# Doeas anyone have a problem-free Hunter ???



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Going through the search thing - looking for the right boat. Grew up with a less-than-stellar impression of the quality of Hunter boats. But I look around and they are all over the place. Have they changed ? Are people less demanding than they used to be ??? Comments ??


----------



## pigslo (Nov 22, 2004)

There are so many of them because they do what they were intended to do quite well.
pigslo


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

In general, probably all of the big 3 (Benehuntalina) make better boats now than they used to. Probably market driven? Still, you get what you pay for -- most of the time. 

One other thing I suggest is to sign up for the Sailnet email lists for the manufacturers you think you might be interested in. Just read what people write about -- problems, things that break, good points, bad points, projects, factory support, etc. You don't even have to post yourself. By lurking on the lists for a while, you'll find out a ton of info and get the scoop on what's good and bad about each manufacturer.


----------



## tommyt (Sep 21, 2002)

I agree with Pigslo and SailorMitch. It just depends on what your expectations and usage are.

The title of this could just as easily be "Does anyone have a problem free boat?" If they do they are probably missing something because the nature of the beast is that things break.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

SM, 

Despite occasional minor gaffs and bumps, Catalinas and Beneteaus have always made good quality boats for the money, I don't think they're any better now than in 1980, they don't need to be...I owned a 1980 Beneteau and although I criticised some elements of that design, it was a very nicely constructed boat...I would never hesitate to consider a Beneteau or Catalina for consturction quality reasons.

Hunters are very common because they are inexpensive.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Sailormann said:


> Going through the search thing - looking for the right boat. Grew up with a less-than-stellar impression of the quality of Hunter boats. But I look around and they are all over the place. Have they changed ? Are people less demanding than they used to be ??? Comments ??


I look around and Wal-Marts are all over the place too, and for much the same reason.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

You don't say if you're looking at new or used boats. Or, how you expect to use it. As already said, most any boat will have some issues. And they are also usually targeted to a particular segement of the market. Defining how you'll use the boat and where, should be your primary goals, then you'll know what kind of boat to be looking for. Don't limit your choices though by simply accepting perceptions of others or yourself. Take a look see before you cross anything off.


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

It's always contentious to make comparisons between 3 essentially equivalent brands which are all made to similar design and construction standards for the same market. I just did a quick yachtworld comparison for grins and came up with the following for advertized price range:

2000-2001 used Catalina 42 $180 - $190k
2000-2001 used Beneteau 42 $120 -$160k (by far more on the market then the other 2)
2000-2001 used Hunter 42 $190 -$220k

Clearly this is not a scientifically or statistically valid comparison but these numbers don't bear your original implication


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Growing up (in the Maritimes) Catalinas were considered acceptable, Beneteaus were non-existent and Hunters were pretty well pariahs. There was a story that circulated there about a sailor whose HUnter deck lifted off his hull at the stern while he was racing in Chester. Didn't see it myself, hence can't vouch for the accuracy of the tale, but it served to scare most of the locals off. This was late seventies, and by all accounts they have improved quite a bit. I was amazed however, when we started looking, to see the number of Hunters on the market here in Ontario. Checked out the Hunter Owners forum and found a lot of reports of leaks, lack of attention to construction detail, etc. Most owners seemed to indicate that they would buy again however, so I guess they're doing something right. Anyway, moot point now. We have settled on a C&C 30 MkII that is in great shape, new engine, wiring, sails, paint, and we're going have some additional upgrading done. So we'll end up with an almost new boat for a bit less than a new price. The original plan was to go out spend 10K on a beater to carry us through until we bought "the boat". Well... the best laid plans and all that...but what the heck...you're only middle-aged once huh ?


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

K1VSK...One of the gross ways in which your sample is distorted is that ALL 6 Beneteau 42's on the yachtworld site are in Europe or Asia. With the dollar so badly devalued...you can't make international price comparisons like that. Furthermore...there is no background on the boats but Bene's are far more likely to be charter boats than the other two so one would expect lower prices. 
The only real way to compare these brands I think is at the boat shows for similarly equipped boats new. They are usually pretty close.


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

Camaderie
Actually, I included all 423s which are 42 ft boats and virtually all are in the U.S. and presumed to not be charters unless in the Carib. which I excluded intentionally to make the comparison fairer. How boats hold theri value with age is usually far more telling than what the new cost is.


----------



## dgarr75456 (Nov 6, 2006)

Sailormann, I think they have changed, and quite a bit. The new Henderson Hunters are well designed for their market and built to a standard equivalent to the other two major market players. Now, between Bene, Cata, and Hunter, its more of which one appeals to you, as the quality and value appear very close. I just got back from a boatshow with all three, and there was no clear winner.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Don't take one off-shore.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I just got the shock of my life. Was thinking that maybe it's a little nuts to pay 80K+ for a 19 year old 30 foot boat, so figured 'what the hey - bump it up the final 20 and get something recent' So I logged on to Yachtworld and did my little search on the Great Lakes and found out that there is nothing fibreglass made in the last ten years, listed on the Great Lakes for under 100K that was not made by Hunter, Catalina, Beneteau or - GHUA - MacGregor ! What happened ????


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

dgarr - what is a Henderson Hunter ??


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Sailor...the " Henderson" refers to the new building processes and models fostered in the last couple of years at Hunter by their new guy Henderson. There are some who have taken factory tours and seen the boats that feel the "new" Hunters have corrected past poor building/design practices and are now excellent choices for their designated purposes. This observer, having seen 30 years of their marketing, prefers to wait till the new boats have a few years in use before rendering judgements...but it at least sounds positive.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Indeed - so does gene splicing but I'm inclined to wait on that one too....


----------



## dgarr75456 (Nov 6, 2006)

Jean splicing? Is that when your pants get caught up in the anchor line?


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Maybe this would be a good time for someone (Not Me!) to define what the "their good for their intended use" means???? It seem that many of the people asking questions about these boats don't know what their intended use is, ie. bathtub toy, pond yacht...

Perhaps a discussion of the lilely lifespan of Hunters vs. other boats. (beyond just the fiberglas shell) due to construction.

Anyone, anyone???


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

T34C...Ok I'll take th bait. Intended use in this case means bay and coastal cruuising with an emphasis on comfort at anchor or at the dock. The larger models would be suitable for ThornyPath caribe adventures or baja runs. In general, these are not boats designed to stand up to the pounding inflicted by 24x7 blue water voyaging. (Which is not to say that some have not done it.)

