Tomcat...Ranger Tug...Glacier Bay...or Custom alloy cat

E

EgliVincent

New member
Hi All, I'm a newbie here to the C-brats site but I figured this would be the place to get some great feedback. I'm looking for a trailerable boat that I can use here in the NW. I live on the Columbia river just outside Portland and would use it here extensively for day fishing and pleasure-boating and some overnite camp outs.. We're also finding ourselves spending more time in the San Juans and like the thought of doing 3-5 day long weekend trips where we would camp on the boat. After doing a lot of negotiating with my wife we've concluded that either a cat or a Ranger Tug would fit the bill. My wife really likes the Tugs (no need to explain further), but I'm leaning more to a cat with a larger sleeping birth, me being on the tall side. There are three in the family and the kid ususally brings a friend along.
I've always liked C-Dory products and the Tomcat looks great aesthetically. I have but one major concern, and that is the tunnel height on the 255. I've seen pics where the tunnel is pushing water at slow speed. I was wondering what the bridge gap is at rest for an average loaded Tomcat as well as how much does it lift out of the water when on step. Looking also at the Glacier Bay 2690 it looks to have a big air-gap and it makes sense that this boat might have much more bluewater capacity and overall better ride in a 3' chop.
I'm more of a protected water sort of guy but both the Columbia and the San Juans can get a heavy chop going pretty quick. I was just wondering how the Tomcat fairs up against the Glacier Bay performance wise. My other option is to have an alloy cat built.. or buy a 25'-27' ranger tug. Any thoughts, please let me know the pros cons, etc.. Thanks in advance for the input. Cheers!
 
Since you will have others onboard for days at a time I'll tell you the selling point for us. We bought a Tomcat rather than a Glacier Bay because of the marine head. My fiancee didn't like the idea of having to lift cusions and close curtains in the V-berth to use a small port-o-potty.
I like the 6'6" headroom, and we've had the boat in very heavy chop (4'+) with little slamming.
 
Congratulations, you have identified the major shortcoming of the Tom Cat. There has been much discussion here about how the factory should have made the sponsons deeper to create more clearance and thereby avoid wave slap at anchor and sneezing at low speed. To be fair, however, the height of the sponsons is what gives the hull the ability to plane on a cushion of air in between the sponsons. It is my understanding that the Glacier Bay does not plane, specifically because of that higher bridge deck height. I love my Tom Cat but after 4 years I can see its faults more clearly. The biggest drawback is that if the chop gets bigger than about 3' you can't run at speed over it and have to slow down (I would like to learn how Phil trims to run his cat through 4'+ chop). At those slow speeds the monohulls have a decided advantage in cutting through the big chop. If you get a big cat to avoid that, I suspect you will burn more gas, but hopefully Bob Austin will jump in with his comments -- he knows much more about the tradeoffs and is thinking of building a custom cat to replace his Tom Cat. If you get an alloy cat built for you, you will be better able to go out into the ocean (West side of Vancouver, Columbia Bar, etc.) It all depends on what your priorities and budget will allow.

Warren
 
Thataway Bob can probably comment on the performance differences between the Tomcat and other cats and he has commented before on the relatively short tunnel of the Tomcat. I'll comment on the difference between a Ranger Tug and the cats - If cruising was my primary application, I'd go for the tug. It's a great cruiser but IMHO, not that great of a fishing boat. Not much cockpit space and not really designed for high speed. Yes you can get 18kts or so in the tug but that's a full throttle and I don't think you want to run at full throttle for long. The cockpit space is larger in the sport cruiser model but it's a cruiser first and foremost.

The Tomcat will do upper 30's to low 40's in kts. The cockpit is larger and it's a bit more utilitarian than a tug. So IMHO, it's a much better fishing boat. It will also go faster through 2-3' chop than the tug with less pounding. It's not near as nice on the inside as the tugs but it's plenty functional. Also, it's possible for one to modify the interior to make it nicer if one wants to but it will take time and money and likely won't look as nice as the Ranger tugs. So if fishing is the primary application, I'd get a cat. If cruising is the primary application, I'd get the tug.
 
If you're over 6', I have a piece of advice. Get in each V-Berth, lay out straight along the side on which you normally sleep and make sure your head has a couple of inches between it and any bulkhead or hull. The CD-25 is a bit short for me and I'm (or was) 6' 2". I've made it do, but be aware of the sleeping room you have. The factory claims 6' 4", but that's a dammed lie. Judy does complain when I encroach on "her" side, but I tell her how lucky she's to be in there with me.

Also, if you're taking your wife along, or any other female, buy a boat with a marine head. That porta-potty stuff is for young kids. Do you want to a woken up at 3 am by a guest? Or anyone else?

The CD-25 is a fine boat for the type of waters you mentioned, easier to load, tow and (don't ignore it) way cheaper; both to buy and to run.

