New Nordic Tugs 26 Announcement - A post from SENTOA

Old Dog · Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:08 pm Post subject:

I've been reluctant to join this discussion even though I may be the only person on the planet that owns one of each. I still own hull #15, R-25 C-Ranger and also own a 2000 Nordic Tug 32. I'm not qualified to have an opinion on the structural integrity of the two boats. I've watched R-25's being built but never a Nordic Tug. I'm pretty darn sure that they are both well built. There is, however, a quality difference, at least in these two boats. It's not in the major systems - the hull, the engines, transmissions, etc - it's in the details. The C-Ranger folks fixed all my gripes with things that didn't work quite right and have, I'm sure, fixed all of that for future boats (I'm a major fan of the boat) but it is unarguable that the Nordic Tugs are significantly better finished and have paid more attention to details than the C-Rangers. It is clear that Nordic Tugs uses cabinet makers on the inside, for example, and C-Ranger doesn't. It's expensive but it does result in a boat that looks and feels and frankly, is higher quality overall. I've not found anything on the Nordic Tug that isn't done right - but then, it's old..........

I've read the comments about R-25 engines. I've not seen the new Cummins but I really, really liked the new 110 Yanmar. Quiet and clean. My Nordic Tug has a Cummins and it's older, noisier and stinks. Again - have not seen the newer ones. Consider it to be an extreme disservice to their customers that C-Ranger couldn't get the engine right to match their ambitious specs. However, the 110 Yanmar is a superb engine and shouldn't disappoint anyone.

So - I would in my most humble opinion conclude that if you want a fast, super fishing boat with cruising capabilities - consider a C-Dory; if you want a slower, stable more comfortable small boat with more amenities -
consider a C-Ranger; if your wife thinks that anything under 30 feet is too small, consider a Nordic Tug. Beyond that are several cruise lines we like, but remember what the Water Rat said to the Mole.

Wouldn't life be boring if we all agreed.

flagold · Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 11:26 am Post subject:

You guys might want to take a deep breath and read this about Skipper:

http://dringersoll.com/intro.html

Never met him or Les L, but sounds as if cut from the same cloth.

Byrdman · Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:24 pm Post subject:

Wow... I now have a another reason to come see my C-Brat friends around the Seattle Boat Show (and our C-Brat stuff) again now for the ....4th or 5th year now?

Hey...so what are the dates of the 09 Seattle Boat show? Jan/Feb 09 is only 6 months away.....and some of us will be iced in before then... and others of us will be enjoying our 12 months of boating. Should be a neat show and who knows what all will pop up in and around Seattle around that time.

Life is good....too few years and simply just too many boats to own one of each...but aint it fun trying!!!

Go get on the water!

Byrdman

Doryman · Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:56 pm Post subject:

Byrdman · Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:15 pm Post subject:

Old Dog: Thanks for your input on this. Have been on one of the older 26 Nordics and there is another one just down river from my Moms enroute to Nashville....a red one. I am "forced" to cross over to that side of the river each time I go past it. It will be really interesting to see the new layout and what they have changed on the boat with some newer modern twist...and old time solid hardcore building.

The red one is also one of the few boats we see when out enjoying our winter waters...when most boats in our areas have been..... forgive me here...."winterized." Such a loss of great boating times!!

Thank God for enclosed boats and wallas heating systems!!

Byrdman

Zelpha · Guest

Old Dog: You know this much better than me: All boats are a compromise......
Length, Beam, Seaworthiness, Ease of towing and launching, Headroom, Fuel Consumption, Weight, Style and Beauty, Fine Finishing, Price, Upkeep, Wife's Approval, Inboard/Outboard, Sail vs Motor, cost of leaving in water and on and on. In my old age, also full of boats, the C-Dory 22 is a good compromise. Toland's upcoming version also looks good. Zelpha

journey on · Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 9:41 pm Post subject:

OK, here's my comments. We're a month into our summer cruise on Journey On, which is a 25' C-Dory, which is used for cruising, not fishing. Our third summer cruising this boat. And in addition, we've cruised on 25' and 36' sailboats. And I have some comments on this discussion, for what it's worth.

First of all, lets remember that we're talking about 25'/26' power boats. For Pete's sake, the bathroom at home has more floor space than any of these boats. and a better head. So for cruising, they're all the same: cramped, and we have to accept that. All the shifting around of berths, heads, galleys is going to leave them cramped. Judged on volume, the C-Dory is equivalent to the Ranger, which is equivalent to the Nordic, unless there is something about volume I've missed.

Next is performance. The Ranger and Nordic are diesel powered boats, the C-Dory uses an outboard. However when the C-Dory cruises at the same speed as the two other boats, it's gas mileage isn't bad. In cruising we travel at 7-8 knts, and enjoy the scenery. And, with the C-Dory, when we need to, such as the winds are coming up, we can travel. So the C-dory is the only boat which offers stability at hull speed and planing speeds.

Last is the construction. I assume the hulls are somewhat equivalent. God knows we've tried to break the hull on Journey On, especially in the last few weeks, but she's come through. I also assume that the other two boats are equally well built.

