32s5 or sigma 33ood

[savageseadog]

I'm not sure I'd describe the Sigma 33 as a strong boat, although it's probably stronger than many modern boats. The rig is highly stressed and really outside recognised safe design limits, the hull is cored, I've seen the result of a fairly low speed collision with a solid object, a fairly sizeable hole I could have climbed through. I believe the keel is vulnerable to grounding damage but then so are many boats but almost any Sigma you may look at will have been grounded a few times, it will be important to determine how well the repairs have been carried out. As I say it's probably no worse than many boats but "strong" it isn't. Due to the modern flying machine designs it's not really competitive as a race boat in mixed fleets any more which is another thing to consider.

 

[john_morris_uk]

We have owned (and raced) a Sigma 33 and there are one or two comments in the replies that you have had which I would disagree strongly with.

Firstly we only ever borached in our Sigma a couple of times, and even then they were not mad broaches with breakages and gear everywhere. When we crusied the boat with the dacron sails we NEVER broached. Sigma 33's sail beautifully and are a pleasure to sail. Yes, they do compress a bit when you tension the rig up, but look for a good one - and if you are not racing, then you will be fine.

We always sat ours on its keel, and I know of several others who do the same, and have never heard of a keel problem with the boat. If there is one with a problem, I suggest its an exception rather than the rule.

Nice boats that sail well - just get one that isn't too tired. Look at a few and you will soon see which the good ones are.

 

[Resolution]

Another srong vote for the Sigma 33, having raced on for several years in the Solent. Great allrounder, provided us with loads of fun in mid fleet positions. Now we DID broach at least once or twice every year, mostly when trying to gybe the kite. Re remarks above about the rig being overstressed, I cannot disagree more - despite sticking it in the water at speed, uncontrolled Chinese gybes, spins etc we never had a single rig breakage. Nor any keel problems, although we never hit any rocks, only the Bramble Bank (more than once...).

 

[Tom Price]

Sigma 33

We broached in the same location after every upwind start to the R rthe Is: rounding the Needles having avoided the Varvassi it's kite up then the girls queue for the loo. That's all it needed, and the trimmer leaving the rail to hit the kicker jammer brought on a wipeout. Very funny after recovery - except for the lass upside down in the heads!

 

[Quandary]

I'm not sure I'd describe the Sigma 33 as a strong boat, although it's probably stronger than many modern boats. The rig is highly stressed and really outside recognised safe design limits, the hull is cored, I've seen the result of a fairly low speed collision with a solid object, a fairly sizeable hole I could have climbed through. I believe the keel is vulnerable to grounding damage but then so are many boats but almost any Sigma you may look at will have been grounded a few times, it will be important to determine how well the repairs have been carried out. As I say it's probably no worse than many boats but "strong" it isn't. Due to the modern flying machine designs it's not really competitive as a race boat in mixed fleets any more which is another thing to consider.

I never knew Marine Projects built cored hulls and I owned two Sigmas.
When racing through the Copeland sound at night the tide carried us broadside on to a channel buoy, (not a mark of the course) one of the lifting lugs on the buoy punched through the hull just above the waterline amidships, we kept her heeled over while we plugged the hull and the filler (two tubs) had to cure before we could tack. After the race I cut the filler away enlarged and filleted the hole and repaired with glass and resin, there was no core there, just GRP about 12mm thick. They are strong, though I agree that some rigs were overstressed, I have seen a 12" spanner with 2 foot of pipe on it being used on the inners between races, even then the rig does the full ten years though so they can take it, the only mast we lost was dropped in the boatyard. The mast post is 4"x2" hardwood and if you intend to race tune, take down the lining in the head, you hire an Acrow and put it in beside it, screw up and pack solidly above and below, it is not solid to the deck as built, you can usually get about 6mm. of ply soaked in resin between the post and the deck, the lining goes back tidily.
We inspected after any hard grounding and only ever had to put paint on the keel, the keel has a wide flange and the bolts are well spaced.
They are still competitive in Scotland, our Finngulf 33 gives them stacks of time and the can beat us easily, if we can see them they are beating us, the guys that sail them hone their skills racing to strict one design rules in very competitive races and are the best saiors around, in a big blow the are the very last to drop their kites.

 

[Captain Bligh]

thanks very much to all for the informative information, alot of which (rigs being tensioned with a 2' lever) i never knew. i suppose these are the same type as those who toss the toilet roll over the ide to save weight! you know who you are.

Clearly the sigma gets the majority vote by all.

as such i think its very obvious that the sigma would be easier to sell on when i go to get a storm 33!!

nobody wants to be stuck with a lemon to sell in the 32s5, although as a guy once said, if you buy right you can sell right.

keep em coming. i find your comments very interesting.

 

[chrisgee]

trying to decide on a first 32s5 (1988) or a sigma 33ood (1 is '87 other '89)

i just don't know. all are similar price range 30K euro or 26k pounds ishhh. similar condition and have similar gear

which would be easier to sell when moving up!!

which sails better

my heart is on the ben as it looks more modern but my head is saying sigma.

please help

other suggestioins very welcome.

Had both
32s5 more stable downwind but no faster then a sigma 33 upwind our 32S5 was a dog ,even with decent sails,no contest, Sigma 33 or perhaps Benny 345, more room and a proper Beneteau what they don`t build like no more!!