As to lifespan...I'm kinda puzzled by the question as I would not expect their lifespan to be less than any other boat. Because much of the hardware/fitting out is lightweight relative to a bluewater boat, one could expect earlier replacement needs for things like hatches, but there are still plenty of 1970's vintage Hunters sailing around out there. Bottom line for me is that they are the most popular boat out there because they are CHEAP (relatively) and the design choices reflect the needs and desires of their clientele. I know several multiple Hunter boat owners and they understand the limits of their boats but love them and use them as intended rather than pushing the limits.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Most mid-range boats (up to 36') it seems are now made and marketed as weekender/coastal vessels. The emphasis is on accomodations and ammenities, rather than extended cruising or performance. There are of course, some exceptions, such as J-Boats and C&C come to mind. There are some that are marketed as small bluewater cruisers, such as Pacific Seacraft 34. These exceptions though, are usually priced considerably higher.

The high volume builders have identified the largest segement of the "new" boat market as being those who want a boat for largely weekend use and with as many ammenities as possible. And, as with any boat, there are compromises that must be made to meet those goals, and, stay within a price point. That's where they are selling the most boats, so that is what they build.

Though many of their larger boats also fit this niche, they do try to make them to CE classification A so they can market them as bluewater boats. Basically, in my mind, this is more a marketing ploy, than any thing else. For while they may be built well enough, they aren't configured for extended bluewater passage.

In some ways, owning a sailboat, particularly a large one, has become similar to having a country club membership. A matter of precieved status. Hence, the builders have responded to the market.

Then, there is the growing market for large daysailers. Classic style looks, high price ..... in other words, shouting "I've made it".

So boat builders, just as with cars, are to some extent, trend driven, as well as market driven. Thus, the need to realistically identify how you will use whatever boat you buy. You don't need the small cockpit, cramped interior, large tankage of a bluewater boat to sit at the dock. Nor would you want it's opposite for a circumnavigation. By having a realistic idea of how you'll use the boat, you can make the boat just what you need for what you'll do. Or, another way to say it would be to, know what you'll do, and then find a boat that will do it.

By and large, I don't think there is a whole lot of difference in the basic construction now days. The differences lie more in the details, such as finish, materials, hardware quality and size, etc. But just as some would never own a Ford or a Chevy, so there are some who would never own a Hunter or Catalina.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

PBzeer said:


> You don't need the small cockpit, cramped interior, large tankage of a bluewater boat to sit at the dock. Nor would you want it's opposite for a circumnavigation.


I am curious, John. Even with a small cockpit, it needs to drain; what is the total cross-sectional area of your cockpit drains? What is the size of tankage that you consider suitable? What is the size have you on your Ontario?


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Firstly, my boat isn't considered a bluewater boat, though they have crossed the Atlantic. The cockpit is not as large as the newer boats, yet not as small as that of the typical bluewater boat. While a "small" cockpit isn't estential for passagemaking, the reading I have done shows it to be desirable.

I have four 1 1/2" cockpit drains in a T shaped cockpit. I have 66 gallons of water and 28 of fuel. Sufficent for the cruising I plan to do, and more than most boat this size. That was one of the factors in choosing the boat. It is well suited for my intended use.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Cam- As for the lifespan issue, I was thinking about some of the disucssions on other threads about the cost involed with older cheaper boats vs. a newer more expensive boat. As these cheaper boats age much of the gear that is lighter duty and well, cheap, is going to need to be replaced. A cheap port will leak, gear fail, etc... Additionally, at some point the thing will start to fall apart just from years of use. At some point the $$$ need to refit are greater than it is worth or greater than what you could buy a newer or better built boat for. In these cases I would consider that boats lifespan DONE. (I know there are still uses for, and people who will want them.)

I just find it interesting that while many people preach recycling and environmentalism our culture continues to buy a lot of cheaper goods that are lesser quality, don't last, and are disposible. I realize I'm poaching from a lot of other threads, but the Benehuntelina's really aren't much different than the cheaper "Apex" or the like TV that you can buy at WalMart becasue it is cheaper than a Sony. Saying that a boat is "good for its intended purpose" might be a little misleading, unless your intended use is as a dockside condo that won't be subjected to a lot of wear and tear.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

PBzeer said:


> I have four 1 1/2" cockpit drains in a T shaped cockpit. I have 66 gallons of water and 28 of fuel.


So, if you consider your 7.07 square inches of cockpit drainage adequate, then the more than 400 square inches of cockpit drain on my boat's T-shaped cockpit should satisfy you.

And I am pleased to see that you might even consider my 200 gallons of water and 222 gallons of fuel sufficient for puttering around the marina.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

T34C...while it is true that lighter gear is used... since lighter conditions of use are anticipated...I don't see any reason why a 20 year old hunter USED AS INTENDED...should have any more wrong with it than a 20 year old tayana (valiant,psc etc.) USED AS INTENDED. 
The vast majority of Hunters (and other low priced production boats) ARE used as dockside condos and only taken out on weekends and rarely even then and NEVER if the wind is blowing 20. Just walk around any marina on a summer day with a nice fresh breeeze! This is another reason why a 20 year old Hunter will generally have no more wrong with it than any other boat of similar age. Just my opinion!


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

PBzeer said:


> By and large, I don't think there is a whole lot of difference in the basic construction now days. The differences lie more in the details, such as finish, materials, hardware quality and size, etc. But just as some would never own a Ford or a Chevy, so there are some who would never own a Hunter or Catalina.


I will agree with you that there is very little difference in basic construction today. However, I find it difficult to understand that you have problems with equipment from Selden, Harken, Bowmar, Lewmar, or with materials such as 316L stainless, Kevlar and Corian.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

I don't get all this condescension directed toward the benehuntalinas and their owners. I own a 27-year-old C30 tall rig with a recently rebuilt 4-4, and it runs and sails like a champ. It has no blisters, stays completely dry inside and loves the ocean swells. At 27, and with another 27 in her, she's hardly comparable to a WalMart television. I read Peter Nichols book about crossing the Atlantic in his wooden boat. In it, he arrogantly conveys his contempt for "plastic boats" for environmental and aesthetic reasons. His boat, however, sank off Bermuda as the result of a previous owner who got creative with hull maintenance. Nothing uglier than a sunken boat. So much for his arrogance...


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Sequitur - I think you misunderstand my post. It was a generalized description of how I see things, apropos to T34C's question of intended use. Also, I didn't say I had a problem with any specific equipment. I merely use that as an example of how boats can vary by builder. Not sure why you seemed to take this as personally directed at your choice of boat, but, it is your boat, not mine, and I would hesitate to question anyone's choice. After all, it's not a totally objective decision, is it?


