# Catalina vs Hunter



## TSOJOURNER

I''m shopping for a 30'' boat to sail on Puget Sound. What is the general concensus on Catalina vs Hunter? Is one inherantly better than the other or is it entirely subjective? 
Any opinions are appreciated. Thanks


----------



## tsenator

Is this a "troll"?

I know a better place to ask this question

http://old.cruisingworld.com/forums/genlmesg/index.pl


----------



## sailingfool

IMHO Catalina has historically made a better boat than Humter, sort of like the Toyota of sailboats, not fancy but well constructed for their purpose. Catalina 27s and 30s are cruising classics of their time. 

I think there a widespread (not to be confused with universal!!!) recognition, among knowledgeable boaters that early Hunters were poorly made. (A memorable moment - back in 1976 I went with a friend to day-sail his Hunter 30. When we got out to the boat, it had two feet of water over the cabin sole. After hand bailing the boat, we discovered that one of the small screws retaining the electric bilge pump in the keel sump had come lose, and water entered from the screw hole. This boat had a fixed keel so go figure. If we had stayed home that day, his boat would have sunk...).

The new Hunters may be better made (no personal experience), but to me they look like floating RVs.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

Hey tsenator, I was indeed trolling for information. You provided none. Perhaps you should confine yourself to that other board. Even a sailing fool could provide more useful information than you. Thanks fool. That is exactly the type of info I''m looking for.


----------



## Magic_Moments

I have a preference towards Catalina''s. I don''t have anything against either brand, and I like some of the things Hunter tries out with innovations handed down from big race boats, but I am not sure they will always work or hold up well over time. Sailboats cost a lot of money (to me) so I tend to prefer things I hope will last.
The Catalina 30 has been around virtually unchanged (aside from the transom) since 1974 or 1976. I like the circular cockpits of the new Hunters at the dock, but I don''t know if I would be so happy when heeled over. I also don''t like the rig with no backstay, but I know people who have both Hunters and Catalina''s and all are happy with their boats and I think either would work well in Puget Sound.
I don''t know if you are looking at new or used. Catalina has a tall rig option that would work very well in Puget Sound.
If you are looking at used boats, get a copy of 48 North at any marina or broker and look at the list of 30 foot boats. All the boats for sale in Puget Sound are listed with the price and broker near the back. I look at the boats on Yachtworld.com before I go look in person so I don''t drive all over until I find a boat or four that I like.

Ken


----------



## RobGallagher

I can''t speak for the hunter, but I have some sailing time on several Catalina models and you get a lot of boat for your money. I still prefer my C&C. If your shopping used, you might get higher quality (for not much more money) in a used C&C or Tartan.


----------



## paulmcquillan

I''ve sailed both the Huner 33.5 and 37, as well as the Catalina 34 and 46.

I ended up buying a C&C design, and it came down to that or the Tartan. 

I would say the Catalinas were always in the running (c38), but the higher performance swayed us in the end.


----------



## ddebruin

Wow, this is like the C&C list. I also looked at the Catalinas and the Hunters. Looked at a lot of Cat 30''s as there are so many out there. Did not like the Hunters as much, although the interiors were nice and big, did not find the construction and performance to be what I likes. Looked at a Hunter 33 early and it convinced my wife that she could live with a sailboat. 

We also ended up with a C&C, liked the reputation of performance and quality. Have not been disappointed. Nice interior space, if traditional, nice performance and very good quality of construction. I also looked at the Tartans but could not find one that was in my price range and with the interior my wife would accept but would not hesitate to buy one all other things considered.


----------



## Jeff_H

As I have mentioned before, I went through a search with a friend who was looking at similar year and size Hunters and Catalinas. Generally the Hunters seemed to hold up better. I spoke to a number of very experienced surveyors who indicated that used Hunters generally did better in surveys. Of the big three builders, I personally prefer Beneteau First Series hands down on sailing ability and build quality with Catalinas a clear third place.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## tsenator

Ottville,

Sorry, its just such a common question that can be emotionally charged and asked quite often on lots of different boards. If your looking for more, just go through the archives and you''ll finds tons of opinions and comments.