 

[Euphonyx]

Lots of info here.... except.. The Sigma should be priced at around 20k if its a good one!

 

[Quandary]

Sigma 33 were being made right up to the end of the eighties though the majority were sold in 78-80, the later ones at the end of production (post red graphics) were sold in very small numbers being comparatively expensive. They had significant improvements like framed windows, interior fit out etc. While a cared for old one may be better than a neglected newer one, if you can find a late production model in fresh condition and there are some about it will be worth a bit of a premium.

 

[Captain Bligh]

thanks. that the 32s5 well and truly shot down. i knew they were not in demand as this 32s5 has been for sale with about 18months and i can only find about 5 others elsewhere on line.

there is a 345 local to me but she is a few quid more. It even feels like a sturdy bus.

I also agree with Quandary about the late model sigma. the 2 models i'm looking at are 89&90. going to check them out shortly.

 

[Resolution]

You've got to go for the Sigma, Bligh, then you can join the rest of us in reminiscing about Great Broaches and fantastic racing whilst inches apart!

 

[john_morris_uk]

You've got to go for the Sigma, Bligh, then you can join the rest of us in reminiscing about Great Broaches and fantastic racing whilst inches apart!

Perhaps I ought to clarify (and admit) that we sometimes broached when racing! It was only when that we were cruising under dacron sails and very much depowered compared whith when we were racing that we never broached. When you sail downwind with more sail than you really should, trying to keep the boat under the kite is always a problem. I still think that the Sigma 33 has FAR better manners than many modern boats. I have broached in some modern fat backsided things in a mild gust when hard on the wind. A little extra heel and the rudder comes out of the water and you round up in an uncontrolled way which I can only describe as a broach. Neither the Sigma 33 or our current Westerly has anything like such bad manners. When pressed hard, they both lean over a bit more and the helm protests and lets you know that things are not right. No sudden loss of steering and rounding up. For those who have only ever sailed modern fat backsided boats, you should try a more traditional design sometime! I always watch out for the look of amazement and joy when the person who hasn't sailed such a boat realises that sailing doesnn't have to be such hard work.

 

[kiboteam]

I don´t know if this is still interesting or not but I´ll give you my two cents.

I now that there, in your country, a Sigma might win the contest, but seeing it from a neutral point of view (I´m Spanish) I can give you my opinion.

Here where I sail, South Spain, I own a First 32s5 and there are two more. Beside, there are two Sigma 33, and we all race and sail together, as a flotilla, in Summer.

The 32s5 looks like and feels as a bigger boat, with higher freeboard, bigger interior, bigger and better designed cockpit and better accomodation. But the point is that the Beneteau is much faster in light-medium winds, and very similar in strong winds to the Sigma.

Moreover, you should consider that the Beneteau takes the year much better, and Sigmas usually look older than they are (probably due to the excess of tuning for races).

Think it twice. The Beneteau has a Stix of 34.7, so it is a A Class, and the ratio Motion Comfort is very high too, so when sailing in high seas you will thank its motion.

 

[emandvee44]

Here is my six pennyworth!

I owned two sigma 33s, the first one was hull number 007 (I think), and I liked the class so much that I bought a much newer one, in fact one of the last built.(the first one went on to win the Nationals a few years later - no mean feat, and proof of the one design principle)
We raced and cruised the boat locally and afar, crossing Biscay 4 times, and once survived a force 10 Channel gale (that's another story in itself - and one I would rather forget).
Crossed the Channel in all sorts of conditions many times and raced around the cans at home, and raced and cruised throughout the Westcountry.

I found them easy to maintain, and never had a problem with the rigs or the keel, and we dried out many times for a scrub and paint mid season.
Bottom line - I would have one again if my circumstances were different!

My last 33, K4574 is currently for sale - pictures on the Sigma Association website.

Cheers,

Michael.

 

[sarico]

Avoid the mast head version, it has a reduced keel as well as the chopped off rig, more of a motorsailer.

As a 33c owner I think the above comments need more substantiation.

"Reduced keel" - the 33c keel is slightly shorter, but is longer to compensate.

"Chopped off rig" - you mean it has a slightly shorter mast so you effectively sail with a reef in to avoid being rounded up in strong breezes - that sounds like a good idea to me if you sail as a couple and don't have 4 or 5 people hanging on the windward rail........see some of the other comments.

"More of a motor sailor" - sorry, but miles off.

If you want a fast cruiser that can be handled by 2 people in some quite rough conditions (the prototype survived the 79 Fastnet) the 33c is a good choice. And as a 'c' won't have been raced (unless you happen to buy Elmarleen which won the OSTAR 2 years ago - but then that proves my point) you should get one in good condition.

 

[dancrane]

Minor digression

Some interesting reading here.

Pardon me for moving sideways (centreboard's up); I remember the Contessa 32 being much-lauded in a comparison with the Sigma 33, in one of the mags twenty years back. I always wondered why they were seen as rivals, when the yardsticks seem to show that one is substantially quicker than the other. The slower one's prettier though.

P.S. Captain Bligh...morale will improve, as soon as it's spelt correctly!!