• Untitled Document

    Join us on March 29rd, 7pm EST

    for the CBEC Virtual Meeting

    All EYO members and followers are welcome to join the fun and get to know the guest speaker!

    See the link below for login credentials and join us!

    March Meeting Info

    (dismiss this notice by hitting 'X', upper right)

Questions on Ericson 34---1989 Bruce King Design

jdbrassord

New Member
Hi all--

I am considering the purchasing an E-34 (1989 Bruce King design) but before making the plunge thought I would seek some advice from this group. I have a couple of concerns/questions:

1) Is the E-34 adequately powered with the Universal 24 HP diesel given its the 13,000 lb displacment?

2) Are there any concerns with the structural grid system that I should be aware of.

3) Are there any know issues with this model that I should focus on when performing an inspection of the boat.

How would you rate the E-34 comparted to an E 32-200 whioch is the other option I am considering? There seem to be many more 32's on the water so I was wondering if this is a reflection of potential problems with the E-34.

Many thaks for your sage advice!!!

Jim
 

treilley

Sustaining Partner
A fellow member here has one that I sail on. I had actually considered buying one myself before I found out that the E35-3 has a shower stall.

The 34 is an excellent boat. Of course you should have a professional survey by a qualified surveyor who knows these boats but there are some things to look out for.

I have seen issues regarding the mast step/TAFG grid and also water damage to the sole surrounding the mast.

The 1989 E34 is more or less just a bigger version of the 32-200. I think less E34s were made so that is why you see less of them. It is very fast and can point extremely high (if you get the fin keel). Downwind performance can be not as good but not bad. The deep thin keel can also make downwind handing in waves a challenge but nothing you can not get used to.

Another point is to check for cracks around the anchor locker. This is a high stress area and boats that have been raced may show some cracks here.

My 35 also has the M25XP which is an adequate motor as long as it is properly pitched. It did not push the boat as well with the fixed 2 blade as it does with my FlexOfold 2 blade.
 
Last edited:

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
How would you rate the E-34 comparted to an E 32-200 whioch is the other option I am considering? There seem to be many more 32's on the water so I was wondering if this is a reflection of potential problems with the E-34.

Jim

On the interior size issue alone -- when we were shopping we had an earnest money down on an E-32-200 and got rejected by the owner. At the time we liked the E-32.200 interior layout. Immediately after that we found our fixer-upper Olson 34 with the similar "tri cabin" interior layout (head aft, separate after cabin on other side).

Years later I enjoyed a multi-day delivery in an E-32-3 with the standard (type a) interior layout with head forward and quarterberth aft with a nice useable nav table.

I really have to say that when you put a tri cabin interior into a 32 foot boat, you are at the ragged limits of what is possible to have in the way of artificial privacy. I have spent time aboard a friend's Oday 322, with a similar tri-cabin layout, and the same observation applies.
Somewhere under 34 or 35 feet (and note that the Ericson 34 of the 1980's is really a 35 foot hull), the more open head-forward layout really works better in many ways.

Our Olson has the tri-cabin layout and it works... but even privacy is overrated some, too. We removed and stored the door to the fore peak cabin our first year, for instance.
Creating separate "rooms" removes a lot of potential storage and tankage space throughout a hull. If you ever go aboard an Ericson 33RH or 36RH, you will be amazed at the amount of lockers, drawers, bulk storage, and tankage that they have. What they lack, of course, is room for square dancing. "Everything's a compromise." :rolleyes:

So, as the aged guardian knight told Indy, standing in the room full of deadly false Holy Grails, "Choose Wisely"... :cool:

Let us know how your search goes, and do try to get aboard several different boats with different layouts -- sit down, lay down, go into the head compartment and shut the door, stand at the stove/sink and see how much food prep room there is, sit down where you would have a half-chart spread out in front of you, sit at the dining table, etc. And etc.

Best,
Loren

ps: worth repeating is that my views are *very* subjective. Also, I am 6'2". If shorter, a smaller interior would seem larger!
 
