An early Morgan 38, in good condition, should sell in the high 20s. Expect to pay a thousand or so more for the yawl. For sellers, considering that in 1969 the base price of the boat was $22,995, that’s not a bad return on investment.

Fifteen years later the price had jumped to $84,995 (1984 model). Those boats today are advertised in the mid to high 60s, and occasionally the low 70s. (What anyone is actually getting for these days is another matter entirely).

Considering the changes in the economy, that’s still not bad performance. What it means most to the prospective buyer is that the Morgan 38 and 382 are popular, much admired boats that should, we expect, hold their value as well as or better than most others.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

My husband & I bought a 382 Morgan in 1980. Named her Galewynd. We enjoyed her til we sold in 2000

My husband & I bought a 382 in 1980. We named her Galewynd. We enjoyed her til we sold in 2000

LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply

Log in to leave a comment

Latest Videos

Island Packet 370: What You Should Know | Boat Review

How To Make Starlink Better On Your Boat | Interview

Catalina 380: What You Should Know | Boat Review

• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell My Personal Information
• Online Account Activation
• Privacy Manager

The Orca 37 is a 37.24ft masthead sloop designed by E. G. van de Stadt and built in steel since 1976.

The Orca 37 is a very heavy sailboat which is a reasonably good performer. It is stable / stiff and has an excellent righting capability if capsized. It is best suited as a heavy bluewater cruising boat.

Orca 37 for sale elsewhere on the web:

Main features

Login or register to personnalize this screen.

You will be able to pin external links of your choice.

See how Sailboatlab works in video

We help you build your own hydraulic steering system - Lecomble & Schmitt

Accommodations

Builder data, modal title.

The content of your modal.

Personalize your sailboat data sheet

Great choice! Your favorites are temporarily saved for this session. Sign in to save them permanently, access them on any device, and receive relevant alerts.

• Sailboat Guide

Orca 43 is a 43 ′ 6 ″ / 13.3 m monohull sailboat designed by Dick Carter and built by Nautical Fiberglass between 1972 and 1984.

• 2 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 3 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 4 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 5 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 6 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 7 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 8 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 9 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 10 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 11 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 12 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 13 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 14 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 15 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View
• 16 / 16 United States 1982 Orca 43 $52,300 USD View

Rig and Sails

Auxilary power, accomodations, calculations.

The theoretical maximum speed that a displacement hull can move efficiently through the water is determined by it's waterline length and displacement. It may be unable to reach this speed if the boat is underpowered or heavily loaded, though it may exceed this speed given enough power. Read more.

Classic hull speed formula:

Hull Speed = 1.34 x √LWL

Max Speed/Length ratio = 8.26 ÷ Displacement/Length ratio .311 Hull Speed = Max Speed/Length ratio x √LWL

Sail Area / Displacement Ratio

A measure of the power of the sails relative to the weight of the boat. The higher the number, the higher the performance, but the harder the boat will be to handle. This ratio is a "non-dimensional" value that facilitates comparisons between boats of different types and sizes. Read more.

SA/D = SA ÷ (D ÷ 64) 2/3

• SA : Sail area in square feet, derived by adding the mainsail area to 100% of the foretriangle area (the lateral area above the deck between the mast and the forestay).
• D : Displacement in pounds.

Ballast / Displacement Ratio

A measure of the stability of a boat's hull that suggests how well a monohull will stand up to its sails. The ballast displacement ratio indicates how much of the weight of a boat is placed for maximum stability against capsizing and is an indicator of stiffness and resistance to capsize.

Ballast / Displacement * 100

Displacement / Length Ratio

A measure of the weight of the boat relative to it's length at the waterline. The higher a boat’s D/L ratio, the more easily it will carry a load and the more comfortable its motion will be. The lower a boat's ratio is, the less power it takes to drive the boat to its nominal hull speed or beyond. Read more.

D/L = (D ÷ 2240) ÷ (0.01 x LWL)³

• D: Displacement of the boat in pounds.
• LWL: Waterline length in feet

Comfort Ratio

This ratio assess how quickly and abruptly a boat’s hull reacts to waves in a significant seaway, these being the elements of a boat’s motion most likely to cause seasickness. Read more.

Comfort ratio = D ÷ (.65 x (.7 LWL + .3 LOA) x Beam 1.33 )

• D: Displacement of the boat in pounds
• LOA: Length overall in feet
• Beam: Width of boat at the widest point in feet

Capsize Screening Formula

This formula attempts to indicate whether a given boat might be too wide and light to readily right itself after being overturned in extreme conditions. Read more.

