Ericson 38 vs. Ericson 38-200

We have an Ericson 32-3 1987. I recently had an opportunity to sail in a race and spend 5 days on a 1998 PSC Ericson-38-200. The boat was in impeccable condition. As with anything else, there were things I liked and some things I preferred on the 32-3 design. PSC started utilizing many PSC parts the last two years they built the Ericsons. Replacing the Shaefer blocks with Harken was a major improvement. They also replaced all the ports with opening Bomar hatches which was a major upgrade. I didn't care for the 200 style layout with the mast in the middle of the table. This was necessary because the head was moved aft which caused the saloon area to be moved forward. The most notable inconvenience was the cockpit.. The seats were noticably wider and the backrests were much lower. My back didn't appreciate those low backrests at all. If I were looking for a 38 Ericson, I'd scrounge around for the conventional interior floorplan.

Having Seen the Ericson 38-200 & also the PSC Ericson 38-200

I can't comment on the virtues of the E38 versus the E38-200, other than my personal preference for the head aft. It's larger, and more conveniently placed.

As for the Ericson versus the PSC Ericson, I noted at few important differences. First, the decks on the PSC had noticeably less cracking, even though the boats were only a couple of years apart. Not that the E38-200's we saw had bad crazing, but the PSC deck was very clean. Comparable to the Tartans of the time.

A second difference was the improved ports and I believe the winches. PSC removed the wood trim around the ports in favor of a white, MDF type board. Perhaps to cut costs, lighten the interior or perhaps hide future signs of water intrusion. They also replaced the Barient winches in favor of Lewmar.

The deck tie down was also different on the PSC, choosing a metal angled piece to the mast. The Ericson design was a separate post. Which is better, is unknown.

The plumbing and electrical seemed of a higher caliber, as well as the engine. PSC used Volvo's then switched over to Yanmar, later, I think. This replaced the old Universal's.

All in all, both are quite nice boats!

JulieMac said:

I can't comment on the virtues of the E38 versus the E38-200, other than my personal preference for the head aft. It's larger, and more conveniently placed.

As for the Ericson versus the PSC Ericson, I noted at few important differences. First, the decks on the PSC had noticeably less cracking, even though the boats were only a couple of years apart. Not that the E38-200's we saw had bad crazing, but the PSC deck was very clean. Comparable to the Tartans of the time.

A second difference was the improved ports and I believe the winches. PSC removed the wood trim around the ports in favor of a white, MDF type board. Perhaps to cut costs, lighten the interior or perhaps hide future signs of water intrusion. They also replaced the Barient winches in favor of Lewmar.

The deck tie down was also different on the PSC, choosing a metal angled piece to the mast. The Ericson design was a separate post. Which is better, is unknown.

The plumbing and electrical seemed of a higher caliber, as well as the engine. PSC used Volvo's then switched over to Yanmar, later, I think. This replaced the old Universal's.

All in all, both are quite nice boats!

Click to expand...

As you say, all the "versions" have their good features.
A couple of trivia quibbles, if I may... by the fall of '88, Ericson was installing Lewmar winches. We have six of 'em on our '88 boat. If it were not for the scarcity of spare parts over time, I would kind of prefer the more robust albeit older Barients -- and they also had the first really great ST mechanism that self-adjusted for multiple line sizes. (Lewmar was not able to compete in that part of ST technology until the Barient patent expired.)

As for plumbing/electrical parts, all the high end builders were steadily improving through the 80's, and sometimes the "improvements" later looked more like 'changes' rather than actual 'improvements'....
Engines -- well, the Universal diesels are among the best one could find in boats, and Yanmar would be right up there, too.
Volvo, OTOH, had (and has) a reputation for selling engines to builders at "loss leader" OEM pricing and then making it up later on high priced parts. While I would not turn down a PSC-built boat just because it had a Volvo, it would have to be a much-better-than-average bargain otherwise. That' s just my prejudice, and YMMV.

Subjective observations: I and my wife prefer boats with the head aft, like our own boat.
But, the E-38-200, not only has the aft head (and shower stall) but also reduced the "nav desk" to a little desk where one sits on the back edge of the settee and faces aft. Not our choice.

The original E-38 (and the E-381) have a full-on forward-facing nav desk and a dedicated seat for it. While the head and shower stall is forward, we would really like the desk layout a lot better.

Again, YMMV...


Loren

The seats were noticably wider and the backrests were much lower.

Stateroom aft means shallow cockpit means minimal backrests. Sometimes I think the best thing about the 32-3 is the really deep seats in the cockpit.

I really think too much is made about which is better....a PSC built Ericson or one built by Ericson. We are the fourth owners of a well traveled 1988, 38-200. It has been home ported in San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle and for the last nine years in Long Beach CA. It has 2800 hours on its Universal 5444 engine, it has six Barient winches, the original upholstery (looks nearly new) a varnished teak interior and NO crazing in the decks....and did I mention a dark blue hull with original gel coat which people ask if it has been painted. My point being that once the boat leaves the factory the condition is the responsibility of the owners.


Pardon my rant.

Don Taugher
Running Free
#263

Caliboat

You've got a real beauty, Don! Love the dark blue hull.

More contrasts 38-200 vs 38.

