310 mast - deck or keel stepped?

[Sky Cruiser]

Hi,
Looking into the 310 as a family (of 3) coastal cruiser in south Florida. Have not had the opportunity to see one yet (not many for sale close by), bit from pics it looks as though the mast is either deck stepped like the 22's we've sailed, or keel stepped with the pole integrated into the forward birth bulkhead.

Can someone please clarify for me? Also, feel free to throw in some general thoughts, pros and cons, about the boat itself. What major differences between early years and later?

Thanks in advance!

Chris

 

[Don S/V ILLusion]

it looks as though the mast is either deck stepped like the 22's we've sailed, or keel stepped with the pole integrated into the forward birth bulkhead.


Chris

Thats a distinction without a difference. Both configurations are deck stepped.

Check out the owner reviews for in-depth info.

 

[Calif. Ted]

Pretty sure they are probably deck stepped with a compression post in the cabin, most I've seen have in-mast furling. I looked at 310's but decided I preferred a 320.

 

[valcour]

Yes, stepped on deck and supported by a compression post. There was a relatively short production run, and I'm not aware of any major changes. The newer ones generally have in mast furling. There were some minor changes in the plumbing arrangement and on some hulls the storage locker forward of the refrigerator had a drain so it could be used as an ice box. On my 2003 model this is a dry storage locker that doesn't appear to have any insulation, and has no factory installed drain. I believe that very early models had a yanamar engine, but most have the universal M-25 XPB.

 

[Sky Cruiser]

Pretty sure they are probably deck stepped with a compression post in the cabin, most I've seen have in-mast furling. I looked at 310's but decided I preferred a 320.

Thanks for the replies. May I ask what led you to the 320 instead? For us, it would have to be 94 or newer as we definitely want the walk thru transom. The 310 cabin interior is appealing to us as well, not having the busy look of mast pole and table right in the middle. But we are not experienced in larger boats, so maybe that's just not as intrusive as it looks in pictures. Basically, 30-32 feet is the size range we are looking at, but the 310 sort if struck me as unique.

Cheers!
Chris

 

[Calif. Ted]

Mostly just a little more lwl and weight, a section of galley floor was also at an angle that was not good for my bad ankle, if I remember right.
They didn't make many 310's, they made over 800 320's before mine, corrected some minor things. I was a little disappointed by Catalina's lack of response to some minor bugs reported by some 310 owners. Some bulkhead burning from the exhaust, some deflection of the hull at the forward bulkhead, teething issues I thought they should have been more aggressive about correcting.

 

[SawyerCurt]

I think (in my humble opinion) that it comes down to space and cost. A comparable 320 is going to cost more than the "equivalent" 310. I looked at both, but I wanted a newer boat (my last was a 1988 C34) that didn't come with any projects. A 2001 C310 was less expensive than same vintage 320s, and with 2 small girls we decided the smaller 310 was plenty of space for us. Had the boat one season and am still in love with her.

 

[Bob James]

Sky: the C 310 is a perfect boat for a couple or a small family. Light and airy with a real innerspring mattress for the owner's berth in the front and a huge queen sized berth aft for the kid(s) and room to store the stuff. Catalina produced somewhere between 350 and 400 of these between 1999 and 2007 or so. The hardware included (winches, furling, traverer, etc) are fantastic and oversized - this is part of the reason that Catalkina probably discontinued the model - it cost too much and they had to maintain price points in the line. Look over the member's list on www.catalina310.org and see if you can find an owner near you. Kick the keel and you will fall in love.

 

[peter_ms]

We have owned hull #147 since 2001.
Still in love with it despite the aforementioned lack of response by CY.
I have raced the boat quite successfully but she excels at cruising. We visit boat shows regularly looking at the competition and @ CY's offerings in the 30-33' range.
We have never found something that would make us want to move up or on.
Deck stepped-Universal M25XPBC
Peter

 

[Sky Cruiser]

Thanks for all your replies, and everyone has been so helpful. Obviously, different needs and/or experiences differentiate one persons love for a certain boat, while another may pass for a slightly different style. At the end of the day for us, there is no "perfect" boat, just the boat that's perfect for our needs. Having said that we will be looking at several boats in the 30-32 range. But I agree that this boat looks great for our size family and our current needs. I'll be spending the next several months looking and researching, since it will not be until next spring that we'll be looking to purchase.

Cheers!

 

[JK_Boston_Catalina310]

Just thought that some of these points need to be addressed in case potential C310 buyers read this thread.

Mostly just a little more lwl and weight, a section of galley floor was also at an angle that was not good for my bad ankle, if I remember right.