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

sailhog said:


> I don't get all this condescension directed toward the benehuntalinas and their owners. I own a 27-year-old C30 tall rig with a recently rebuilt 4-4, and it runs and sails like a champ. It has no blisters, stays completely dry inside and loves the ocean swells. At 27, and with another 27 in her, she's hardly comparable to a WalMart television. I read Peter Nichols book about crossing the Atlantic in his wooden boat. In it, he arrogantly conveys his contempt for "plastic boats" for environmental and aesthetic reasons. His boat, however, sank off Bermuda as the result of a previous owner who got creative with hull maintenance. Nothing uglier than a sunken boat. So much for his arrogance...


There is no condescension intended toward anyone. I just wonder if the sailing community doesn't create a self-fulfilling prophecy with some of these boats. They see many boats sitting dockside being used as second homes and tailor their production to suit, thus creating a boat that can't be used for much more than sitting dockside as a second home. Due to the relative cheapness of price they sell a lot of them, thus creating even more dockside condos where there might have been boats otherwise.

I think WalMart is over rated. People start out buying their normal goods at a reduced price at WalMart then they spend the money they saved buying a bunch of cheap crap they really didn't need and wouldn't have bought otherwise. At the end of the day they spent the same amount of money on a bunch of cheap quality stuff.

In both cases I guess the issue lies with the consumer not the producer, but I think we might do an injustice to new sailors by recommending these types of boats simply because right now they are "suited to their purpose".


----------



## cardiacpaul (Jun 20, 2006)

T34C,

"_They see many boats sitting dockside being used as second homes and tailor their production to suit, thus creating a boat that can't be used for much more than sitting dockside as a second home. Due to the relative cheapness of price they sell a lot of them, thus creating even more dockside condos where there might have been boats otherwise."_

Alas, in my experience, thats exactly what happens. Now, in my opinion, thats not a bad thing at all.

The "general population" of boat owners are NOT going to be setting sail in search of atlantis, They are going to bring friends and family up for a day, a weekend, or, heaven forbid, a week by themselves when the old lady throws them out for a time.

The "intended purpose" drama comes in when after 5-10 years the honeymoon wears off, and the boat is sold to an aspiring world traveller that has not done the homework. 
I certainly connot blame the mfr's for that.

I see literally hundreds of 35-45 ft. Motor Yachts that are hitched yards from me that have not moved in YEARS. Cruisers inc, silverton, hatteras, chris-craft, carver, bluewater, heck, we've even got 3-50 ft trawlers... 
Are they used? Sure, if you count that about 40% of them are on weekends from April to July, not in August, too darn hot, then 25% from Sept. to Oct. 
I'd say the only days I saw more than 50% of all the boats out of tha marina was 4th of july, (big on the water fireworks show) and the annual poker run that the go fast boyz put on. The sailboat population, in this case, is LESS used. These run the gamut, from 26ft Mac-x's to oceanis, 40.7's, to gulfstars to tartans, to tayana, a swan, some valiants, c&c's, j-boats plus the big 3, you name it, we got 'em. There are approx. 100 sailboats there, I have seen no more that 15-20 out on any given saturday/sunday.

Some, I've noticed, come up for the weekend, sit under the umbrella with a couple of cold ones, then retire below decks for the evening. The engine keys? at home. Is this a bad thing? I can't say. I offer no opinion, its what they want to do, so, go forth and phosphor.

The rest... sitting, silently... waiting.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

I don't know that I can agree with any of that T. 

It is the Valiants I see sitting in the docks. Want proof? THere are... 4-6 of them for sale right now at Cedar Mills (Valiant). That is just Cedar Mills. As everyone knows, I love their boats. But there sure are a lot that just sit there and rot. Why? They are not very comfortable down below or the old man just sold the farm to pay for them and can't afford anything else (including going cruising). THere are many, many, many Catalina/Hunter/Beneteaus still in great shape many years later. And I have had them (well, Catalinas) offshore more times than I can count, and in some pretty nasty storms too. 

Valiants are built better. You are crazy (and have never seen a Valiant) if you believe otherwise. They are great for crossing the Atalantic... living aboard (especially with kids)... well, you have a bigger lap than mine. I still love Valiants, so I ask no one to take offense to my comments. Superior boats.

There is nothing wrong with a Catalina/Bene/Hunter, at all. It would not be my first choice to sail to Hawaii (though I just read in Mainsheet today about two women IN THEIR 60's!) that did just that. They are not alone. THere is another couple in England and France cruising over there.... and many, many others. I cannot comment to Hunters or Bene's as I have not owned them, but if they were nothing but floating condos they would lose their market to the sea rays and pimp-mobiles. 

Catalinas hold together much better than they are given credit for. I mean, even a Valiant could be made more sturdy... what about 12 inch plate steel and kevlar with no port or hatches... etc. An Iceburg would not take it down, but it sure would not be very comfortable or pleasant to sail. In all things (especially boats) there is a trade-off. There is nothing wrong with comfort and space. You are a the dock/hook 99% of the time and going 1% of the time. Where you put your emphasis depends on your destination.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

"Poor he, that a Catalina bought..."
"There is no condescension intended toward anyone."

I think your sign-off epigram speaks for a lot of sailors on this site, yourself, obviously, included. From what I've read of your comments, you seem like an especially experienced, but to draw an analogy between WalMart and a Catalina is, as a Japanese yachtsman once told me, "redickerous." If I could afford an Island Packet, I would certainly buy one. But I've promised my wife that I would let her quit her night job once the baby comes. Therefore, I sail an old Catalina 30. If I didn't sail that, I wouldn't sail anything at all.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

sailhog said:


> "Poor he, that a Catalina bought..."
> "There is no condescension intended toward anyone."
> 
> I think your sign-off epigram speaks for a lot of sailors on this site, yourself, obviously, included. From what I've read of your comments, you seem like an especially experienced, but to draw an analogy between WalMart and a Catalina is, as a Japanese yachtsman once told me, "redickerous." If I could afford an Island Packet, I would certainly buy one. But I've promised my wife that I would let her quit her night job once the baby comes. Therefore, I sail an old Catalina 30. If I didn't sail that, I wouldn't sail anything at all.


Sorry, I noticed the "sign-off" after I sumitted that last post too. That was a joke originally intended to poke fun at CD-, borrowed from from a friend on this site. This was intended to be thought provoking, not judgemental or condecending. The WalMart comparison is more of an example of buyer trends than manufacture accusations.

CD- I agree with you in that everything is a trade-off. I just think that too many boats have been built that traded-off seaworthyness for affordability. This has resulted in a LOT of used boats on the market that because of price are now being bought by sailors much less experienced than yourself, with the idea they are "good for the intended purpose". With the downward spiral of a less seaworthy vessel and an inexperienced captian you end up with boat that can (or should) only go out in sheltered waters with 5-12 kts of wind. I'm not sure it possible to say that it is the Valiants that arent going out simply because of the numbers built.

