Hi - I will be listing my CD27 soon; Annie Girl, hull #187. She has a Universal M3-20, 3 cylinder 18 hp engine, with new transmission, shaft and cutlass bearing and a 3 bladed bronze prop. Plenty of power in pretty much all wind/tide conditions.
I started with the Typhoon, and moved up to the 27. Primarily single hand - main is rigged with the Dutchman flaking system, with 2-speed Anderson self-tailing winches on the jib, and a RayMarine ST2000 tiller pilot. I sailed her up from NJ through Buzzards Bay in 2013 and we regularly cruise all over the coast of Maine - day sails to 2 week trips.
Have done a ton of work on her - full description coming soon. My plan is to move up to larger boat for extended travel. Feel free to PM me if you want to discuss.
CD 25 vs. CD 27
Moderator: Jim Walsh
Re: CD 25 vs. CD 27
Any CD 25 supporters out there? I really did have a good season with mine, starting with the self-delivery from Barrington to Marion and highlighted by the Cape Dory rendezvous at Red Brook Harbor. I've read just about everything there is to read online about the 25, and it seems to get snubbed a little simply because it was not designed by Carl Alberg. Seems like a fine boat to me, even if you do have to stoop down inside the cabin. : )
I'm still considering the upgrade to the CD 27, of course, but I've run into some interference from a person usually referred to as the Admiral...
I'm still considering the upgrade to the CD 27, of course, but I've run into some interference from a person usually referred to as the Admiral...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Re: CD 25 vs. CD 27
it gets snubbed for more reasons than the designer. You can't stand up down below and there is no inboard engine. Those reasons alone are why I went with a 27 over a 25 along with the added weight and stability which makes her far better at any blue water type sailing.casampson wrote:Any CD 25 supporters out there? I really did have a good season with mine, starting with the self-delivery from Barrington to Marion and highlighted by the Cape Dory rendezvous at Red Brook Harbor. I've read just about everything there is to read online about the 25, and it seems to get snubbed a little simply because it was not designed by Carl Alberg. Seems like a fine boat to me, even if you do have to stoop down inside the cabin. : )
I'm still considering the upgrade to the CD 27, of course, but I've run into some interference from a person usually referred to as the Admiral...
-
tjr818
- Posts: 1851
- Joined: Oct 13th, '07, 13:42
- Location: Previously owned 1980 CD 27 Slainte, Hull #185. NO.1257949
Re: CD 25 vs. CD 27
When we had our 27 surveyed by Peter Kronich, a crusty old WWII Navy Captain who had been surveying for longer than I had been alive, he knew the Cape Dorys very well. He mentioned that the best boat in the whole Cape Dory fleet was the 25. 
Tim
Nonsuch 26 Ultra,
Previously, Sláinte a CD27
Nonsuch 26 Ultra,
Previously, Sláinte a CD27
Re: CD 25 vs. CD 27
According to Sailboatdata.com, the sail area/displacement ratio for the CD 25 is 16.68, while it is 14.83 for the CD 27. According to Charles Doane in Boats and Gear, "The basic guidelines for interpreting an SA/D ratio are as follows: below 16 indicates a slow underpowered boat; 16 to 19 indicates reasonably good performance; 20 to 22 indicates high performance; and anything over 22 indicates super-high performance." The advantage here, at least on paper, goes to the CD 25.
The ballast/displacement ratio is 42.5 for the 25 and 40.00 for the 27, proving that both are good solid boats that can handle rough conditions. The displacement/length ratio for the 25 is 306.19, while the 27 has a ratio of 418.53. In another blog, Doane writes, "A boat with a D/L ratio below 100 is considered ultralight; a D/L value between 100 and 200 is light; 200 to 300 is moderate; 300 to 400 is heavy; and over 400, by modern standards, is very heavy. For a boat of a given length the lower its D/L ratio, the less power it takes to drive the boat to its nominal hull speed and the more likely it is the boat can exceed its hull speed."
The real kicker is comfort ratio: 22.02 for the 25 and 30.28 for the 27. Obviously, you are going to bounce around a little more in the 25 than you will in the 27. So, if I had to pick a boat that would make my wife more comfortable and my life a lot easier, I would have to go with the CD 27.
The bottom line, I think, is that these boats really can't be compared side by side, as they are built for entirely different purposes.
The ballast/displacement ratio is 42.5 for the 25 and 40.00 for the 27, proving that both are good solid boats that can handle rough conditions. The displacement/length ratio for the 25 is 306.19, while the 27 has a ratio of 418.53. In another blog, Doane writes, "A boat with a D/L ratio below 100 is considered ultralight; a D/L value between 100 and 200 is light; 200 to 300 is moderate; 300 to 400 is heavy; and over 400, by modern standards, is very heavy. For a boat of a given length the lower its D/L ratio, the less power it takes to drive the boat to its nominal hull speed and the more likely it is the boat can exceed its hull speed."
The real kicker is comfort ratio: 22.02 for the 25 and 30.28 for the 27. Obviously, you are going to bounce around a little more in the 25 than you will in the 27. So, if I had to pick a boat that would make my wife more comfortable and my life a lot easier, I would have to go with the CD 27.
The bottom line, I think, is that these boats really can't be compared side by side, as they are built for entirely different purposes.
-
tjr818
- Posts: 1851
- Joined: Oct 13th, '07, 13:42
- Location: Previously owned 1980 CD 27 Slainte, Hull #185. NO.1257949
Re: CD 25 vs. CD 27
We sail our 27 with a 130 genoa - she is not underpowered. The 27 is not a racer, but she can beat most cruisers of her generation and length, she is also a wonderful drifter.
Tim
Nonsuch 26 Ultra,
Previously, Sláinte a CD27
Nonsuch 26 Ultra,
Previously, Sláinte a CD27
Re: CD 25 vs. CD 27
I believe the SA/D ratio is based on a 100% jib.