Nope, you are incorrect. The galley floor is flat up to the rear berth.

They didn't make many 310's, they made over 800 320's before mine, corrected some minor things.

Yup, the 310 is the shortest production run in the history of Catalina. It also won pocket cruiser of the year from Cruising World and was a top 10 boat of the year for Sail. I don't recall the 320s having any such honors despite the large number of production runs. As has been pointed out by others, Catalina went a little over the top with the equipment on the 310s and that is probably the biggest explanation for the short production run.

That combined with the fact that most cruising couples who buy new boats tend to buy way bigger then they need or can reasonably maintain. About a month ago I was in a slip next to a couple in Hylas 47 who cruise 6 months of the year. They were thinking of going bigger because they couldn't fit all their stuff. I didn't have the heart to tell them we live full time on our Catalina 310.

I was a little disappointed by Catalina's lack of response to some minor bugs reported by some 310 owners. Some bulkhead burning from the exhaust, some deflection of the hull at the forward bulkhead, teething issues I thought they should have been more aggressive about correcting.

Funny, I found their prompt response as a reason to buy the C310. When I was looking to buy our 310 I called Catalina and got calls back from Frank Buttler and Gerry Douglas. From their records less than 20 boats had the short compression post issue (deflection of the cabin top) and all had been sent the piece to fix it. The bulkhead burning issue was a matter of use and affected boats that powered for long periods. They had additional insulation that fixed the problem. I personally went a little further and used the issue as an excused to provide better engine access (see my blog).

As Stu and others have pointed out in the past, many of the complaints about 310s (and most newer boats probably) has more to due with a lack of a good maintenance program from the owners. Most expect that things like chain plates and stanchions can go on without rebedding forever and that just isn't the case.

I am not saying the 310 is perfect. It's a boat and like all boats it's a series of compromises. But find me another less than 40 foot boat with a walk-around queen berth, walk through transom, large cockpit, and livable layout. I bet you can't name more than 3(the Catalina 350, the Catalina Morgan 38 cc and the Hunter 37 Legend).

 

[Calif. Ted]

OK, I was wrong about the location of the tilted piece of floor that bothered my ankle.
You are correct, no awards from Cruising World or Sail magazine for the 320, not even an "honorable Mention".

The bulkhead burning issue was a matter of use and affected boats that powered for long periods. They had additional insulation that fixed the problem. I personally went a little further and used the issue as an excused to provide better engine access (see my blog).

I don't read blogs, glad you fixed that, I'm sure it's a good resource and reassurance for potential 310 buyers to see how you made these repairs.

 

[Alansails]

We have owned nothing but Catalina yachts, But have sailed and raced others, when we were looking for a "Bigger boat" we looked at other brands and Catalina-other sizes, came back to 310, for a variety of reasons listed above but also to include Buying a boat is one thing, Affording the dockage, replacements,repairs etc.is another. The 310 is very affordable and comfortable to sail in all kinds of weather, very stable yet fast. We have owned ours for two years and continue to grow into it more all the time. Decks are wide and stern platform is great for swimming off of. Cockpit is where all our dockmates come over to meet for Sundowners.
I have also had contact with Catalina yachts and Gerry Douglas, they bend over backwards for their customers, just another reason why Catalina owners are Brand Loyal.
And the boat is deck stepped with a compression post. Please if you have further questions feel free to ask. The 310 is a good value for your dollar and they Hold their value!

 

[Sky Cruiser]

Thanks, that's great information on the corrections made and I've heard nothing but great comments on various forums from all Catalina owners about the support from the company no matter how old or which model the boats are.

I agree that some of the standard equipment (winches, etc) on the 310's seem above average quality and it makes sense that when the economy started going bust toward the end of that production run, that maybe they started to rethink that model instead of going to a MKII or III, which would theoretically be upgraded versions. Yet it was a very popular size (for folks like me anyway), so that makes me wonder if the 309 was meant to be the lower "production" cost follow up beginning in 2007. Has anyone ever referred to it as such? I've seen a few listed and the interior layout looks very similar (except for the TV cutout in forward bulkhead, nicer transom setup and probably a few other small things I'm not noticing). However, given the fact that an asking prices for early 310's are right up there (within $10-15K) with that of a 2007/8 309's is remarkable! Some are actually asking even higher, but probably either asking too much or have certain upgrades. But while I'm thinking of purchasing, when I see two very similar sized, layout and furnished boats separated in some cases by 6-8 years with similar asking prices, I have to scratch my head a bit! Did they really go to lesser (or a more standard) quality of equipment on the 309, or is the 310 just a better boat all around?