I guess the long and the short of it is that maybe we should spend more time recommending that new buyers get the most seaworthy boat they can possibly afford instead of falling into the "a xxxx will work fine for your intended use". Unless the boat is truely being bought just to have waterfront property, or is going to be sailed on a Corp. of Engineers lake in Kansas I think we should be more willing to trade-off Corian countertops and less willing to trade-off seaworthiness. New owners should be able to leave the dock (however rarely) with the comfort of knowing their boat will bring them home safely, instead of worrying weather or not they are within the window of what the boat was intended for.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

T34C,
It's hard to read all of this racist hate speech directed toward benehuntalina owners. Kidding aside, I see your point concerning sailors who see fit to put money into corian countertops on a boat with shoddy rigging. As for myself, it isn't a package of trade-offs between a lovely below decks and a plastic hull, but a choice between sailing on an old boat with my family and being a proud canoe owner. In the meantime, "We shall overcome..."
Dwight


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

sailhog- I understand. As Giulietta likes to tell me, the "C" in T34C really means OLD.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

longwaterline said:


> Don't take one off-shore.


Over the year-and-a-half that I have been following the discussions on this forum, I have regularly seen posters here who apparently take pleasure in slamming various types and brands of boat. Generally, their gratuitous damning comments seem based more on hearsay than on experience or fact. Most often the posters are owners of older boats that for one reason or another made it onto someone's "recommended boat" list two, three or four decades ago, and their boats have likely been repeatedly refitted to varying standards (or lack thereof) over the years by a number of caring or uncaring owners.

Why do these posters slam new or near new boats that have been built with modern technology to ABYC, NMMA and CE standards? To use an automobile analogy, as is often resorted to here, it seems to me that they prefer their 1970s Land Rover to a recent Ford, Chevy or Chrysler SUV. All will take you virtually anywhere, but who will be constantly needing repair? Admittedly, if their old Land Rover falls off the road and tumbles down the embankment, they can probably dust it off, add more baling wire and duct tape, and carry on. However, for the other 99.99% of the time, who is going to be the more comfortable?


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

I would rather take a 20 year old production boat of 45 feet or so up and down the coast or to the caribe than try to do the same on a 35ft. bluewater boat of the same age which might cost the same. The suggstion that a 20 year old production boat is inherently less ready for coastal cruising is ridiculous. You need a good survey and good prep on both boats of this age...but if my horizons are going to be limited I'd rather have the living space than paying for "seaworthiness" that I won't use. 
I do think there is a lot of unnecessary prejudice against entire brands out there but I remember when a Catalina 30 was our "dream boat" and I would have sold a kidney to have one. Better to have a boat than a dream! 

"A goal is a dream with a deadline!"


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Sequitur said:


> Over the year-and-a-half that I have been following the discussions on this forum, I have regularly seen posters here who apparently take pleasure in slamming various types and brands of boat. Generally, their gratuitous damning comments seem based more on hearsay than on experience or fact. Most often the posters are owners of older boats that for one reason or another made it onto someone's "recommended boat" list two, three or four decades ago, and their boats have likely been repeatedly refitted to varying standards (or lack thereof) over the years by a number of caring or uncaring owners.
> 
> Why do these posters slam new or near new boats that have been built with modern technology to ABYC, NMMA and CE standards? To use an automobile analogy, as is often resorted to here, it seems to me that they prefer their 1970s Land Rover to a recent Ford, Chevy or Chrysler SUV. All will take you virtually anywhere, but who will be constantly needing repair? Admittedly, if their old Land Rover falls off the road and tumbles down the embankment, they can probably dust it off, add more baling wire and duct tape, and carry on. However, for the other 99.99% of the time, who is going to be the more comfortable?


The biggest differences between that Land Rover and the "recent Ford, Chevy, or Chrysler SUV" are computerized engine controls, Anti-lock brakes, airbags, traction control, and cheap velour upholstery. With the exception of the upholstery which of these upgrades is in a new boat?

Cam- I intentionaly have not singled out any brand of boat. (And changed my signature so as not to appear to single out any.) I don't know of many first time buyer that start out looking in the 45 ft. range. Personally I'll take the increased seaworthyness and a slightly smaller boat than the sacrifice just to have something bigger.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

T34C...
The size differential was not meant to be taken literally...merely to say that I'd rather take a BIGGER more comfortable boat down the coast rather than a smaller bluewater boat for the same price. So use a catalina 36 and a cape dory instead as the example...same deal. 

As to larger boats...I know I am in the minority in this position ,but I continue to recommend that first time owners planning on cruising get the size boat they will be comfortable living on...rather than working their way up in size. Then they should just get the experience they need in protected waters and get to KNOW the boat they will be cruising on. It is Absolutely no harder for a couple to sail a 40-45' boat than 30-35' both and indeed, in a blow, I would submit that the bigger boat is the safer boat. 
Look at it this way... if I wanted to eventually go cruising coastwise on a 45 foot boat...but had no sailing experience. How long would it be sailing every weekend in season in smaller boats till I was "deemed fit" to sail a 45 footer? Assuming one has a relatively sheltered place to sail... I submit that a few lessons aboard that 45 footer and I could get around quite nicely while perfecting my skills on MY CRUISING BOAT and learning MY SYSTEMS and figuring out what needed to change...ALL without having to buy and sell multiple boats at a loss. 
As a practical matter most folks need to save up boat by boat to get into the larger sizes...but if you've got the bucks and an island packet 42 sings to you...go buy it and then learn how to use it before venturing afar!


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I used to sail on the ocean - storms, waves, rain, cold - it gets rough and you need a strong boat. Back then I used to think that I'd sail around the world one day. To do that, you need a VERY strong boat. I realise now that I will never circumnavigate. I don't need a Pacific Seacraft or a Valiant. I sail on the Great Lakes. The waves are never huge. It gets windy sometimes, but if you stay away from land you're fine. But it does get very hot here in the summer and the new boats from the big three have refrigerators and air conditioners, and showers. They are perfectly capable of surviving the weather here. It would be nice if they were put together a little more carefully, but then an awful lot of people would never be able to afford to sail, and those who still fancy themselves future circumnavingators would not have any one to feel superior to...


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

*Yikes*



Sequitur said:


> So, if you consider your 7.07 square inches of cockpit drainage adequate, then the more than 400 square inches of cockpit drain on my boat's T-shaped cockpit should satisfy you.
> 
> And I am pleased to see that you might even consider my 200 gallons of water and 222 gallons of fuel sufficient for puttering around the marina.


