Ranger Tug 29CB vs Cutwater 30CB

A

aintmissb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
73
Fluid Motion Model
C-24 C
A discussion topic for a pre-launch Sunday afternoon. The RT29CB and the Cutwater30CB are superficially very similar, same beam, Cutwater is a bit longer, very similar interior. The Cutwater has a much more powerful diesel. But the RT29CB seems to selling like hot cakes and the Cutwater 30CB seems not to be (I cannot back this up with any actual data). In fact several of the C30CBs seem to be coming back on the used market, and at a lower price than the the RT29s. Anyone have any thoughts on why this is? Thanks, Roger, Kingston, ON - waiting for the last of the ice to clear!
 
I suspect the most significant difference is style. They have a very different look. The tugs in the 25-31 foot size don’t have much market competition. It’s a pretty big move up price wise to a Nordic or American Tug. There are more classic power boats out there similar in style to the Cutwaters; therefore more competition. I prefer the extra power on the Cutwater and find the command bridge more visually appealing than the Ranger 29CB. Surprised you have the impression that the Cutwaters don’t hold their value as well as the Tugs. Both great boats from an outstanding company.
 
For me part of the difference was being able to cruise in the Cutwater at the 29’s top speed. I came very close to purchasing an R29 and 31 but really enjoyed the easy, fast planing cruise in the 30.
 
I wondered also if the recent craze for outboards and the introduction of the C30 OB has softened the market for the diesel 30?
 
I am presently doing the 29CB vs 30CB debate. I believe the 30CB has more of a planing hull, which is one reason it is faster than the 29CB, which has more of a displacement hull. I wonder if that gives the 29CB a smoother ride in rougher conditions than the 30CB. From the folks I have talked with, as folks age they are more interested in getting a smoother riding boat than a faster boat. I am enjoying the speed of my 27OB, but I am thinking I want a smoother ride and I am willing to give up some speed to get it. Especially when the Admiral retires and we have more time to explore and smell the roses along the way. I am still trying to find mpg curves for the 29CB and the 30CB. A CB will be my next boat, but I am not sure if I want to step up to the 50mph speed of the rumored 302CB. So I am trying to decide between the 29CB and the 30CB.
 
ixlr8":4d5f89cn said:
...snip... I am still trying to find mpg curves for the 29CB and the 30CB. A CB will be my next boat, but I am not sure if I want to step up to the 50mph speed of the rumored 302CB. So I am trying to decide between the 29CB and the 30CB.
Click to expand...

Jim:

My guess is that the R29 CB will give you a smoother/better ride in just about all sea conditions. The C-30 CB is some 200 lbs heavier than the R29 CB.

MPG & GPH for my 2019 R29 CB so far yielded this on calm day, no wind, smooth waters, slack tide, one person, full fuel tank, full water tank, empty holding tank, no dinghy on swim step, new bottom paint and maybe 250 lbs of stowed gear.

6 kts/7 mph -> 2 gph/3.45 mpg at 1600 RPM
10 kts/11.5 mph -> 6 gph/1.91 mpg at 2400 RPM
17 kts/19.6 mph -> 12 gph/1.63 mpg at 3200 RPM

WOT at 3600 RPM gave me ~24 kts / 27.5 mph
 
Only 200lbs difference? I would have thought the engine alone would account for that much.
 
OK I stand corrected, Volvo lists the D4 and D6 diesels as only differing by 60lbs in weight.
 
310 lbs difference between D4 300 hp and D6 435 hp.
 
Yep, I was looking at the wrong D4. So a lot more than 200lbs weight difference
 
ixlr8":11w5urt5 said:
I am presently doing the 29CB vs 30CB debate. I believe the 30CB has more of a planing hull, which is one reason it is faster than the 29CB, which has more of a displacement hull. I wonder if that gives the 29CB a smoother ride in rougher conditions than the 30CB.
Click to expand...

Both 29CB Ranger and 30CB are semi displacement hulls. The Cutwater has design changes compared to the traditional Ranger Tug Hull but still not a planing hull. The most significant difference in regards to the performance (speed) is the additional 135hp powering the Cutwater and additional assumed foot of water line length. With regard to ride my opinion is the ride would be comparable with a slight edge going to the Cutwater because of the one foot addition in length and the step hull design.I do not think that the ride difference would sway a buyer to purchase one over the other. Design and appearance of the Tug or traditional design and appearance of the Cutwater would weigh in more in the decision. Both designs are appealing. It come down to more of whats your flavor!
 
Besides the factors already mentioned (and completely agree) one factor in choosing a C30 for us was aft visibility. It has great aft visibility, unlike tugs. (OTOH, I would also like to have a helm door, which helps and has many other advantages. Yes, every boat is a tradeoff!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

  • Tugnuts.com is the community hub for Ranger Tug, Cutwater, and Solara owners. Since its inception in 2008, the Tugnuts forum has grown into an active and thriving community of more than 9,000 members. It serves as both a meeting place for the best boating community online, and an invaluable archive of information.

  • User menu
Back
Top