It looks like Jeff H is the lone wolf here, and I have to respectfully disagree. I do tend to agree with the Benetaus in some respects, but they make many different quality/types of boats, with the first series being their upgraded racing version ....but they are starting to cheap out in some ways....not that it affects the boats integrity, but in other ways.....they are going to fake plastic teak floors and most of the models do not come with the option for a lead keel (at least thats what the Beneteau dealer told me last weekend...and I looked at the options price list ) Not sure what years and sizes Jeff was looking at, but its not consistent with what I saw, but I wasn''t looking at boats older than 15-17 years though. I won''t comment on 70''s era Catalina......they made 2 classic boats back then the C27 and the C30, but like a lot of other mass producers of these vintages they might have not been up to the standards of some other manufacturers of the time (that, by the way, are no longer with us!)...but starting in the 80''s and continuing thru to today the quality has consistently improved. Outside of the Cheribini''s cutter model Hunter built, the design and quality of the Hunters were not great. I will concur that the quality of the newer Hunters have improved since I started looking at them about 10 years ago, but thats not too hard since I think the late 80''s to early 90''s Hunters were the worst in my opinion. But these days the quality is improving on all the boat manufacturers.

In fact I think if you survey most people out there that have looked at boats and been around them and then you take away the Hunters owners and the Catalina owners as being biased. I am pretty sure you''ll find an overwhelming number of people consider the Catalina to be a notch above the Hunters . I believe Jeff H is very knowledgeable but clearly in the minority when it comes to his opinion ranking these boats.

Take a look here http://users3.ev1.net/~sailord/H376.jpg thats a Hunter 376...this is not a one off thing. These things are not a result of a running hard aground or a boating accident either. These are major boat failures . I have heard of this occurring on more than one Hunter in this latest era of their non-backstayed rigged. Still Hunter''s decision to allow the hull to deck joint to support the rigging loads (with or without their magic glass layup that they say they have in this area) is a serious mistake in their construction. People say they have good customer service, but if you''re going to build boats like this you''ll need it. 

I just got back from the NY/NJ Sail Expo and I was looking at both sets of boats. There were just too many small items, where for some unknown reason, Hunter cheaps out. In many ways these are very important items on the Hunter that my mind are woefully inadequate. Take for instance the bilge pump hose on the 36'' Hunter, its this tiny 1" hose !!. I almost can''t believe it and the bilge pump is undersized too. Someone has to explain to me why they do that for something that important , looking at their setup they would only pump 1/2 the volume of water that most other boats have. Remember 97% are never going to need or care about that, but what about the other 3%. So I have to respectfully disagree with Jeff H, when you really look at these seemingly small but very important items.

Lets put it this way.....If you told me that I had to sail to Europe and my only 2 options were a Catalina 36 or a Hunter 356 then I don''t think I''d blink an eyelash before I''d pick the Catalina. I think most people that have been on each boat would agree. If you told me I was 6''6" and had to live aboard, then the hunter gets a bit more appealing since it goes for the maximum space conceivable....just look at the freeboard of a lot of hunters. But even then I''m not so sure...


----------



## bubb2

Regards, tsenater

Jeff is not the lone wolf you want to made him out to be. While at the NY/NJ Sail Expo maybe you didn''t notice that the Beneteau 423 was named best mid-sized cruiser of the year by Cruising World.

I own a 1999 Beneteau and have been nothing but happy with my boat. 

In July of this year, I had the missforture of being run down from behind by a 45 ft. Sea Ray traveling 20 to 30 kts. 

My boat lost her port back stay, port srouds, and suffered over 25 fiberglass fractures. The rig stood and she came home on her own iron keel over 20 miles from the site of the collision. A lesser vessel would have sunk. 

Now there are Insurance poeple and Lawyers involved and come to find out the Blue Book Value of my boat (high and low) is 1,000 to 5,000 dollar,s less than the price i paid in 1999. If i can sail for a $1,000 a year i am a happy man. 

I also have had nothing but good experances with the factory, parts and ect.