Sequitur, welcome to the board. So what vessel packs 222 gallons of fuel and has cockpit scuppers equal to a 2 foot diameter circle? Sounds like a mega-yacht!


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

sailingfool said:


> Sequitur, welcome to the board. So what vessel packs 222 gallons of fuel and has cockpit scuppers equal to a 2 foot diameter circle? Sounds like a mega-yacht!


Here's a fisheye view of the largest of the cockpit drains, taken last week when we were fitting Sequitur's rudder:


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Sailormann, 
Someone on one of these threads pointed out a sad but interesting truth about becoming a Hunter owner: you will have to endure the stigma of being a Hunter owner... T34C has corrected his hatefully racist (yuk, yuk) sign-off, but its a shame that boat buyers with limited means (which is nearly every would-be sailor) would have to take this into account. Why put up with people glowering at your Hunter, when you can buy something else that suits you less? Sailors who consider sailing their 1982 Hunter 31 to Bermuda should be brought to their senses by any means necessary, but that's not the kind of criticism that's being leveled against Hunter owners. They get the abuse when they're out on their Sunday afternoon sail in protected wateres. I'm relatively new to sailing, but I've noticed that there's an alarming percentage of yachtsmen with this weird Paris Hilton mindset when it comes to what kind of boat the rest of us should buy.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Hi Sailhog - I appreciate the post but I didn't buy a Hunter - God help us all - do you think I have totally taken leave of my senses ???? I (_think_) I have settled on a Catalina - certainly you can appreciate the vast difference between the two !    I understand why there are a lot of supporters of the older, more traditionally built boats, and until I actually started looking seriously for a new boat, I counted myself amongst them. The fact is that unless you have pots of money to spend, then you are limited to one of the volume boats, or an older boat. As far as the older boats go - I don't care who made it - if it hasn't been maintained it's a pile of crap. Up here in Ontario, people don't understand the hows or whys of boat maintenance. Probably because they aren't offshore in bad weather, but whatever the cause, they buy the largest boats they can afford and sell them when they are rotting. I don't want one of those, but I don't want to spend more than 100K on a boat either, so if I want something affordable, that was built in the last ten years, I have three options - Beneteau, Hunter or Catalina. Today I am thinking it's a Catalina, hence I posit that Beneteau and Hunter are fit for nothing more than being sunk to use as mooring weights. Should my selection change prior to actually purchasing (and I hope not - cause I'm getting tired of this process) then I am sure that I will revile Catalinas ...


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Hey Sailormann,
I'm nursing a lot of heartache about some of the negative comments made about production boats. I'm even considering a class action law suit against those who say these things, as money is the one sure way to mend a broken heart. With this money I will of course buy a very expensive and very long and very new Island Packet, because when you really think about it, these production boats really are pieces of s*&^%.
Dwight


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

sailhog said:


> Sailormann,
> Sailors who consider sailing their 1982 Hunter 31 to Bermuda should be brought to their senses by any means necessary, but that's not the kind of criticism that's being leveled against Hunter owners.


I don't know about that. The 1982 Hunter 31 was designed by John Cherubini and was overbuilt. The Hunter line from the late 70's until 1983 where good boats. They had small cockpits, large scuppers, really deep iceboxs among a number of other fine atributes for a small offshore boat.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

sailhog said:


> With this money I will of course buy a very expensive and very long and very new Island Packet, because when you really think about it, these production boats really are pieces of s*&^%.


Not quite sure how to break this to you, but IP's are "production boats".

I often wonder, just how many people who put down a certain make of boat have actually owned one, or at least sailed on one more than a couple of times?


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

PBzeer said:


> Not quite sure how to break this to you, but IP's are "production boats".
> 
> I often wonder, just how many people who put down a certain make of boat have actually owned one, or at least sailed on one more than a couple of times?


I don't know how to break this to you, but my previous post referred to one of the big three production boats.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

T34C said:


> The biggest differences between that Land Rover and the "recent Ford, Chevy, or Chrysler SUV" are computerized engine controls, Anti-lock brakes, airbags, traction control, and cheap velour upholstery. With the exception of the upholstery which of these upgrades is in a new boat?


Yes, isn't the advance of technology wonderful. Just think, now a driver doesn't have to crawl out and turn the front hubs to four-wheel.

I can't find any of the cheap velour upholstery to which you refer. Should I rip-out my leather upholstery and put in velour to bring it down to your standards?


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Brezzin said:


> I don't know about that. The 1982 Hunter 31 was designed by John Cherubini and was overbuilt. The Hunter line from the late 70's until 1983 where good boats. They had small cockpits, large scuppers, really deep iceboxs among a number of other fine atributes for a small offshore boat.


If I'm not mistaken there's a later model that had all sorts of problem with the steering quadrant and major leaks at the mast step. It's not the Cherubini design, but a model that came immediately after that.


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

True, from 83 to the glenn henderson era is when hunter developed it's less than stellar reputation.


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

I don't know how to break this to some of you, but IP's suffer from many of the same ailments as the Benehuntalinas. Some of you know that I often recommend to folks to lurk on the email lists here on Sailnet to check out boat manufacturers they are interested in. Through time, people write in about every problem they encounter, big or little. I lurked on the IP list for about 2 years when I was thinking bout moving to a larger boat and found out that IP's suffer from delamination, port leaks, hull/deck joint leaks, inherent lists in some models (always fixed by adding more batteries in specified locations -- IP owners need lots of batteries), rudder problems to name a few. IP owners also spend a lot of time talking about props because -- well, because they motor a lot! The other side of the coin is that lots of IP owners are out there sailing the high seas. Many of them use those boats as intended.

At various times I lurked on Sabre, Tartan, Freedom, and Caliber in addition to IP. Same went for them -- lots of the same issues you find on "lessor" boats.

I never lurked on the Bene/Hunt/Alina lists because I have never been interested in owning one of them for a variety of reasons. I always find it interesting how different people will rank those 3 boats, too. Bene and Cat owners always look down their noses at Hunters. Hunter owners are always on the defensive against the other 2. Frankly, all that jabbering is pointless in the end because we all buy what we like, and what we can afford.

FYI -- when I did move to a larger boat, I finally decided to stay with what I knew. I owned a Pearson 27 at first and then bought a Pearson 33-2 about 3 years ago. I'm quite happy, and really don't care what anyone else thinks!


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

A new acquaintance of mine invited me aboard his IP, and it just looked and felt solid. I'm new to boat ownership, so I'm picking up a lot of this through osmosis.