Boris
 
Another happy TC owner here. The tunnel concerns are just that, a concern. In reality, the TC cruises well in 2'-3' chop at 21-22 kts just fine. When it gets up to 4', we slow down to 12-15 kts. At anchor, we always find a protected spot close to shore due to the shallow draft.

The forward berth is close to 8' long and queen size wide. The dinette makes into a single. Since we added our camper canvas, there's a whole new room outside for kids. (see album)

We have spent about 50-60 nights/year onboard for last 3 years, sometimes 5-6 weeks at a time. The big comfortable berth and hot showers available onboard every morning make it a real pleasure. Storage on the TC is enormous and we never use it all!

You could strive for the "perfect cat" and have one built or look at the 07 with low hours in Port Townsend and be cruising when the snow melts :lol: depending on your location. PM or e-mail with any questions.
 
Well I think the gentlemen above nailed it but I will add my 2 cents.

In short, I have cruised 2700 nautical miles on my Tomcat in the three seasons I have owned her and I am very happy with her.

The cabin shown in the pictures for the Glacier Bay 2680 is much smaller than the Tomcat. It looks to me like a nice cuddy cabin but not a cabin cruiser. The Tomcat's cabin is more like a cabin cruiser. The cabin is tall (6'6") and the cabin floor through to the end of the cockpit is level. This makes for a more open living/functional space.

The tunnel height is too short on the Tomcat. That is perhaps the number 1 negative aspect about it. Unless you are tied up in a protected/flat calm area for an overnight it will be tough to fall asleep with the noise of the slap. Underway the Tomcat can handle real 2-3' short chop which is considerable. That being said, most marina's in our area are protected so this has never been a problem.

The number 1 selling point for me was the ride. When you first take a cruise in chop you will grip the helm expecting the usual monohull slam only to learn you float right over. There are seas that will cause the Tomcat (and any other vessel) to slam, but she has provided me with the soft ride I was looking for - for a good portion of our typical seas. I would never again own a planing monohull as a result.

I really like the Ranger Tug! If I could own multiple vessels I would own a Ranger Tug. The cruising space and refinements are impressive. The cost is higher than the Tomcat. The tug is also much slower than the Tomcat of course. I typically cruise at 22 knots and have read 41 knots on my GPS wide open throttle. I seldom run WOT though. I love the fact that I have two engines and two fuel tanks for redundancy.

So there are many things to consider....when I began this search I looked high and low for aluminum manufacturers but none were available for a remotely similar price range. (Nearly all commercial vessels are made of aluminum for a reason).

Good luck with your research! All the vessels you mention appear quite nice each with their own advantages and disadvantages over the other models.
 
I'm working on the design of an inflatable TomCat where the tunnel height can be varied. Having trouble with the prototype however, when I try to blow it up, I pass out from lack of oxygen and when I wake up, it's deflated and I have to start over. I may need to rethink this... :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Charlie
 
The Glacier Bay is a semi displacement boat--and was in strong consideration for our cruiser. The cabin is very small, dinette only for 2, small galley, head in the same area as the bunk (2690). It uses more fuel at 22 knots than the Tom Cat, and has less range at higher speeds.

The Glacier Bay rides better into 3 to 3.5 foot chop--but it also has a limit--and it is about there. With beam seas and down wave, there is no comparison. The Tom Cat handles far better. How many Tom Cats have capsized? (I know of two Glacier Bays). How many Tom Cats have had splits in the hull to deck joints --none.

Don't know about the Aspen, but I don't see much more room than the Tom Cat--I see it as a bit of an unusual boat--you do need the bow thruster to maneuver. The engine access is terriable. Range will be less than the Tom Cat. It will cost over $200K when you get it up and running.

We have never lost any sleep on the Tom Cat--but we have slept in hurricane force winds at sea--so that may not be a good example. Yes the tunnel needs to be higher. There is no clearance at rest or low speeds. Once on a plane, the boat rides on a cushion of air, and the ride is better at higher speeds. We often run it right up into the 30's if the seas get choppier. It rides better.

The biggest problem you have is if you take more kids. This is a probelm I have with grandchildren--so we would have 3 adults and 2 children. This is too much for a Tom Cat. Two children (small) and the mother can sleep forward. We have our bunk so one adult (could be two) sleeps fore and aft--plenty of room for over 6' with the extra cushion. Yes, you can put kids in the cockpit--and that is where I slept for many years when I was a kid--just a tarp over a boom. My parents slept in the bunks in the cabin. It is fine, but you then have to roll up the sleeping bags, and air mattressese in the AM--plus it is crowded with 4. Even the Tug might be a bit crowded. For weekends, the Tom Cat wins. For long cruises, the tug probably would be better.
 
Back
Top