Last edited:

Tom Metzger

Sustaining Partner
I've sailed & worked on both

Jim – I have had an ’87 E-34 since ’96 and my son has a ‘98 E-333 which is the same basic boat as the E-32-200, but built by Pacific Seacraft. While the two boats on paper are very similar, there is a tremendous difference. The E-34 weighs almost a third more; it’s much bigger.
<O:p</O:p
If you are just going to day sail it may not make too much difference, but if you are planning to spend time on it I would highly recommend going to the bigger boat. That said, the one basic layout problem with the E-34 is the small icebox in the galley. We have an Adler Barbour refrigeration unit in it that works for the two of us. We can go a week maximum keeping our normal diet, but it takes some repackaging to make it all fit. We do not use the second icebox in front of the head for cold food, unless we have company when we use it for beer & soda, etc. The icebox on the E-333 is much larger than on the E-34.

<O:p</O:p
The problem with the mast step that Tim referred to is not with the step itself. The step sits on the grid, which allows water to get into the sole and cause delamination if the sole is not properly sealed on the edges. There are other areas of the sole that are subject to the same problem. I replaced the sole several years ago. As I remember, the mast step is the same on my son’s E-333.
<O:p</O:p

The tankage on the E-34 is much more accessible as is the fridge compressor and other systems. Engine access is good on both of them. Storage on the E-34 is much better than on the smaller boat.

The final word is that my son & I both enjoy our boats very much. He might trade, but I wouldn’t.

The picture of the E-333 interior may not be exactly the same as the E-32-200. I haven't been on one in years.
<O:p
</O:p
 

Attachments

  • En Douce 054 (Medium).jpg
    En Douce 054 (Medium).jpg
    72.5 KB · Views: 181
  • Xanthus interior 007 (Medium).jpg
    Xanthus interior 007 (Medium).jpg
    98.6 KB · Views: 237

jdbrassord

New Member
Thanks for the responses

thanks to all for your feedback on the E-34. Confirms that it is all the boat that I thought it was.

The question of the engine capacity is still outstnding though. Is the universal diesel adequate to drive the E-34??

Many thanks, Jim
 

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
How much truck

thanks to all for your feedback on the E-34. Confirms that it is all the boat that I thought it was.

The question of the engine capacity is still outstnding though. Is the universal diesel adequate to drive the E-34??
Many thanks, Jim
__________
Jim, Thoughtful Ericson owners may be reluctant to pontificate on something as subjective... :rolleyes:
But what the hey, I'll take a run at it.

The key word you bring to the discussion, IMHO, is "adequate."
For a boat of that displacement, in the 60's and early 70's something like 18 or 20 hp diesel would have been OK. (Sidebar: Remember that a lot of the gas engine installations in that era, like the famous Atomic 4, were 25 to 30 hp because that's what the standard A-4 happened to put out.)

By the late 70's and early 80's buyers were more in a hurry when the wind dropped below XX kts and boat builders were putting in lots of three cylinder diesels like the Universal M25 (21 hp) at Ericson and similar Yanmars (to name only one other common brand) at competitors. Mid to late 80's, Ericson had moved to the 23 hp M25XP like the one in our boat. If they were still making these boats I have no doubt that something around 28 hp would now be standard.
My point is that "adequate" is a moving target.

In smooth water with little headwind, you could drive that model to hull speed with, maybe, 15 hp. For most of us, being impatient and sometimes faced with narrow waterways where sailing is impractical or sometimes even unlawful, more hp is needed for headwinds. As a friend of our refers to winds encountered while cruising for several years: "Noserlies!" when asked from which quarter the winds often came. :rolleyes:

Our boat weighs less than your contemplated E-34, but we have about the same amount of windage. If my faithful engine ever dies in some expensive way, I would likely move up slightly to a 26 or 27 hp, "just because."
;)

Perhaps some the other 34/35 owners can shed some light on this. My comments on this question are worth way under a penny.

Regards,
Loren
:egrin:
 
Last edited:

Tom Metzger

Sustaining Partner
Jim - I would say that the M-25XP's 23 hp is adequate for the E-34. Would I like to cruise faster than my usual 6 kts under power? Yes, but it is not a problem for me. It is a sailboat, don'tcha know, and I mostly sail. There are a lot of E-34's and E-35 III's with this engine out there. The engine would not be a deal breaker for me.

My son has a 3GM30F in his E-333 and he can go like a banshee under power, which was nice when we delivered it over 500 miles, mostly under power. That's a few days out of a few years.