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

sailhog said:


> osmosis.


Not a good word to use on this forum


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

I thought of that just after I made the post. Feel free to tell me to get a clew.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

Brezzin said:


> True, from 83 to the glenn henderson era is when hunter developed it's less than stellar reputation.


Yes, and when they recognized the problems that had developed with their rapid growth, Hunter began making changes to remedy the situation. In 1995 they introduced an employee-ownership program, which has resulted in a dedicated, long-term construction team. In 1998 they brought in Glen Henderson to head the design department, and he has now completely redesigned the entire Hunter line.

The design team includes Steve Pettengill, with his ocean racing records and Around-the-World Race experience. He sea-trials all new designs. He repeatedly crashes new boats into stone jetties at full speed, and under full sail in strong winds up onto sandy beaches. He spends weeks offshore in the nastiest conditions he can find to assess liveability, and to try to break stuff. The thinking is that if the new design can withstand Pettengill's abuse, it will likely handle a loving owner's occasional bumbling and the odd nasty that Mother Nature can serve-up. If the boat doesn't take kindly to Pettengill's abuse, Henderson and his team go back to their drawing boards.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Sequitur...that sounds straight from the Hunter marketing department. As you can see from the above I am no Hunter basher but as far as I am concerned, the jury is still out on Hunter changes and I think it is misleading to imply that things have been getting better since Hederson arrived in 1998. They are still building some AWFUL stuff...example the big CC boat...so it is the new models of the last couple of years that we have to evaluate to understand if the work teams/henderson and senior management have put together boats that will put them at or above the quality of their competitors. And it will also take time to replace the existing poorly conceived boats in the line which continue to roll off the molds. Hopefully, they are addressing this and in a couple of more years we can all agree that Hunter is back to the Cherubini quality throughout the line.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

Yes, Cam, I agree. And no, I have no connection to Hunter, other than as a proud owner of one of their latest vessels.

But looking at the comments up-thread, I thought that someone should offer a factual counterpoint to the seemingly automatic regurgitation of Hunter damning diatribe that is freely offered by so many, whether or not with any actual experience or substantiation.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

*Yikes*



Sequitur said:


> .....someone should offer a factual counterpoint to the seemingly automatic regurgitation of Hunter damning diatribe that is freely offered by so many, whether or not with any actual experience or substantiation.


If there's anything factual in "He repeatedly crashes new boats into stone jetties at full speed, and under full sail in strong winds up onto sandy beaches. He spends weeks offshore in the nastiest conditions he can find to assess liveability, and to try to break stuff." it sure escapes me. Sounds like schoolyard chatter, like the "222 gallon fuel tank" in your other post. Yikes.

Read this review again http://www.yachtsurvey.com/boatreviews/hunter28.htm and ponder just how bad a crappy boat can be.


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

*perfect example*

Sailingfool wrote:
Read this review again http://www.yachtsurvey.com/boatreviews/hunter28.htm and ponder just how bad a crappy boat can be.[/quote]

This is another perfect example of someone repeatedly making biased statements founded on old information, having little or no first-hand experience apparently to serve no other purpose than to enhance some self-esteem issue. Anyone who criticizes other people's possessions would likely never have the arrogance to do it in person but somehow thinks it's acceptable to do so here..

Someone much wiser than me once said "it's easy to give an explanation but impossible to make you understand that self-dillusion isn't a great place to live".

From reading some of your other posts, it appears you ought to lighten up on the computer use.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

sailingfool said:


> Sounds like schoolyard chatter, like the "222 gallon fuel tank" in your other post. Yikes.


Fool, if you must quote me, please do it accurately.  In the post to which you refer, I wrote "222 gallons of fuel".

The boat comes standard with a 150 gallon fuel capacity, and there is an option to increase it to 222 gallons; I opted for the increased fuel capacity. Water, fuel and waste tankage and all machinery and batteries are in the deep bilges beneath the cabin sole, where there is also extensive stowage in which to organize spares and stores.


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

sailhog said:


> A new acquaintance of mine invited me aboard his IP, and it just looked and felt solid. I'm new to boat ownership, so I'm picking up a lot of this through osmosis.


S-hog -- They are solidly built with those full keels and heavy layups of fiberglass. They also are slow as molasses compared to just about any other boat of similar size. I once ran down and passed an IP-38 in a Pearson 27 (my old P-27 admittedly was a downwind rocket.) IP's of course have many other attributes that make them fine boats that are quite popular. I was checking them out because I was interested in them. But I finally came to the conclusion they were not the boat for me, just as many people come to the conclusion that Pearson's aren't for them. It's all different strokes for different folks.

I won't comment on the osmosis thing since someone else already did.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

It might be beneficial for us all to take a moment and remember what boats were like before the advent of fibreglass. Compared to the vast majority of those things, particularly a wooden boat in freshwater, a MacGregor is a marvel. Should a Hunter have appeared in those days it would have been a cause of shock and awe. Catalinas of course, eptimomising as they do the zenith of the designer's art and the pinnacle of the builder's skill, would probably have been declared wonders of the world and preserved for all posterity in shrines where the masses could worship them. I am willing to bet that ninety percent of us wouldn't have set foot in Slocum's Spray. Its kind of like doing the wild thing, or for us older folk - pizza: even the worst is pretty wonderful.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

*Yessh*



k1vsk said:


> This is another perfect example of someone repeatedly making biased statements founded on old information, having little or no first-hand experience apparently to serve no other purpose than to enhance some self-esteem issue. Anyone who criticizes other people's possessions would likely never have the arrogance to do it in person but somehow thinks it's acceptable to do so here..
> 
> Someone much wiser than me once said "it's easy to give an explanation but impossible to make you understand that self-dillusion isn't a great place to live".
> 
> From reading some of your other posts, it appears you ought to lighten up on the computer use.


Yessh, lighten up on the pschobabble and ad hominem, do you have anything to say about boats or sailing?

As to "little or no first hand experience..", since you drag me to this story, it happens the first boat I ever skippered was '76 Hunter 30 I chartered for a week in the late '70s. Of course I was new to boating then, but that boat left quite an impression: the spotty non-skid where the paint was lifting, the engine diesel leak when heeled over 15 degrees, the broken parts throughout, but I most remember the two feet of water in the boat when I arrived, eventually traced to a lose set screw holding the bilge pump in the keel stump. Even though the boat had a fin keel, that set screw hole was intent on sinking the boat. I gotta admit that's my ONLY experience, but in fairness, after that experience why would I want another?

