The Columbia 43 a classic Tripp racer

The Columbia 43 is a big, muscular boat made for long ocean races. The boat is largely forgotten now because its birth coincided with the death of the rating rule it was designed to race under.

With a long, flush deck and a low gun-turret house, the boat is easily recognizable as coming from the drafting board of William H. Tripp, Jr., one of the great designers of the Cruising Club of America racing era. Trip designed the Columbia 43 as part of a suite of racing and cruising boats for Columbia Yachts that included two of the largest production boats of the 1960s, the Columbia 50 and the Columbia 57. In fact, the first model of the Columbia 43 had a Columbia 50s deck house.

Columbia 43 hull number 1 with the deck house off a Columbia 50.

The Columbia 43 is a fast boat. In its early years, a 43 finished first-in-class in the Transpac race from San Pedro, Calif., to Honolulu, Hawaii. As the International Offshore Rating rule took over the racing scene, the Columbia 43 was left behind in favor of boats that would rate better under the new rule. With the popularity of sailboat racing under PHRF, the Columbia 43 is again a contender for the silver.

A Mark III recognizable by her small rectangular ports.

Columbia also came out with a Mark III model that was even more competitive as a racer. It had a keel with a shorter chord and lead ballast, a modified rudder, and six additional feet of mast height. Columbia also abandoned its trademark long, low window on the side of the house for this model and substituted two, rectangular ports on each side giving it a mean, pillbox look.

Tripps name is synonymous with CCA racers that have centerboards, so, naturally, there is a centerboard version of the boat as well. It has an additional 1,300 pounds of ballast and a minimum draft two feet less than the keel version.

The boat was well laid out for racing with a galley to port and a U-shaped dinette to starboard, a step down takes you to the main saloon with facing settees that convert to four single bunks. Forward of that is a small head to starboard with a large standing chart table and a V-birth in the forepeak, The arrangement is somewhat less desirable as a cruising boat for a couple, but it is still workable. The boat also carried 50 gallons of fuel and 50 gallons of water, about half of what you would want on a cruising boat that size.

Columbia built 153 of the 43s: about a third at its yard in Portsmouth, Va., and the rest in the Costa Mesa, Calif., yard. A smaller number (about six) of the Mark IIIs were built. The longevity of heavy fiberglass construction means most are still sailing.

At least one Columbia 43 has circumnavigated the globe. Other boats ended up scattered across the world in the Mediterranean,Caribbean and the islands of the Pacific as well as in every coastal state. A 43 in Aruba takes out 22 passengers for day sails; a job its done every day for more than 30 years under two generations of owners. The large deck and 10-foot cockpit comfortably handles all 22 passengers. A tough boat indeed.

Columbia 43 under sail on the Columbia River.

Heres the Columbia 43 by the numbers:

• Length: 43 feet 3 inches
• Beam: 12 feet 4 inches
• Draft: 6 feet 11 inches
• Waterline Length: 32 feet 8 inches
• Displacement: 22,200 pounds (one source says 18,900 pounds)
• Ballast: 9,500 pounds
• Sail Area: 806 square feet
• Sail Area/Displacement: 18.24
• Ballast/Displacement: 50.26 percent
• Displacement/Length: 257.49
• Theoretical Hull Speed: 7.5 knots 
• Vertical Clearance: 58 feet 4 inches
• Built between 1969 and 1974
• Number built: 153
• PHRF number: 102 (Columbia 43 Mark III has a PHRF number of 96)

Dix 43

The picture here is of Flying Cloud - a Hout Bay Resident boat. This is also the Dix 43 with which I am most familiar - although most are built in steel and a few in aluminium.


I make no apologies for the glowing references to most of the boats in this blog - nor the qualities of the designers - they are here because they are my favourites, or at least very interesting.


This boat is a brilliant cruising design. While researching for this posting - I was interested to see it is the personal choice of at least two professional builders - including also Robert Christinger (Alumar Yachts) - who makes very detailed kits for them. The designer - Dudley Dix - is also arguably the best "design to build" man in the game, with very practical and sensible designs, all based on contemporary class-leading concepts. Kits are vailable in Steel and Aluminium as far as I know - details on http://www.dixdesign.com/.