I think you can guess what my next boat will be.


----------



## tsenator

Bubb2,

Hmmm, I guess you didn''t read or understand my post very well. I said the bene''s were pretty nice for the money, no I don''t like the fake plastic teak floor) and some of the styling and setup. Where did you read that I said the bene''s were bad??? What post were you reading? I am truly bewildered by your post. I was talking about comparing catalina''s to hunters, just like the the title of the post. My comments towards Jeff being a lone wolf were about his comments on catalina''s vs hunters.......just like what the title of this post is about.... personally I really can''t understand how beneteau''s can give you a 47 foot sailing vessel for the price they do....it trully boggles the mind.....if I was really looking at the a 47 footer and trying to get the most boat for the money, then the B473 would be on the top of my list. But I don''t think the mid 30 foot benes layouts are anything special......ps I can also easily sell my ''99 C36 for more than I paid for it.

pps. Cruising world/Sailing world gives out honors all the time....The C36 has won these awards too....just as Hunters do....as the years go by I realize more and more that these awards mean less and less....I recall the Hunter356 won an award a few years back. Well Hunter no longer has the H356 , its been replaced already after 2 1/2 years by the new 36 footer from Hunter......whats all that about !?! They change designs like a sailor changes underwear, once a year.


----------



## jbarros

No way man, you need a MacGregor 26. Now THOSE are some seaworthy craft. 

Fwiw, I live about 10 miles from the Catalina factory, and I see a grip of OLD, beet up, hung down, abused not to nice, not well taken care of at all, had a few horible no good downright bad days, Catalina 27''s around, and you know what, they''re all still floating around, and the ones that havent completley blown out their sails still can move all right. And you can pick them up for a few thousand if you keep a vigilent eye out. 

As a general rule with sail boats, I hesitate to make general rules. Most people make a reletivley sound hull, and from there on out, it''s up to how the owners took care of her, and what "upgrades" (Note the quotes) were applied over the life of the boat. People have gone around the world in Catalina 27''s, and there are Beneteau First Series (and Oysstars, and IP''s and Pacific Seacraft and ....) lying on the bottom. Look at the boats you find for sale. ask around about whats typicaly wrong with those boats, and check to see how thats doing in this instance. Then look for everything else. 

-- James


----------



## TSOJOURNER

Ottville,

You''ve gotten a ton of advice already but let me add my personal experience with just buying a new Hunter anyway.

I owned an 81 Hunter 30 for several years (Cherubini design). Nice solid boat, and I do mean solid - it weighed over 9500 lbs with the fin keel. Not a particularly good sailing boat, and the interior left a lot to be desired. But, it held it''s value OK, and I learned a lot about what I wanted. Last month I bought a new H326 - after +much+ analysis of Hunter vs. Catalina. I found 2 important things. 1- the Catalinas in that size range are seriously out of date as regards interior arrangements. The Hunter folks are a lot more creative about how to use space. After having a boat with lousy interior space, I found it''s a big issue if you''re going to cruise for more than an afternoon. 2 - Hunters hold their value a lot better. I collected a lot of asking price data on H''s and C''s, then did some regression analysis to see what happened over time. The result? Catalinas cost at least 30% more when new, and 8 to 10 years later will cost the same. IOW, Catalina depreciation is a lot worse.

If I were going offshore (which doesn''t interest me in the least), I probably wouldn''t buy either. But, for sailing around inland waters, I really can''t see any significant difference in safety or performance. RE the no-backstay rig, the design is a relatively simple exercise in structural engineering, and everything I found said it works fine.

Hope this helps.

Dave...