The winches on this PSC 38-200 were all high quality Harken winches. Two other changes with this 1998 version. The interior cabin lights were moved from under the side decks to the overhead area which I thought provided better lighting. The PSC pedestal had one controler for both throttle and transmission. I also noted it was positioned too low. I had to keep reaching down to work the thing and I'm only 5' 10''. There were also no red lights on the breaker panel. I liked the partial scoop on the transom which PSC introduced 1993. Just a word on cracked decks. I've seen many Ericsons over the last 13yrs we've owned ours. Our marina has 2 1980 38's, 2 1987 32-3, 1 1990 32-3, 1 1976 28, 1 1983 30. 1 1998 38. I've also seen many more over this time period. I HAVE NEVER SEEN CRACKED JELLCOAT ON THE DECK OF AN ERICSON. Hunter is a different story. That's one pretty 1988 38-200 in navy blue there sir! Ah yes..one last word on performance. We race in the cruising class here on Galveston Bay. Our PHRF is 187. We've done so well we've been pounded down to 162. 139 headsail, 4' 3'' draft and no backstay adjuster.

Seems a bit as if we are comparing both the virtues of the PSC Ericsons with PS Ericsons, and the benefits of the old 38 floor plan vs. the newer aft head design.

I've only seen a couple of PSC Ericson 38s, and they were beauties with amazing quality. I didn't agree with all of the changes though. The opening ports were nice, but the distinctive deadlights on Ericsons are part of their whole image, and removing them took away some of the boat's character. And while the scoop transom looked great, it took away a huge amount of storage that I used for fenders and floats.

As for the two floor plans, when we were looking at used boats we right away noticed that just about all of the boats with forward heads - and the forward holding tanks that go with it - stunk. Keeping the head aft keeps the holding tank and the waste hose out of the main cabin area. For us the rest was secondary.

gulfcoaster said:

Just a word on cracked decks. I've seen many Ericsons over the last 13yrs we've owned ours. Our marina has 2 1980 38's, 2 1987 32-3, 1 1990 32-3, 1 1976 28, 1 1983 30. 1 1998 38. I've also seen many more over this time period. I HAVE NEVER SEEN CRACKED JELLCOAT ON THE DECK OF AN ERICSON. Hunter is a different story.

Click to expand...

When I mentioned cracks, I was meaning hairline crazing type cracks. This summer, we saw probably 4 or 5 E38-200's. Each had just a couple of fine cracks, typically around the deck tie down plate, the anchor locker latch, possibly a stancion base or in the cockpit wall. Again, we'd only see 2 or 3 per boat, which we felt quite acceptable. The one PSC 38-200 had a perfect deck with zero crazing, much like the late 80's Tartans.

Speaking of crazing, nearly every Lewmar port was crazed to the point of becoming opaque. Wonder if that's just a cheaper Lewmar issue?

My Bomar lenses were just as crazed as the 27-year-old Lewmars were. But the original Bomar lens at the foot of the quarterberth remains perfect, it never saw the sun. The fixed ports, lensed with glass, are like new.

I was told by my plastics supplier that even today's acrylic will have a similar fate unless protected against UV etc. by appropriate covers.

Christian Williams said:

My Bomar lenses were just as crazed as the 27-year-old Lewmars were. But the original Bomar lens at the foot of the quarterberth remains perfect, it never saw the sun. The fixed ports, lensed with glass, are like new.

I was told by my plastics supplier that even today's acrylic will have a similar fate unless protected against UV etc. by appropriate covers.

Click to expand...

Agreed. It's the plastic, not the frame designer.
Acrylic is a lot better than polycarbonate, but in time the UV seems to attack them all. Our boat has some of both.

I do have some friends that have replaced the lenses in their fixed ports with tinted safety glass on a Cascade 36. Looks wonderful, but you have to have a ruler-flat cabin side port area for that scheme to work.

Loren

One more word 38 vs 38-200

I pointed out the differences between the two layouts for informational purposes. Different designs may appeal to different people. Kinda like buying a house. I, in no way intended to imply one was better then the other. If it's an Ericson, its a fine boat!

Don Taugher said:

I really think too much is made about which is better....a PSC built Ericson or one built by Ericson. We are the fourth owners of a well traveled 1988, 38-200. It has been home ported in San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle and for the last nine years in Long Beach CA. It has 2800 hours on its Universal 5444 engine, it has six Barient winches, the original upholstery (looks nearly new) a varnished teak interior and NO crazing in the decks....and did I mention a dark blue hull with original gel coat which people ask if it has been painted. My point being that once the boat leaves the factory the condition is the responsibility of the owners.


Pardon my rant.

Don Taugher
Running Free
#263

Click to expand...

Beautiful boat Don!

My 1981 E-38 had gelcoat cracking on the starboard side deck severe enough to admit water and saturate the deck coring. It also has gelcoat cracking over substantial regions of the starboard cabin side, with cracks right through the gelcoat and edges beginning to delaminate from the underlying fiberglass. Since the port side has no such cracking, I just assumed the guy who sprayed the starboard side was an inadequately supervised rookie who was watching the clock late on a Friday afternoon.

I replaced the acrylic on all of my opening ports with laminated auto safety glass. Since they are smallish, and the break characteristic of it tends to keep it in place, I'm not worried about them breaking. And it ends the issue of crazing until they're opaque. The PO replaced the deadlights with glass also. Much nicer.