C380 versus C387 Differences

I am a C34 owner who is considering a move up to a bigger boat. I know a lot about the differences between the Mark I and the Mark II versions of the C34 but the differences between the C380 and the C387 seem more subtle to me. Other than cost and age, are there important distinctions I should keep in mind when comparing the two boats?

Responses from the group:

  • 380 has a separate bronze strut for support of the prop-shaft while the 387 has a molded in skeg which covers the shaft completely.  
  • The 387 has a bit more head room than the 380, and therefore a higher cabin top
  • the genoa winches were downsized from #54 to #48.
  • The lower backstay legs were move farther inboard so the stern perch seats are easier to access.
  • The earlier 380s are equipped with a smaller genoa furler.
  • The early 380s have inner-spring mattresses or just foam – 1998 C380 has foam; 1999 has inner-spring mattress
  • The 380 didn’t have much sound insulation inside the engine covers. The 387 has some, needs more.
  • The 380 has standard and tall-mast versions?? The 387 only has the equivalent of the “standard” mast height
  • Wing keel depth changed a number of times in the 380 line and then to 4’10” in 387 though some have reported it is actually deeper than that when the boat is loaded.
  • Mast on C380s from z-spar until later switch to Charleston.  Early C387s used Charleston then changed to Seldon
  • Catalina eliminated the T-shaped shaped cockpit on the 387. Some like the additional room in the 387.
  • Catalina eliminated the vented sealed liner on at least one of the aft swim platform 387 lockers.-One is sealed, one is open to the lazarette.
  • Catalina split the starboard salon bench seat in two seats with dedicated table, where the 380 bench seat back folded down with a less functional table top. – In the 387, the table lowers and becomes a bench.
  • Eliminated the dedicated nav-station seat.
  • The waste tank that was mounted under the bench seat was moved to what is a wet hanging locker on the 380.
  • Lots of cabinet changes in the salon, enlarged the aft cabinets and eliminated shelves.
  • Eliminated the storage above the power panel at the Nav station by increasing the panel size for upgrades. Changed the cabinetry under the galley sink
  • Changed the configuration of the 387 v-berth, and eliminated the forward wash basin.
  • Altered the number and configuration of side fixed and opening ports.
  • Divided anchor locker and added an additional roller
  • Changed the configuration and number of bilge access boards.
  • Redesigned and improved the refrigerator door
  • Changed the shower bulkhead//door.
  • Another consideration is Westerbeke versus Yanmar, which is actually a 380 vs. 380 consideration, since it occurred sometime during the 2000 model year.
  • A significant change is the aft “queen” bed configuration.  It was lowered, giving more vertical space Also, the bed has optional orientation: either fore/aft or athrwartship.  
  • Some aft cabin storage was lost on the C387.
  • On another front, early C387s had a baby stay. This did give rise to a mod to fix questionable interior attachment of stay & resulting leaks.- The turnover was thought to be in around hull 60??

 

 

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.