----------



## TSOJOURNER

Ottville,
You have received lots of input, from comments on topic comparing Hunters and Catalinas, to off topic comments about Beneteau''s and MacGregors. Let me tell you what I have learned based on several years of study of the big three and some old and new experiences with MacGregors. I owned a Macgregor 22 years ago. It was sturdy for lakes or rivers but it was small of spar and rig and it lacked basic ammenities. Recent outings on a 26 revealed pretty much the same thing. You can press your hand against the hull of a MacGregor 26 and make an indentation. That is not good. The Beneteaus are nice boats and I believe, well made. I followed them for a full year and that revealed some minor and major problems to condider before buying a Bene. Things like metric plumbing and parts and lack of availability or compatibility crop up frequently. A major complaint is the rust that forms on the iron keels. Rust never sleeps. Once it starts, you have to deal with it every year. Catalina uses lead. Lead doesn''t rust. At the NY/NJ boat show, Beneteau didn''t even bring any new boats (they were provided by existing owners). That turned me off. I was leaning toward benes but what does it say when the largest sailboat maker in the world can''t manage to bring a new boat to a major sailboat show? The boats they brought were nice, but they were used and strict restrictions were in place for inspecting them. Who needs that? They lost me as a customer that day. I studied Hunters over a period of two years and liked what I saw initially and especially online. They seem to provide a lot of boat for the money. The reality is this. I went to the NY/NJ boat show to look at Hunters after extensive online study. Pricewise, they seemed to be a great value as compared to Beneteau as far as equipment and ammenities. They were nicely laid out and looked good. I went over to look at the Catalina 32 at the suggestion of the Hunter salesman(who had a used Catlina 32 for sale at his yard), and that was the end of the search. The Catalina 320 and the 310 were much better boats than the comparable sized Hunters. Just walk on board and look at the winches. They are massive on Catalinas and wimpy on Hunters. Look at the masts. The Catalina masts are hefty and massive, ocean going spars, wheras the Hunters are sized for lakes and rivers and bays. In fact, all Catalinas over 30'' are CE rated class "A". That means ocean rated.. Hunters are not. My research of used boats reveals a glut of used Hunters at much lower prices than Catalinas, which hold their higher values much longer. The thickness of the fiberglass on a Catalina as compared to a Hunter is something you can see and feel. There is really no comparison in my humble opinion. Beneteaus are good boats but there are problems that will never go away until they get rid of the iron keels and make plumbing and fittings that are compatible with American chandleries. The Macs are nice, low budget boats that really need to be looked at a different level. As a result of my two year study, I have decided to buy a Catalina. It''s built to withstand ocean going (thats not opinion, thats a fact borne by the CE rating of "A". It''s construction is very sturdy and the company stands behind their product. They hold their higher values on resale much better than Hunters(just check yachtworld.com). They are really over built. They have engines that will get you through and inlet whereas the Hunters are really underpowered., Don''t get me wrong, I almost bought a Hunter based on what I read online. They are a real value. But when I saw the Hunter and the Catalina, there was no doubt as to which was the better made boat. Ray Charles could''ve seen the difference. Tim


----------



## jack_patricia

Tim, I found the bulk of your discussion on comparing Catalina with Hunter to be interesting (if opposite in some respects the post preceding yours) but was genuinely bothered by what seems to be your blanket acceptance of the CE rating for offshore use as legitimate. I recently listened to an experienced sailor, also a technical editor for CW for some years, describe how the dynamics of the discussion and decision-making of that certifying body changed as the large volumne boat manufacturers began participating in their meetings. It was apparently a classic case of the committee designing a horse that turned out to be a camel.

The description I heard, interestingly, was not unlike the comments you made about Hunter representing itself well on the Web. They played a huge role in the standards for CE certification being watered down, using arguments that perhaps sound defensible in theoretical terms...much as I hear their brokers describe the boat''s design and construction. However, the reality is a bit different. I''m in the UK at the moment, where Hunters are sold under the Legend brand name (Hunter having already been claimed by another builder) and they make quite a big deal of being offshore rated. My impression is that this doesn''t cause any great concern here because a) most sailors see a Legend for what it is, and b) most Legends here are used as floating condos and daysailors, must as they seem to be in the States. Similarly, British boatbuilders here find the EU''s efforts to standardize boat building standards to be provincial and less than convincing, and the resulting classification system to be similarly flawed, and influenced by the high volume (and dare I say...French) manufacturers and the rivalries of the member countries.