Lets skip the name calling. I hear they are making better boats, and I'm sure they do, some other reliable posters have had good things to say about specific models such as 37 cutter, and if the current boats light your fire, good for you. But threads that present this brand as the Second Coming in boat quality, should expect they'll get different opinions, and ought to be able to respond without the name-calling.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Folks get pretty grumpy when their boats are s*** upon. PBzeer is just plain grumpy. He laid into me because he assumed I didn't know IPs were production boats. Makes you wonder if he's seeing any action in the bunk.


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

Here's the thing. Boat reputations aside. If you are in the market for a NEW boat. You do your homework visit the builders, walk the boats etc... Then you can decide what works best for you. Because I'm buying a NEW boat I am concerned with what’s happening today not 20 yrs ago. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. For example back in the late 70's Pearson's were the boat. Mid 80's they ran into some major financial issues and cut corners, quality suffered. Mid 80's were a very tough time for builders. You young people don't remember the 16 to 20% interest rates. The industry was devastated. Of course we can't forget the short-lived but equally brutal 10% luxury tax on boats and planes. Many builders folded during that time. But that was then. 

I've done my homework and I am confident that my new Hunter 49 is built as good as any other production boat on the market today. It's the right boat for me for what I plan on doing with it. 

Dave


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

For what it is worth, I saw the new 37 Hunter and was impressed with the changes they have made. I did not get to really dive into it (as the kids were with me), but seems like they are trying to make a better boat.

I mean this to come across as nothing but positve, so please take it as such. As to whether these changes are long term and will really stand up to abuse, only time will tell. Of course, it could NEVER be as good as a Catalina (smile) since I own one. HAHA! Just kidding.

- CD


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

Brezzin said:


> I've done my homework and I am confident that my new Hunter 49 is built as good as any other production boat on the market today. It's the right boat for me for what I plan on doing with it.


I also have done my homework.

I might not have as much experience as some on this forum have (or pretend to have), but I am certainly not still wet behind the ears. I bought my first sailboat in 1964, and have well over 150,000 miles of North Atlantic, North and South Pacific and Indian Oceans beneath my various keels since then.

When I started seriously thinking of my next sailboat last spring, I realized that I was tired of fixing-up someone else's problems and decided to buy new. Well aware that all boats are in one way or other compromises, after months of winnowing the field, I finally settled on the Hunter 49. It satisfied more of my needs than anything else in the marketplace.

Yes, I could have paid an extra $200,000 to $500,000 and gotten one of the other builders' hand rubbed, custom cabinetry, but I didn't think that would add anything to the seaworthiness or performance.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Sequitur,

Welcome aboard. 

Obviously you are a very experienced sailor and it is great to have you here. I think I can speak for many of the other members that have been on this board for a while, and I will say that I look forward to hearing more about your boat and experiences. You are not the first person to "speak-up" the new 49. I have never been on one, so look forward to the comments. I would especially like to know how the 49 handles passages offshore. Post some pictures!!!! 

Take care. Fair winds.

- CD


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

Thanks for the welcome, CD.

Sequitur was due to arrive in Vancouver on Friday the 2nd of February, but she was refused passage through Seattle on the Thursday, causing her to miss the weekday-only restrictions on some of the remainder of the route. I spent the weekend pacing like an expectant father in the maternity ward waiting room.

She arrived on Vancouver's Granville Island in the wee hours of Monday the 5th, and at dawn, a swarm of yardies descended on her. She was cleansed of her road dirt, off-loaded and hung in slings to await a crane to unload her 11,216 pound lead keel so she could be settled onto it. By the end of the day, her rudder had been installed, the keel was in place and epoxied and work was progressing on rigging her mast. 

Her keel bolts were re-torqued and her mast was stepped by noon on Tuesday. Work was steadily progressing to make her ready for display in the Floating Boat Show on the weekend. In my purchase arrangements, I had agreed to allow the dealer to show her both at the Vancouver show and in the Victoria Floating Boat Show in April.

She was the star of last weekend's show, and is now on the hard again at Granville Island while the yard continues with her fitting-out. Mid-April is the projected launch.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Make sure you tell them NO SHOES on the boat!! Stay off the beds. Children under 18 better be hand-held or carried by the parent. And, of course: THE HEADS ARE FOR LOOKS ONLY unless you want to die.

- CD

(I have worked a few boat shows for Catalina!!!)


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

I was within 1 hour of buying hull number 1 of the 49 at the Newport RI boatshow. I had done a deal with the dealership. But the dealer needed get a bit of information for me before I would give him a deposit. He told me to come back in an hour. When I came back, the boat had a huge number of people on it and I thought my wife was going to have a stroke and kick all these people off "her" boat. Anyway, It turns out that during that hour someone else wrote a deposit check for it.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

The production line was just being set-up when I ordered mine, and my stipulation was that I wanted no earlier than hull #18. I figured a dozen-and-a-half boats would allow them to set-up the line, work-out any bugs and do some fine-tuning and tweaking. It would also allow for changes from crew feedback as hull #1 did its tour up the east coast.

I'm glad I waited; during the summer they added a tall rig option, taking the mast to 68'-6", and since I'm not an East Coast Ditch sailor, I went for it. Down below, a couple of the more obvious changes are the higher and more ergonomically placed hand rails down the companionway stairs, and the change from teak to cherry for the interior cabinetry.

Do you have a hull number yet?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

East Coast Ditch ????? A tad condescending for a Left Coaster who sees sunlight twice a year.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

Sailormann said:


> sunlight twice a year


Sunlight is not a requisite for sailing; however, ice-free water is.  One of the joys of sailing the west coast is the twelve month season. Out here, haul-out is done for repairs and maintenance, and not as a seven or eight month long seasonal thing.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Sequitur said:


> Sunlight is not a requisite for sailing; however, ice-free water is.  One of the joys of sailing the west coast is the twelve month season. Out here, haul-out is done for repairs and maintenance, and not as a seven or eight month long seasonal thing.


Very true... unless you're on an ice-boat. We've got ice here alright. But our haulout isn't for seven months... only six...


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

Sequitur said:


> Do you have a hull number yet?


Nope, Not yet but that's because I didn't ask. I do know that it will be delivered in approx 5 weeks. My guess is it will be in the high twentys.