Thus the construction difference is in the inside and above the hull, and I think this is where lies the real difference. The C-Dory is certainly plain, and they haven't employed any cabinet makers inside the cabin. The Ranger is a step up in the accouterments, and I'll bet the Nordic is even better. Of course all this adds weight, which isn't important at hull speed but counts when you're planing as well as when you're towing. and that C-Dory is heavy enough.

Now, the C-Dory prices have increased since we bought Journey On, but I'll bet they're still less than a Ranger and at $200K for a cheaper Nordic, much less than one of those. And it's easy to trailer.

So, each of those boats are good boats, each offers something different, but in the end they all can do the same thing, which is cruise comfortably. I can spend a lot of time cruising on a C-dory, and for me that's the best.

Boris

Pat Anderson · Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 12:46 am Post subject:

Right on, Boris!

Doryman · Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 2:08 am Post subject:

JamesTXSD · Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:27 am Post subject:

Well, from another 25 owner, we, too, feel it's the right fit for us. But, there is a real world difference between the boats discussed. As 25 owners, we see the volume difference between our boats and the 22s... that extra foot of beam makes a significant difference. Same with the Ranger and the Nordic - that extra beam is going to make the Nordic 26 feel like a lot more boat. We spent a night on the dock at Olga with a Nordic 26 and visited with those folks. Neat boat... and a lot of boat for its length. They were very interested in how we used our boat, especially the trailering aspects.

If I were in the market for a trailerable tug, it would be the Ranger, no question. But if it's going to stay in the water in one place, that changes the equation.

As with most purchases, you pay your money, you make your choice. Both nice boats. Anyone here mulling over that decision? Wink

Pat Anderson · Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 9:20 am Post subject:

Nope, we have concluded we are very happy with Daydream, and anything else would be a waste of the Anderson family resources!

westward · Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 9:49 am Post subject:

Here's a bit of spec information that might shed light on the relative construction of the 3 boats being discussed: Length: Nordic 26'-4"; R25 24'-7"; CD25 25'-5". Beam: Nordic 9'-6"; R25 8'-6"; CD25 8'-6". Displacement(weight): Nordic 6800#; R25 5750#; CD25 4200#(appx.). Draft: Nordic 32"; R25 26"; CD25 ?. They are obviously very different boats, in ways far beyond the type of cabinetry installed. The overarching rule is that as long as everyone is happy with the boat they choose for themselves then everything is cool! Cheers, Mike.

JamesTXSD · Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:20 am Post subject:

journey on · Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 2:37 pm Post subject:

Weight is a topic I can't resist. First, I built spacecraft, and if it was too heavy, it wasn't a spacecraft. If you were over the allowance, weight could be worth $10,000/lb. Also, I raced motorcycles and the lighter the easier it was to ride. The bikes I rode went from 320# down to 220#, and boy did I enjoy that as I got older.

The same doesn't necessarily apply to boats. We sailed a Catalina 36 to Tahiti, which weighed (bare, no provisions, fuel, etc.) 7 tons. Other boats that went with us weighed twice as much, for the same length. We got there a couple of days earlier, but they were probably more comfortable. So you pays your money and takes your choice. Half way across we wanted more weight, say the Queen Mary.

As for the weight of a C-25, light is good for planing and towing, bad for bouncing. I've weighed Journey On (actually the boat and trailer,) and I found that the !@#$ thing weighs about 7000# ready to cruise. I don't know where anyone gets those advertised weights, but I suspect that's a bare hull or wishful thinking. Add motors, batteries, fluids, interior, etc. And of course, Judy has become adept at packing the inside for cruising, and that weighs a lot. I'm on a weight reduction program now. Weight affects both fuel use and performance, more so in a planing boat than a semi-displacement hull.

So of the three boats, weight reflects their style more than saying if one is better than another. ALL are good small boats.

Boris

thataway · Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 5:40 pm Post subject:

I might point out that Doryman's post was:
"I asked him if the new 26 would be the same as the old 26 and he said it would be popped from the same molds but it would be finished much plainer on the inside than the old ones due to the increased cost of labor and materials. I asked him how he felt the 26 would line up against the Ranger 29 and he said that the Nordic was built much better and that the Ranger was designed to appeal on the basis of its lines rather than its quality. I know that Skip is related to the Nordic builder family,"

I assume that the "Ranger 29" was not a typo--and that we know very little about the Ranger 29 (but perhaps the dealers know much more than has been released).

From the little I have heard; the Ranger 29 will be a wider beam, and not trailerable without a wide load permit--again, it is very difficult to compare a 24 foot boat, a 26 foot boat and a 29 foot boat, all with different beams. I doubt that we will really have an answer to this question until both boats are seen side by side and we see sea trials.

We have long distance cruised boats from 20 to 62 feet in length--and certainly agree that there is a huge difference in both comfort and ammenities. Volume of livable area is what makes the difference, not necessarilly the length. The C Dory 25 certainly is one of the best "small" boats I have owned--and for what it is, and what it is designed for, it is s surperb boat. I am looking forward to seeing the Ranger 29, as well as the New Nordic Tug--but will stick to the 25 for our trailering West Coast travels.