BTW, a Hunter 27 edge has more horse power. ;)

YMMV
 

tenders

Innocent Bystander
Sea conditions haven't changed in the last 30 years, nor has the 1.34 x sqrt(waterline length) formula for maximum hull speed.

You'll only get so much additional speed with more horsepower. I think the reason for larger engines in more recent boats has as much to do with increased electrical/alternator demands as speed.
 

Glyn Judson

Moderator
Moderator
More HP nit necessarily the answer.

Jim and all, Consistent with what Mr. tenders just offered, I can say that at least when speaking of older Yanmar engines, the main difference between my 3GMF and the later 3GM30F engines is an increase from 22.5HP to 27HP respectively. Along with that was a larger alternator from my 30 amp to a 55 or 60 amp (can't remember exactly) fitted to the 3GM30F. The result is that a majority of increased power is evened out with the added demand from the larger alternator. Our dry weight 11,400 pound E31 powered with the older Yanmar 3 cylinder 3GMF engine and Kanzaki KM3P, 2.61 to 1 transmission fitted with a fixed 13 X 12 1/2 RH 3 blade prop can attain around 6.2 knots on flat water and ideal conditions. I might add that the boat can punch through very aggressive seas with that power train combination and I've never wanted for more power. As an aside, I initially thought that I was in trouble when my 30 amp alternator went south: I couldn't find a new replacement for it and resorted to going to a local repair shop as a last measure. I was pleased to find out they could indeed rebuild my alternator and was further surprised to learn that it was identical in appearance to one of the off brand Japanese cars, although of lesser output. The next day I came to pick it up and was surprised to learn that there were no special spark inhibiting baffles, etc built into my alternator, it looked just like the automotive ones inside and out. Cheers, Glyn Judson E31 hull #55, Marina del Rey, CA
 

Shadowfax

Member III
E34 Power

I have a '88 E34. the boat you are looking at. I have to agree with Tom. The engine is adequate. Hull speed of the 34 is, I believe, 7.2 knots. With a clean bottom, in still water, I can come close to that with this engine. Add tide, a head wind and a dirty bottom and this speed will drop. A dirty bottom [end of the season] can cost a knot to a knot and a half. I cruise with a Bristol 38.8 which has the next size up Universal engine and keep up with him, though the Bristol in much heavier. Would I like a larger engine... sure; would it keep me from buying the boat, no.

If you do buy the boat and find it slow, or not to your liking in a head wind, I would, and did, re-prop. A 3 blade makes a big difference, mine is feathering, which also makes a big difference.

Another thing I noticed is when I went for the Balmar 100 amp alternator and ran the engine after a weekend of TV, stereo, refrigeration, etc., and the batteries wanted a lot of juice, the alternator will knock a knot off the speed until the batteries begin to come up. This was mentioned in one of the eariler posts and I agree.

I bought my boat new in ' 88 and with the kids not down all the time now, the boat has got a lot bigger. I have no desire to trade up, or down.

Hope this helps.
 

escapade

Inactive Member
More E34

I too have an E34 (1988). It's our third Ericson and our last. It's generally a good layout but with the exceptions noted by others. Could use more refrig space and the cabin sole tends to rot around the mast. I have posted pictures of the replacement on this site. M25XP is a solid motor which will move the boat nicely on flat water. A 30 HP with a three blade would probably be better in a headwind but I've never been stranded with a 2 blade folder. Tends to get knocked back when motering directly into a headwind but if you sail or motorsail it's just fine. All things considered would buy one again in a heartbeat. We've had Escapade for 7 seasons and are still very happy. Happy boat shoping!
 

kevin81

Member II
I agree with Bud and Paul's thoughts. Mine is a 1989 with Universal 25XP. The power is fine; the only problem I've had is keeping the prop free of barnacles. I now have a diver check the bottom a few times a year (the boat stays in the water all year) and he will clean the prop. As to the interior, I am very happy with the layout and space down below for a 34 ft sailboat. Having a larger ice box (on the port side at the galley) would be nice but we make the two ice box arrangement work for cruising.
I've owned the boat since 2002 and have never second guess the decision to buy it.

