# Carroll Marine vs Hinterhoeller Frers 36



## halfree (Jan 15, 2007)

Is anyone familiar with the Hinterhoeller or Carroll Marine built Frers 36?

If yes, what are the differences?


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

The Hinterhoellers were generally considered to be better built in all ways. My recollection is that the Carrolls are pretty crude down below. I don't know whether there was a design difference between the F3 (Hinterhoeller and the Frer 36). 

If you are interested in an old IOR racer cruiser from that era, I would also suggest that you look for a Farr 37, which was a better boat in almost all ways. 

Jeff


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Hey Jeff! nice to see you back


The Hinterhoeller F3 predates the Carroll 36 by about 3 years, and though the numbers are similar I believe they are different boats. Certainly the deck design and layout is substantially different. Perhaps the hull are more similar than that.

The F3 has a great rep in Canada as a well built attractive racer/cruiser (as does Hinterhoeller as a builder).


----------



## svsirius (Jan 14, 2007)

I owned a Carroll built Frers 36 for 11 yrs. The hulls are the same, the foils are different, the deck is different, the interiors are different, and I don't remember if the rig is the same or not. Actually I found the build quality was fine on mine. Had no delamination issues, etc. The interiors on these are all over the map from full teak to stripped out. Depended on what the original owner wanted [all custom]. Ours had a full on teak interior and we were very comfy down below. I know of a sistership that was pipe berths and no wood at all [and we had the same rating - lover
PHRF]. Like all cored race boats of that era you need to look at them individually.


----------



## halfree (Jan 15, 2007)

*Hinterhoeller vs. Carroll Marine*

Thanks for all of the feedback!

Some additional follow-up ....

I have seen some PHRF certificates for both the Hinterhoeller and Carroll Marine Frers 36.

For the Hinterhoeller, the measurements are:

I = 48.3	
J = 14.5	
P = 42.3	
E = 13.3
Displacement = 10,900 lbs.
Ballast = 5,700 lbs

For the Carroll Marine, the measurements are:

I = 49.66
J = 14.5
P = 44.0
E = 14.0
Displacement = 10,900 lbs
Ballast = 5400 lbs

Carroll Marine Frers 36 brochures claim these measurements also.

Also, I had measurements taken of the keel and rudder on a Hinterhoeller and Carroll Marine. The measurements suggest that the keel chord, 8" below the hull is about 6-7" longer (72" vs 79") on the Hinterhoeller. These measurements were taken on fin keels, not the elliptical keel that Carroll Marine included in the 86/87 models. The rudder appears to be equal on both models.

Carroll Marine seems to have constructed "rounds" or "fillets" at the keel/hull intersection, on both sides of the keel, the leading, tail end of the keel. Hinterhoeller appears to have a more "perpendicular" or "square" intersection of the keel and hull.

With regards to the interior, I have only seen a Hinterhoeller in pictures and have seen a few Carroll Marine vessels in person. The Hinterhoeller has two rear quarter berths (not pipe berths), while the Carroll Marine has only one rear quarter berth. The galley on the Carroll Marine takes the form of a "J" and the space for the second berth is storage accessible from the deck. In the Hinterhoeller, the galley has two parts, one under the stairs (one part of the "J") and the other "under the rail" (another part of the "J"), but the third part of the "J" is an entryway to the second rear quarter berth. The head in the Hinterhoeller appears to be constructed more of fiberglass, while Carroll appears to have used more wood. The Carroll Marine model has more interior space as the cabin top is wider than the Hinterhoeller. Other than the feeling of space, one can enter, sit, and vacate the Carroll Marine nav station comfortably, while the Hinterhoeller risks bumping the head of anyone over 5' 6" tall. On deck, this translates to more deck space on the rail for the Hinterhoeller.

Having said all of this, does someone have thoughts about the difference in performance between the two given the differences in rig, ballast, etc? The Carroll Marine has a PHRF rating of 90 while the Hinterhoeller has a 99. Other than the 6 seconds, is there a "real" difference in terms of performance, stability, sailability, etc?

Thanks so much for you help!


----------



## halfree (Jan 15, 2007)

*Frers 36 vs Farr 37*

Jeff .. thanks for the Farr 37 recommendation .... Can you elaborate on why the Farr 37 is superior to the Frers 36?


----------



## wtbrandt (Jun 16, 2005)

One other difference between the Hinterholler and Carroll Marine versions of the Frers 36 might be the amount of headroom in the boat. One owner I spoke with said the headroom in his Hinterholler built F3 was 6' 1". However, I recently saw a later model Carroll Marine 36 for sale that reported the headroom to be 6' 3". Certainly the cabin trunk design is different between these two versions of the Frers 36. I wonder of the Carroll Marine version was built with 2 inches more headroom? Can anyone verify this?


----------



## bshambrook (Sep 8, 2007)

I am looking at a 1986 Frers F3. The owner tells me that typically there is a square "window" cut out of the center of the keel that is back-filled with lighter wood or even foam. This apparently removes about 700 lbs of weight. Does anyone know if this is correct and does it in anyway compromise the structural strength of the boat?


----------