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

Nice. the new 49's are sweet a$$ed boats for sure. Way outta my price range though. I may have to get that Pearson 46 ex Race yatch instead. The previous owner did a bang up cruiser conversion on it while using lightweight fixtures.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Well, this boat search becomes more soul-destroying every weekend. Being poverty-stricken I am limited to the used boat market, but thought that I had found the perfect compromise in a very recent Catalina. Well, once again it was brought home to me how important it is to ask every possible question you can upfront. It turns out that the broker had neglected to mention the boat's participation in the Hurricane Katrina festivities. I guess at my age I should be a little less trusting, but I still walk right in to things - eyes wide shut. Anyway, it's been a learning experience. So far have dealt with 6 different brokers here in Toronto, and one out of town. Have learnt that regardless of what they tell you, they are not interested in selling you someone else's listing. When they say they'll find the perfect boat for you, regardless.... they mean regardless of what corner of their boatyard they have it tucked away in and regardless of how unfit for use it is. This is understandable, they want maximum return for their efforts. Just be upfront about this. Have found one brokerage who have been professional and upfront with us. Anyway, spent a day looking at some other possibilities and think I've found one, nice condition, not too old, not too expensive, so the phoenix of hope is reborn yet again...


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

Hang in there, Sailorman.

I've been throught the search process many times over the years, and with each boat it seems that when I finally decided I had done enough searching, it was when I standing on the one that I ended-up buying.

One nice thing about searching this time of year in the Toronto area is that the boats are all in the freezer section, and they will not spoil.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

No - they'll be nice and fresh when they're launched. And the cryogenics slow down the aging process considerably


----------



## Newport41 (Jun 30, 2006)

*Have to judge on a boat to boat basis*

I think quality can be related to the brand but is more specific to the model, or even to the individual boat. Our boat for example is built by Capital yachts, not our favorite, but the design is C&C and we were lucky to find a hull with no resin pockets or seperation in the deck. The interior is typical Capital Yachts sub par but we like to go fast and float so it meets our expectations. The Hunter 37 cutter (cheribini) from the early 80's has always been a hunter I liked but the rest of them....well, not so much. My point is that you have to look into what problems a boat is known for, by manufacturer, model, and specific boat before you buy.
I feel that fit and finish has gone down hill over the years but the engineering that has gone into the designs is more advanced. There is an upside and downside to this. The downside to new designs might be a lack of redundancy. Our boat is an older C&C design and the hull is two inches thick below the water line. You won't find that on a new boat. This means that it is stronger than "necessary" but I like the idea of having more than just enough. It's cheaper to build with less material and the new technology allows that. My brother tells me the Mumm he sails on is so well engineered it can get away with what I would call rediculous lack of redundancy in construction. It's light and fast and strong until it encounters a force that the designer didn't account for, then what?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

The phrase "intended use" is a good thing to remember I guess. The Mumms were built and sold to the racing crowd who buy them to own for about five years and can afford the depreciation when it's time to sell. I sure wouldn't go offshore in them either, but they aren't intended to cruise to Tonga Tonga.

Maintenance is also key. Doesn't matter how beautifully built your boat is, if you don't take care of it, or if you _LEAVE IT UNCOVERED IN THE WINTER LIKE AN IDIOT !_ the boat is going to be pooched in very short order.

And to be perfectly fair, quality is a subjective thing. I am pretty old-school and grew up believing that heavier and bigger meant stronger and better. Still believe that but have realised that there is such a thing as overkill. When I first made the post, I hadn't seen too many of the boats on the market in this region. After looking at a fair number and really assessing my needs, I am becoming more accepting of the idea of a thinner hull and some plastic fittings. Not that I would want to go offshore with that stuff either...but I was pleasantly surprised this past weekend when we looked at a CS. Although there isn't enough wood on it to start throwing terms like joinery and cabinetry around, it did seem to be well put together and even had a fairly solid feel to it.

A cut above the others that I have been considering, and, as Sequitir (that's the guy with the escape hatches in his transom...  ) said, I decided I was tired of looking. So now we're hoping the surveyor doesn't find anything...


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Dear God - what's a resin pocket and why didn't someone tell me about them sooner ??? Now I've got something else to worry about...


----------



## dgarr75456 (Nov 6, 2006)

Cruising World just had an article on the 2006 ARC race, from the Canaries to St Lucia. Two Hunters did the race, as did a number of Beneteaus, Jeanneaus, and the expected Swans, Oysters, etc. No Catalinas. The weather was apparently pretty nasty, and the Hunters handled it all. The boat that got dismasted was a Camper Nicholson.


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

As I've always thought, any contemporary production boat is built essentially equivalent to it's competitor(s) and it's crew is it's weakest link. It is interesting how the folks who make clealy subjective and usually misinformed judgement about how good any particular manufacturer makes them often don't know how to tie a bowline yet seem convined they know what it takes to sail to Morrea. It is telling that of all the boat disussions among blue water sailors offshore, we never heard one focused on criticizing any one brand.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Good point k1vsk - honestly hadn't made the post maliciously, was wondering if there was substance to the chatter. I am suitably chastened...actually have learnt a fair bit since then.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*that u may be right,*

from what I understand the best way too judge a boat is to shake it down.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

...and see if anything falls off ???


----------



## pigslo (Nov 22, 2004)

Back when I was chartering, one of my favorite boats was a Hunter27. Swept back spreaders. I figured it out that you could crank down on the mainsheet and flatten out the sail and the boat would just take off!
Pigslo


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

I was just reading about a recent Hunter which was lost en route to Hawaii due primarily to its loss of a rudder in heavy conditions. Another poster, provided the following link about COMPOSITE rudder posts used on larger Hunters which Hunter issued in 2005. They offered a replacement option at reduced cost. *Hunter said that it was aware of 16 such rudder post failures*. See page 12 in the attached document for full details. 
Since Hunter dealers and other brokers are still selling some of these older boats WITHOUT the fix I thought it would be appropriate to repeat this old news here where propective buyers might access it.

http://www.huntermarine.com/Images/ProductNot/Hunter2005TuneUp.pdf


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

I have a very inetersting story about a composite material rudder that was installed in a race boat..if its relevant I'll tell it, if not..well

Not to hijack the thread.


----------



## Sequitur (Feb 13, 2007)

camaraderie said:


> I was just reading about a recent Hunter which was lost en route to Hawaii due primarily to its loss of a rudder in heavy conditions.


For your further information, there is a thread currently running at: [URL="http://www.sailboatowners.com/forums/[/URL], which discusses this incident.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Incident ?? INCIDENT ??? I'm thinking this rates a little higher on the scale than "incident"..."Tragedy" perhaps ???


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

camaraderie said:


> Sailorman...here is the link to the story...but if you want to talk about it...let's start a new thread rather than hijack this one.
> http://www.mauinews.com/story.aspx?id=28269


Cam- Can you move these post to a new thread???


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

BOAT LOSS OFF HAWAII THREAD STARTED under the "cruising" sub-forum.
Please keep this thread on the HUNTER subject only.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

This was the owners "Dream Boat"?? Perhaps he will set his sights a bit higher next time.


----------