Kevin
1989 E34
 

SASSY

Member II
We are also the proud owners of a 1987 E-34 200 and we love the boat. We find the tri cabin model with aft head makes a great live aboard for our small family.
We have been living on the boat for 18 months and havn't looked back, on ocasion the limited storage does get to me but that is no fault of the boat, just my ability to ajust. My wife and son however have adjusted quite well.
I have raced the boat in the Regatta Al sol del sol accross the gulf and the boat performe flawlesly in big seas. The build quaity has not disapointed me in any regard but I would recomend rebeding all the portights, and stantion bassis as they seemed to skimp a little on the compound. That combined with age and UV will create leaks.
The only two complaints I have with the boat is it's natural tendancy to list to starboard, even more so when the holding tank is full. And the big, fixed yet beautiful teak dining table. It takes up so much space and only serves one purpose, eating. I have since corected these two problems by moving the starboard water tank to port, and moving the storage starboard, and installing a new table I built. (I still have to put on a teak vaneer)
As for power, if the engine is running in top shape she has more than enough power to get you were you need to go. I installed a three blade 16/12 wich gives me ample power in forward and she is a dream to handle in reverse. The Kubota/Universal M25 is bulit proof and easy to find parts for. I blew the raw water pump seals on the way through the dismal swamp. The next day I hitchhiked from Elizabeth city 25 miles to Edenton were I was able to pick up a couple of rebuild kits from a tractor dealer.
We did get caught in the soup a few times and she powered through almost everything, our worst day was 53 knots of wind in the Chesapeak, we came of a wave and the wind blew us to port as we had nowere to run and since the waves weren't cresting I held the whell hard over and after about 30 seconds we were able to head up and make way about a 1 knot over ground. It was the longest 30 seconds of my life.
On some passages of over 120 miles the engine ran the entire time. We had no problems with overheating at all. We do have a fair bit of vibration and it gets a bit loud in the aft cabin while under power. We averaged between 6.2 and 6.5 knots at 2000-2300 rpm and our fuel economy was roughly 50 hours per tank. Although the tank is rated at 30 gallons you cannot count 3 gallons of that as the factory pick up does not go deep enough.
I have rebuilt most of the boat over the last two years with very few surprises. I have a posting on the site that list all the jobs I have undertaken with the aid of this web site, if you have any further questions let me know.
Andy
 

Attachments

  • 072.jpg
    072.jpg
    79.5 KB · Views: 126
  • 070.jpg
    070.jpg
    86.7 KB · Views: 136
  • 071.jpg
    071.jpg
    81.9 KB · Views: 117
Last edited:

Chris A.

Member III
A different pitch

Well I guess I will chime in with a little different "spin". I also think our E34 is a great boat but have always thought the boat was underpowered. I agree with Loren that adequate power is a relative term. I do have a high output alternator (110 amp) and engine driven refrigeration but the compressor is disengaged almost all of the time.

I guess what I'm talking about specifically (as have my fellow E34 sailors above) is that compared to some other boats that I have spent time on, it is a little laborious motoring into a headwind with any kind of sea state. I don't care that much about moving 7 vs. 6 knots under power in flat conditions, and I don't really care that the helm pulls to port quite strongly under power. But in 20+ knots of noserly (I like that term) and moderately steep waves I am often moving 3-4 knots. I don't normally run WOT, but usually think of 2300 rpm or so as cruising speed and it bugs me to go to wide open throttle in order to feel like you're making headway. One things is certain: if you can put the boat on a heading that will allow even a little bit of headsail to be used, it's like being fired out of a gun. The boat takes off. And I guess it is in part that stark contrast that makes me feel that she could be better under power. If I had to pick between good sailing boat vs. good motoring boat I would definitely choose the former, but I'd shoot for both if I had my druthers and I've cruised on boats that give up less on the motoring performance than our boat does.

I'm not sure that it is entirely a horsepower issue, but I think more horsepower would help. I think prop design, hull shape, growth on the bottom, windage from dodgers and the like, all contribute to how easily the boat is driven under power under various conditions. I have reason to believe from motoring on treilley's E35-III (same engine as mine, M25XP) that an upgraded prop will make a positive difference and I'm planning on a Flex-o-fold 2 blade to replace my fixed 2 blade (how does she go in slop and a headwind though Tim?). I do some beer can racing (and she is well suited for it!), daysail mostly, do as many overnights as time and family allow, but inherently have a cruiser's mentality and an inborn tendency to rely on that auxillary when the shit hits the fan.

