Oday 222 or 23?

[raphski]

I recently sold my first boat a West Wight Potter 19 and am interested in a Oday 222 or 23. Our family, now including two kids 2 and 6, sail on Heron Lake in Northern New Mexico where we keep the boat in the water for the season. We often spend the weekend on the boat as a family. Coming from the Potter we are used to close quarters but it was getting too small particularly in the cockpit while sailing. I would be greatful for some feedback on both boats from those with experience, about the interor space and sailing characteristics of the boats.
Thanks
Raphael

 

[HukilauMike]

Although only a foot longer, the 23 is really a "bigger" boat. It weighs more than 1000 lbs more, and it has (at least to my mind) significantly more room below. I own a 1979 23, but have only sailed on a 222 once that I remember. I don't remember specifically, but my vague recollection of the 222 is that the cockpit was only marginally smaller than the 23. As far as sailing qualities go, they were similar as well: tender boats that sail ok, but are not flyers made to race. I may be (ok, I am totally) biased, but I love the 23. I think it is the best value small weekend cruiser out there; better than the Catalina 22 or 25. Between the 222 or 23, if the extra room and stability of the 23 is not determinative for you, my advice is to buy the boat that is in the best condition. When you buy an older boat, I think you are best served by taking advantage of the efforts of previous owners who have maintained their boats. Good luck!

 

[Joe11688]

I would go for the O'Day 23 built after 1974. I like my 222, but I often sail single handed with my dog. The 23 is a great boat for a couple.
Joe

 

[Mich222]

I have only owned a 222 - and for the two of us, the 222 suits us well. Because there are four of you- two little ones- I would go with the 23 because the bulkhead will give you more privacy. I believe the draft for a 23 is 27 inches (vs 18 inches for the 222). I like the fractional rig on the 222- I am not sure if the 23 is a fractional rig?? Just my two cents. mick

 

[Jon6436]

I've owned a 222 and a 240 (which is actually 23 ft. on deck). I bought the 222 because boat and trailer weighted about 2k lbs. less than the total for the 240 -- therefore easier to trail, and a bit easier to rig. BUT the 240 was Much more roomy. We often slept 3 on it, and sometimes 4. Cruised 138-days on the 240 with 2 or three on board and did very, very well. Did 4 on-board only one night on the 222 and there wasn't enough extra room for one's shadow.

 

[Joe11688]

I've owned a 222 and a 240 (which is actually 23 ft. on deck). I bought the 222 because boat and trailer weighted about 2k lbs. less than the total for the 240 -- therefore easier to trail, and a bit easier to rig. BUT the 240 was Much more roomy. We often slept 3 on it, and sometimes 4. Cruised 138-days on the 240 with 2 or three on board and did very, very well. Did 4 on-board only one night on the 222 and there wasn't enough extra room for one's shadow.

Hi Jon!
You're right. The 222 is supposed to sleep four but they don't take into account the baggage that one needs or cooler and food supplies. Years ago, my wife and I would sail to Martha's Vineyard and hang out there for a week. The cabin was so cramped that we were always in each other's way. The 23 or the O'Day 240 is a better compromise for two people.
Joe

 

[raphski]

Wow,
Thanks for all the response. I was originally attracted to the 23 and only started looking at the 222 because I was not finding a 23 in my area. I appritiate all the info and think I will keep looking for the right 23.
Raphael

 

[Joe11688]

Raphael,
I think that you'll have a greater chance finding an O'Day 23 than you will a 222. The 222s are getting kind of scarce, but there are plenty of 23s around. I think that the 23s are set up a little better than the 222s in that they have winches and tracks on the combings for easy single handing, and a full stern rail with lifelines like the larger O'Day boats. Good luck!
Joe

 

[kepeterss]

go with the 23

Hey Raphael,

Your post caught my eye because I used to sail a Potter 19 when our 2 daughters were small, probably about the age of your kids. We had some great family times aboard. But I was always banging into something down below. The years have passed and my children are now grown. I've been sailing a 1979 23 for 5 seasons. The Oday 23 is just right for a cruising couple and it should work fine with your 2 young kids in the Vberth. I always sleep in the quarterberths and use the Vberth for storage. About once a year, I will do a long weekend with 3 on board and we get by. I just haul all the sails and other extra gear up on deck at night to clear the Vberth for sleeping. I have often sailed with 4 adults in the cockpit and had plenty of room. Mike is right, the 23 is not a racing boat. It does best on a reach or a run, but I think you will be pleased with the performance compared to your Potter.

Good luck in your search,
Kevin

 

[Larry14187]

I have owned both a 222 and a 23. The 23 is wieghs about 1000 lbs more and has a whole lot more room everywhere. Loved the 222 but the 23 is a better, roomier cruising boat and not quite as tender...

 

[Joe11688]

I have owned both a 222 and a 23. The 23 is wieghs about 1000 lbs more and has a whole lot more room everywhere. Loved the 222 but the 23 is a better, roomier cruising boat and not quite as tender...

Rudy Nickerson of D&R Marine in Assonet Ma. told me that the O'Day 23 built after 1974 is one of the best boats that O'Day ever built. My 222 has the full stern rail like the 23, only because I asked for it. They were nice enough at the factory to leave the winches along with the tracks and cars from the top of the cabin so that I could place them on the combing. I found out later from Rudy, that O'Day built about 20 of their 222s with full stern rails. The 222's and the 192s had these small upside down U shaped rails on each side of the stern sections of these boats. I'm lucky that I have an O'Day 222 that resembles the O'Day 23 with the exception of it's size.
Joe