While my knowledge of Catalinas and Hunters is fairly casual, I share some of the same impressions you do about how one brand is equipped vs. the other. OTOH I''m far less persuaded to draw conclusions about suitable use offshore based on the hardware chosen. E.g. when a stout spar tied down to the hull with conventional rigging - all of which looks right - is being whipsawed in a heavy offshore sea, I don''t think we can assume that the rest of the monocoque structure is similarly up to the task. And we do read of cases where the opposite proved to be true for mid-30''s latter day Catalinas I also see a host of details that simply don''t reflect the realities of cruising boats to distant shores. E.g. how any builder can choose to place plastic ports midships on a hull and not protect them with a rubrail, given the nature of some foreign docks, pilings, and the reality of maneuvering a boat in wind and tidal current, is beyond me. But then, as I read recently at the Catalina 34 Owner''s website, Frank Butler has apparently steered his company clear of making claims about his brand being intended for offshore cruising (as in ''cross ocean'' passages) no matter how it''s certified by an independent commision''s standards, which I think is a reasonable - and I''d guess, well reasoned - position for Catalina to take.

All of that having been said, I hope you have a great time with your new boat, and find her capable of all the sailing you intend.

Jack


----------



## jbarros

final sound off from me. 

I''ve found the hunters to be much more roomy down below, very comfrotable, and just bigger. 

I''ve also found them to be horible sailers on the wind, off the wind, or reaching. 

This only applies to the hunters I''ve sailed on. which were the 38 and the 40. For all I know, the rest may be great sailers, but if similar lines lead to similar sailing, then... 

likewise, the only catalina''s I''ve sailed have been reletivley fun and fast, good sailers, but abismal below. I''ve only sailed on the 22, 27, 30 and 36 though, and one none of the much more spacious, modern ones (270, 380, etc) which are fatter, and may not sail as well. (although from what I know of the company, I doubt they''d sacrafice too much sailability) 

but find a chance to inspect them both, and get some crew time in on both of them, and decide for yourself what you want and or need.  

-- James


----------



## capttb

I recently bought a ''94 Catalina C270 LE, I was shopping for the best boat for my budget and needs. I''m real happy with the performance under sail. Had a friend out and I couldn''t get the wheel from him. It was in a groove and he kept muttering "over five knots and you don''t need to touch the wheel." I don''t think the maker is as important as the condition of the particular boat you are looking at. Catalina,Hunter, Beneteau, Jeaneau, or if you can afford them, C&C''s, Tartans, Pacific Seacraft etc. all make adequate to excellent boats. I think a lot a times we shop for the boat we''d like to need instead of the maybe smaller simpler boat we will use more. When you shop for a used boat what the previous owner did or didn''t do can be more immediate that what happened at the factory.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

O.K. Jack, say the rating of "A" offshore has been watered down a bit. whats that say about the boats still don''t meet that watered down rating
Bill


----------



## jack_patricia

One thing it might say is that the boat''s market - and perhaps where it''s built, tho'' not necessarily - lies outside the EU, which is the only governmental entity assigning CE ratings. 

But I don''t think I''ve suggested the standards have been ''watered down''. First, I''m still trying to locate the standards - somewhere, on some website, or with the help of a builder and/or publication - as I''ve yet to find them. (You would think builders would be trumpeting them to the sailing public, wouldn''t you?) Second, I''m not sure the CE ratings have been in place long enough for there to be a basis for challenging them yet, altho'' that''s only my impression at a distance.

Jack


----------



## Jeff_H

Jack I believe this will get you where you want to go:

http://www.ce-marking.org/directive-9425ec-Recreational-Craft.html


----------



## doubleplay

Catalina vs Beneteau or Hunter(add Bavaria if u want) has been discussed on this board many times and I don''t think I have anything to add except to say that they are all trying to attract the same buyer from the same segment of the market.You can discuss all you want about one being better than the other but in fact they are like Toyota,Honda or Mitsubishi pick whichever one you like....they are never a BMW or Mercedes...
One word for CW boat of the year awards look who is giving the most advertising in the magazine and compare it to the winners,every year they are creating new catagories to keep their advertisers happy...
Fair Winds


----------



## jack_patricia

Thanks, Jeff - that does indeed look like one source. 