So to sum up, I'm a little underwhelmed by our boat under power but overall she is a fine yacht that I'm very happy with and DEFINITELY would not describe the powertrain as a deal breaker.

Cheers,
Chris


P.S.- Nice table Andy!
 
Last edited:

treilley

Sustaining Partner
Chris, my E35 definitely does better to wind and waves with the Flexofold that it did with the fixed 2 blade.

Andy, Does the table lower into a bunk?
 

Shadowfax

Member III
Prop Change

To those considering a prop change, seriously consider a three blade, preferably feathering.

I ran the stock 2 blade Michigan Sailor for years, then a 2 blade folding but noticed very little difference in power or smoothness. Under sail it was maybe a 1/2 + knot faster, but marine growth would jam up the gears not allowing the blades to open or close correctly, requiring a dive or diver to scrape it clean and with them jammed up it felt like the engine was going to go through the cockpit deck and assault me.

I went for a fixed 3 blade, the Campbell sailer, which really smoothed out the engine and gave me a bit more push, but no difference from my old fixed 2 blade when sailing, well maybe a little.

A couple of years back I picked up a used Martec 3 blade feathering prop and all is now right with the universe. Stops on a dime, excellent reverse, very smooth, actually feels faster then the folding 2 blade [did it ever really completely fold?], great push in seas and head winds and doesn't suffer from clogged gears from marine growth, though I must say that because there is more surface area on a 3 blade the growth has more to grow on, so I'm still over the side about the middle of the summer with a scrapper.

I know the cost of a 3 blade vs a 2 blade, but look for a used one at about a third the cost of a new one, get it rebuilt if necessary [$200] and be done with playing with props.

This is a little off topic for this thread, but we started talking about props and my expediences are on a 34.
 

treilley

Sustaining Partner
I like feathering props but they don't help you much when you catch a lobster pot warp. At least with my folder the line gets caught on the rudder which is much easier to clear.
 

SASSY

Member II
E34-200

Tim I would have to say you do great work, the pictures probably don't do your workmanship justice.
We have been living aboard for 18 months and the cabin sole drives me nuts. It has a few dark spots and some dents but it's the color that drives me crazy. The stripes have yellowed from so many coats of varnish over the years. I have striped a small section that had the most discolor and cleaned it with acetone, bleach and dried it with a heat gun and its original color has returned. I am excited about the idea of a rejuvenated floor but the thought of my 1 year old son dropping one of his heavy toys on it concerns me. I would refinish it and put down a carpet of some sort but one of our dogs piddles a bit when you pick him up to go for a walk so I'm left dreaming of a sole like yours.
As for your question, no it does not drop into a birth. I have moved my starboard fresh water tank to port to better balance the boat and in moving it displaced its storage starboard. Now that I need not regularly access the port storage I have installed a leaf that folds out to make a double. I was able to cantilever the new table using the existing factory mounts taped for the original table. I can store 6 wine bottles in the trunk of the table and it does not require a forward support.
As for Prop talk again, I installed a three blade 16/12 and have no qualms about how she drive a rough seas. I figure if it ever gets to the point where I am not making any headway in rough seas I should either gets used to the scenery until it subside or turn and head the other way. And as I’m not the captain I don’t foresee steaming headlong into the forementioned all too often. Should a genie come and grant me one wish for my boat. I would first ask for 25 more feet and if that didn’t go well a little more power would be nice.
 
Last edited:

tramp

Member I
E34

I have owned my E34 since 1993. It is a1990 vintage, I am the original owner. I love this boat, obvious since I have kept it for 17 years. I have been chartering it with me as skipper for the past three years in Southern Ca. with no issues. Like any boat, you have to maintain it and it will bring you home every time. This is a great boat for two people to cruise coastally. I have a Yanmar 3G30F with a two blade prop. I am considering a three blade for the extra speed but after 17 years, why rush it. My last haul I found many micro blisters and was told, don't worry about it. When you decide to buy your 34, get a proffesional survey done then go sail your new boat.

Dave Moore
Lady and the TRAMP
Dana Point Ca.
 
Top