Thanks!
Chris

 

[jsalley]

I owned a 309 for seven years. It has essentially the same hull as the 310, but that's where the similarities end . The cabin layout is completely different - the 309 has a layout similar to the C-30, which the 309 was intended to replace. The rig, propulsion, some systems, etc. are also quite different. Compared to other Catalina models of the same vintage, the 309 has somewhat downgraded trim and amenities below (fewer enclosed lockers in the cabin, foam instead of innerspring mattresses, etc) that helped to meet a lower price point, but still with oversized and robust systems and deck hardware standard. The new 315 that replaced the 309 is the same boat with all the nice touches and amenities added back - at a much higher price. If you read Gerry Douglas' design criteria for the 310 (Practical Sailor has a publication with an excellent review of the 310), it was meant to be a cruising boat for a couple or with only occasional guests or with small children. The 309 is more family-sized, with two enclosed sleeping cabins instead of one, though the "owner's" forward cabin is much more cramped on the 309 since more space is given over to the salon. Overall, two very different boats that share the same hull.

 

[Solstice]

Just thought that some of these points need to be addressed in case potential C310 buyers read this thread. Nope, you are incorrect. The galley floor is flat up to the rear berth. Yup, the 310 is the shortest production run in the history of Catalina. It also won pocket cruiser of the year from Cruising World and was a top 10 boat of the year for Sail. I don't recall the 320s having any such honors despite the large number of production runs. As has been pointed out by others, Catalina went a little over the top with the equipment on the 310s and that is probably the biggest explanation for the short production run. That combined with the fact that most cruising couples who buy new boats tend to buy way bigger then they need or can reasonably maintain. About a month ago I was in a slip next to a couple in Hylas 47 who cruise 6 months of the year. They were thinking of going bigger because they couldn't fit all their stuff. I didn't have the heart to tell them we live full time on our Catalina 310. Funny, I found their prompt response as a reason to buy the C310. When I was looking to buy our 310 I called Catalina and got calls back from Frank Buttler and Gerry Douglas. From their records less than 20 boats had the short compression post issue (deflection of the cabin top) and all had been sent the piece to fix it. The bulkhead burning issue was a matter of use and affected boats that powered for long periods. They had additional insulation that fixed the problem. I personally went a little further and used the issue as an excused to provide better engine access (see my blog). As Stu and others have pointed out in the past, many of the complaints about 310s (and most newer boats probably) has more to due with a lack of a good maintenance program from the owners. Most expect that things like chain plates and stanchions can go on without rebedding forever and that just isn't the case. I am not saying the 310 is perfect. It's a boat and like all boats it's a series of compromises. But find me another less than 40 foot boat with a walk-around queen berth, walk through transom, large cockpit, and livable layout. I bet you can't name more than 3(the Catalina 350, the Catalina Morgan 38 cc and the Hunter 37 Legend).

The Catalina 355

 

[jsalley]

+1 !!!

 

[JK_Boston_Catalina310]

The Catalina 355

True even-though that is really the MKII of the 350

So now we are up to 4 boats that have the combination I listed. And three of them are Catalinas.

 

[Stu Jackson]

1. True even-though that is really the MKII of the 350

2..So now we are up to 4 boats that have the combination I listed. And three of them are Catalinas.

1. Not quite. The C355 has pretty much the same layout as the venerable Catalina 34 (1986 to 2009 or so, exactly 1,800 hulls were built): aft head to port but with increased shower space, (improved) galley to starboard, same entry to the aft cabin, dinette table to starboard (much improved table), and straight settee to port (with improved separate seats with fold down table). It is by no means similar in layout to the C350. It would be more likely a Mark III of the C34!!! It truly, though, is a NEW boat. FYI, the C355 membership is being managed by us here at C34 "headquarters."

2. Yes. There may be others, like the Bs and Hs, but I am not familiar with them. (Again, under 40 feet).

 

[Solstice]

1. Not quite. The C355 has pretty much the same layout as the venerable Catalina 34 (1986 to 2009 or so, exactly 1,800 hulls were built): aft head to port but with increased shower space, (improved) galley to starboard, same entry to the aft cabin, dinette table to starboard (much improved table), and straight settee to port (with improved separate seats with fold down table). It is by no means similar in layout to the C350. It would be more likely a Mark III of the C34!!! It truly, though, is a NEW boat. FYI, the C355 membership is being managed by us here at C34 "headquarters." 2. Yes. There may be others, like the Bs and Hs, but I am not familiar with them. (Again, under 40 feet).

Exactly Stu! it also has the lower freeboard similar to the venerable 34. If you look at the dimensions of the 34 and 355, they are very close. Really not like the 350s at all...