The "Dix Range" within Dudleys portfolio represent the most sensible, balanced range of cruisers you will find anywhere. The Shearwaters (modern classics oozing style), and the Hout Bays (corinthian classics), are also in fact modern designs but offer traditional styling and rigs if one prefers. The "Dix" range however is purely contemporary - they have the fewest compromises to be the "thinking mans cruiser" in my words.

If someone were to ask me to chose my ideal cruising yacht in 10 seconds this would be it from the yachts I know . . . other more informed folk have come to the same conclusion after much more thought but there you are.


The Dix range includes four versions of the Dix 43 - the original aft-cockpit version, the standard centre cockpit version, the pilothouse version, and now also an aft-cockpit version with a hard dodger and trunk-cabin. I honestly dont know which is best - or even how to argue the case for any one of them - they are all great. Centre cockpit is great on a boat this size - I have been in this one and it has all the advantages of a centre cockpit without the usual drawbacks below - but the Pilothouse would be great as well - and the aft cockpit with hard dodger might have the best of them all? (I havent seen this one in the flesh but surely it has the potential to have the largest cabin . . .). You can build from Steel (most of them are), or Aluminium. The one in the top pic was built of ply (radiius chine) - and is extremely successful - but is not a standard offer to my knowledge.

left-click for fullsize

this is the pilot-house version

All Dudleys cruising designs have modern underbodies and moderate keels. The hulls are moderate in section and beam, but have relatively long waterline running up to the fine bow. The Dix 43 has a semi-balanced rudder well aft on a partial skeg.? All the ratios are moderate and balanced, and the design makes use of all contemporary thinking to make her fast, sea-kindly, spacious and safe - without being expensive or extreme. As with most Dix designs, the engine and tankage is very central, leaving the ends nice and buoyant, with good engine access. These boats have great "open ocean cred" to coin a phrase - they are good for Cape Waters and the 40s if you like. They have powerful keels and efficient rigs, making them very able sailing upwind. These are not just boats for the Med or the Latitudes . . . all comments for the Shearwater 39s sailing ability apply here too - even more so, as it is a slightly bigger boat.

The rig is a double-spreader marconi cutter. Headsails can be configured as a true Yankee-clipper or simply a big-un and a small-un - on roller furlers depending what you doing. So its basically a simple sloop - good for perfromance in all conditions, and easy on the pocket. They are fast, comfortable, safe, and easy to handle. See stability curve for the Dix 43:

left click for fullsize

The space inside is vast. The broad stern, generous freeboard and ample windows make it light and large without the dymamic drawbacks of todays "floating charter caravans". Both the centre cockpit version as well as the Pilot House version have extensive windows and support good views from the saloon. Layouts are conventional but larger than usual - and it certainly feels like a boat you would easily live in. Cockpit is safe and spacious.

How does it compare with the Shearwaters and the Hout Bay Range? Or the armada of mediterranean charter boats?

Well - the Hout-Bays, the Shearwaters and the Dixs have very similar hull philosophies. The differences are primarily in style and choice of rig. The Dix range makes least compromises. The Shearwaters look the best. And the Hout Bays are theoretically the simplest, cheapest, most traditional, and maybe the most spacious . . . although a bit slower, but not too much . . . The "med boats" now also have leading designers, factory finishes, good accommodation, but they still arent tough enough for around here, and dont sail quite as well as they should. Even their tying up cleats are woefully inadequate for Hout Bay (I have personal experience of these). Certainly they lack soul, and bullet-proof is a term I wouldnt put  in the same sentence. Id take a Dix 43 over one of them any day at all . . . .

Does a Dix 43 have any drawbacks? None that come to mind if you want a cruiser with great performance and safety. Its not a buoy-racer -  but if you entered the Cape to Rio youd be right up with the front-runners and likely win the cruising division. Sailing back you might get back first . . . and still be dry. . . my only gripe is the one I want is listed beyond my budget . . . !

Another very interesting design on the same philosophy is the Dix 38.

See http://www.dixdesign.com/dix43.htm for Dudleys website info on this design.