CSV = Beam ÷ ³√(D / 64)

The Orca 43 was designed by Dick Carter as a boat to compete in the Admiral’s Cup in the early 70s under IOR. Construction began at the site Sailboats of Crespellano (BO) which later changed its name to Cantieri del Pardo (est. 4 hulls). Molds were sold to Fiumicino (Rome) and, later, it passed to Nautical Fiberglass (Rome).

Embed this page on your own website by copying and pasting this code.

• About Sailboat Guide

©2024 Sea Time Tech, LLC

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Yachting Monthly

• Digital edition

Salona 380: the 38 footer which has a lot to offer

• David Harding
• February 14, 2020

From a yard that’s still relatively unknown in the UK, the Salona 380 looks set to present the established performance cruisers in this size range with some serious competition, says David Harding

Upwind with 18 knots over the deck, the Salona 380 clocked nearly 7 knots at time. Credit: David Harding

Product Overview

• Good performance
• Easy to sail short-handed
• Uncluttered deck layout
• Flying bow is a mixed blessing under power
• More non-slip needed on deck
• No stowage for books at chart table

If any sector of the new-boat market is tough to break into, it’s the one for the 38ft performance cruiser.

Look at the builders who are there already: Dehler with the 38 and Elan with the 380/E5, for example.

Then we have the Arcona 380, the slightly more cruisy Xc38 and, arguably with a little less of a sporty tilt, Hanse’s 388.

Given the availability of these, you might wonder why anyone looking for a sporty not-quite-forty should consider a boat from a Croatian builder that relatively few people in the UK have heard of.

The flying bow, with the knuckle clear of the water, becomes immersed to lengthen the waterline under way. Credit: David Harding

The reason is simple: the Salona 380 claims to offer pretty well everything its competitors offer and more.

The builders are keen to stress the relatively low volume of production (around 35 boats per year across the range), the attention to detail and scope for customisation, the structural integrity (including the stainless steel frame in the hull to distribute the loads from the rig and keel), the uncluttered deck layout and, not insignificantly, the fact that you get a lot of boat for your money.

What’s more, despite its lack of recognition in the UK, Salona is not an unknown quantity.

The yard has been building boats since 2002 and has established a strong following in the Adriatic and eastern Mediterranean, where many British sailors will have met Salonas on charter holidays.

Dealers have also been active in Holland, Sweden, Germany, France and Spain but, although Salona has been represented on and off in Britain since 2004, it has yet to become a well-known name on these shores.

Interior joinery is light oak and all made at the yard. Drawers are in wood throughout and frames and fiddles are solid. Credit: David Harding

That’s all the more surprising given that the 35 had just won its class in the 2012 Hamble Winter Series when I tested it back in 2013.

I joined the 35 for one of the races.

Before that I had tested the 45 in 2004, followed by the 37 and 40, looked at various other models in Trieste and visited the yard in Split, where I sailed another 45.

I thought they all had a lot to offer.

THE TEST VERDICT

There’s much to like about the Salona 380, from the performance and handling to the level of specification and the reassuring construction.

As well as being stiffened by the steel frame, the vacuum-infused hull with its PVC-cored topsides is laid up with vinylester resin and, as an extra precaution that’s rarely seen these days, clear gelcoat beneath the waterline.

Until recently, the performance and structural integrity of Salonas was not matched by the interior finish or, in some respects, the attention to detail.

CLICK HERE TO BUY THE FULL TEST IN THE JANUARY 2020 ISSUE

The 380 reflects a substantial improvement in these areas and she has to be seen as a serious competitor to boats of similar size and nature from the better-known yards.

She’s fast, responsive, fun to sail, nicely finished, well thought-out and equipped to a good standard.

WOULD SHE SUIT YOU AND YOUR CREW?

If you’re looking for a performance cruiser in this size range, there are good reasons to include the Salona 380 on your list of possibles.

Whereas the credibility of Salona as a company might once have been questioned by some in the UK, things have changed.

The yard has now been building boats for nearly 20 years.

It’s owned (as it always has been) by AD Plastics, a leading European supplier of automotive parts, which in turn is part of the ASA prevent Group.

The Salona 380’s deck and cockpit layout make the boat well suited to short-handed sailing. Credit: David Harding

The new UK dealer will be familiar to many, too –Russell Hodgson, who formerly handled X-Yachts and later Dehler in the UK, and has already covered several thousand miles on the Salona 380.

These recent developments and improvements can only increase Salona’s appeal to prospective British buyers.

If you’re tempted by the boat you will probably also be tempted by the Limited Edition package of extras and upgrades that takes the specification to step-aboard-and-go level.

It could see you sailing a sleek and sporty 38 for what, in relative terms, is a pretty reasonable amount of money.