As I mentioned yesterday, I''m going to see if one of the EU builders who trumpet their CE Rating can provide a copy of the RCD with which they comply. The London Boat Show seems like an ideal opportunity to attempt this.

Jack


----------



## TSOJOURNER

I''ve chartered both brands in several sizes ranging from 22 to 36 feet on several occasions. My two cents:

Catalinas look better, Hunters look a little dumpy, especially the stern. The Hunter mast and arch look, well, different.

Hunters have more space and better designed interiors. They''re more comfortable. If there''s a female involved in the final check-off, Hunter is going to win most of the time.

Catalina''s sail better for me, but this is subjective. I like a boat that has just a little weather helm and can handle 15 knots without a reef in the main. Catalinas seem to eat this up and hang in there. The 36 is an especially lovely sailer.

Hunters are easier to sail, especially singlehanded. How can this be? The arch may look weird, but it''s very effective because you''ve got lot of leverage on the boom and there''s that long traveler mounted up there to give you many adjustment options. I hated the way Hunters sailed until I learned that the boat is designed so you have to reef the main once the wind starts getting up there. After all, the Hunter has a larger main. About 15 knots the Hunter''s weather helm gets severe. Here on SF Bay, 20-30 knots is typical of a summer afternoon. But put in a reef, and the Hunter straightens up and sails very well. Because the Hunter typically uses a larger main, you can run a smaller jib, hence, the jib pops over easily and cleanly during the tack. 

Customer support and owner association support for both boats is phenomenal. These two builders have outlasted hundreds of sailboat companies. The others may have been faster, cheaper, cooler, and fancier (or more expensive), but none of them gave the customer support or have had a more enthusiastic owner base than these two great American companies. I bought a used 70s 14 foot Catalina boat a few years ago. I sent an email to Catalina hoping to learn something about the boat, but expecting nothing. A few days later I got an owners manual in the mail with Catalina''s compliments.

Frankly, I like both boats for the reasons above. And if I''m lucky enough to own either one of them one of these days, I''ll probably be happy. I''ll probably end up with a Hunter because my wife finds the galley and the head to her liking. 

One note on the Hunter 356. It appears Hunter simply changed the name to 36 in 2004. Some interior changes were made, but the specs are exacly the same. Maybe Hunter was concerned back in 2000 that if it called the 356 a 36, it would be confused with the earlier Hunter 36. Anyway, the 356 or new 36 continues to be a popular boat. I have a friend with one of them and it is an absolutely pleasant boat to sail and live in. Here''s a little example of Hunter design ingenuity. All through-hulls on the 356 are led to a plate aft of the keel and can be accessed by a hatch at the foot of the cabin ladder. No searching around all over the nooks and cranies of the boat to find the ball cocks to shut everything down. My only objection, which Cruising World pointed out in its review, is that the aft lockers next to the swim platform are liabilities if the hatches were to come off. This can be fixed with heavier hinges and latches.

rjones


----------



## TSOJOURNER

One of the problems with "which is better" type questions is one tends to hear from owners of one or the other who, understandably tend to defend their purchase choice. Are they wrong? No, of course not--in fact, they''re probably speaking from the advantage of seeing one boat or the other from a longer-term perspective.

You might consider looking at independent reviews of the boats you''re considering. I''m a big fan of Practical Sailor--you can probably find a review they''ve done on the boat(s) you''re looking for on the web or in a copy somewhere. If you''re shopping in the broader sense, you can purchase the 2-volume set of all their reviews. They don''t accept adverstising, and while I''m sure they''re not flawless, they appear to be very candid in terms of positives/negatives for a particular boat.

The only comments I see on the board here that I would tend to disregard outright are the ones that cast a blanket critique on an entire manufacturing line...Catalinas, Hunters, Beneteaus, as many others are quality boats--in a very competitive market, no one is going to have survived this long by offering a worthless product. Beyond that, as some have posted here previously, dealer support, owners associations, etc. can make a real difference in a happy boat relationship.

Hope this helps...

Fair winds, (and happy shopping!!)

Bill


----------



## wkw

Ottville said:


> I''m shopping for a 30'' boat to sail on Puget Sound. What is the general concensus on Catalina vs Hunter? Is one inherantly better than the other or is it entirely subjective?
> Any opinions are appreciated. Thanks


Old thread but good question to keep alive. I enjoyed a 22 foot sailboat and moved up to a 27 footer. I sold my 27' boat thinking a move up to a "newish" 32 footer would be an easy find....2 seasons later and maybe a 3rd, I find myself boatless...probably because I did lots of research and made my choice too narrow. I pretty much got fixated on the Catalina 320. But after looking at several 320's I found it's an overrated over priced boat. They have a lot of weird **** going on. Like; excessive port leaks, Catalina smiles when there should be none on this boat, and what I'll call the Butt Crack ( this is poor fairing or fiberglass work on the entire seam of the Hull to transom) some show a faint gelcoat discoloration at the entire seam and some have fairing compound cracking the entire hull transom seam. Most 320's have questionable rusty keel bolt backing plate/washers..why are they so freaking rusted! my last two boats didn't have this (O'days) and I've seen multitudes of Beneteau's in crap condition...the keel bolts and washers never look this bad. ..but I'm still fixated/obsessed on the looks and overall setup interior and exterior, and the rigging/chainplates are awesome on the 320. I omitted the hunter and never even been on one because of reading through "owner forums" and finding a lot of issues with very young hunters. General issues are leaky ports, poor interior cabinetry, Keels that are off center so bad the boat does not go straight and several models have a composite rudder post that has been known to shear off from continuous flexing....as in the rudder divorcing your boat and finding a new home. Another thing that concerns me is a cored hull....even if its "above" the waterline you still have exterior hull mounted chainplates (hunter 33 newer) and ports cut out into the cored hull. Bad enough we have to deal with cored decks. Adding cored hulls to the list sucks. I think the 2005'ish Hunter 33 is very nice in pictures..maybe I will take a look at one.  As for the old salts and the idea old salt boat's are just better in every way...let's look at the Island Packet 31(larger too). The 1989 (last year) is one sexy fat boat...really comparable to the roomy interiors of newer production boats. It's made a lot better than boats mentioned above boats but all IP31's have one major flaw. The chainplates are glassed in, inside the hull, hidden behind fixed cabinetry. Impossible to see the condition and the condition is bad on most. The chainplates have decomposed due to lack of oxygen...really really badly..like obvious cracks ready to give...just hidden from sight! I would never consider this boat unless they spent the $10,000+ to replace all chainplates and sure as hell have proof it has been done. Heck, I say buy and enjoy what you like. They all have some kind of issues...you just have to decide what issues you're willing to adopt.


----------



## SeaStar58

Go to Catalina Direct and they tell why the keel bolts can be in such rough shape on the Catalina and its because they put Inferior Grade nuts and washers on the High Grade J-Bolts they cast into the keels. Now that the damage is done you need to clean the corrosion off as best you can with a rotary wire brush, coat the parts with a protectant, refit new high grade nuts and washers on the keel bolts and seal with a marine grade thread locker every few years since to the damage that was done using the wrong nuts is going to keep coming back on you. Plus on certain models where Catalina cored the keel trunk with plywood you need to remove the keel, chisel/grind out the plywood and lay up solid fiberglass to replace the rotting plywood reinstalling the keel afterwards. Just because Catalina took over Charlie Morgans boat yard in Largo Florida it does not mean they are built like a Morgan.

The local boat repairmen here where all three companies (Catalina/Hake/Com-Pac) operate (Clearwater/Largo Florida) are pretty much in agreement when they say Hake builds a better larger boat and Com-Pac a better small to medium boat than Catalina or Marlow Hunter 170 miles away over in Alachua Florida. I have to take their word for it since they see hundreds of boats that need repair and are much more familiar with their weaknesses along with what needs to be done to overcome them than I am.


----------

