# Hunter Vision 32/36 offshore?



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I am investigating the potential purchase of the Hunter Vision 32 or 36. First attracted to the value (late models from 50-70K), and then due to the liveability of what appears to be a pretty innovative design.

Next August my girlfriend and I will depart for extended cruising with offshore destinations in mind (ie, Pacific Northwest - Hawaii and beyond). I have some questions for those of you that may have some experience with the Hunter product:

- Is the Hunter Vision suitable for offshore work?
- Are there any specific safety ratings or standards that we can review to ensure that it is/is not? 

I am well aware that there are many other sv's out there that are virtually bomb proof, but we are not interested in refitting an old tub, and would just like to know if this boat which seems to meet the rest of our criteria (short of the lack of storage space) will take us across an ocean or two.

Thoughts?


----------



## CBinRI (May 17, 2004)

This thread does not necessarily focus on bluewater capability but covers various points of view on Hunters in general:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/buying-boat/7558-got-religon-but-hunter.html


----------



## Headingsouth (Jun 26, 2006)

One of the ratings system you may be looking for is the "CE" Certification, with 'A' being for Offshore capability, the highest for recreational boats. The Hunter 32 and 36 are 'A' rated, I believe, but as you research you will find that these are not the most capable offshore boats out there. I've sailed older hunters, with not much enthusiasm. Very livable, but not much else. Weekends on the lake -definitely, Hawaii and beyond - questionable. There are many other ratios such as displacement to length, length to beam and ballast ration that others on this site could certainly quickly quote, which will give you much more information as to your choice than a single rating. I'm sure there will be some Hunter afficionados here that will have done what you want to do, but that doesn't make it in your best interest to do so.Good Luck.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

newtoschool said:


> I am investigating the potential purchase of the Hunter Vision 32 or 36. First attracted to the value (late models from 50-70K), and then due to the liveability of what appears to be a pretty innovative design.
> 
> I am well aware that there are many other sv's out there that are virtually bomb proof, but we are not interested in refitting an old tub, and would just like to know if this boat which seems to meet the rest of our criteria (short of the lack of storage space) will take us across an ocean or two.
> 
> Thoughts?


The value you see in these models appears to be that they are relatively inexpensive dockiminiums. That they are, and if you use one as such, it may serve you well. If you want to take your boat offshore you need to develop a different list of criteria for that use, and you might reconsider the suitability of the Vision. I wouldn't consider them to be in the ballpark.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Thanks for the quick replies!

I've read that link, and every other scrap of information I could find. If there's one thing I have learned, it's that any defence I foolishly mounted on behalf of one of the 3 lines of production boats could easily be crushed by members of this board that have more knowledge in their pinky than I have been able to gather over months of visiting dock, brokers, marina bars etc. So I won't! That said, if there are those of you out there that have used one of these boats for a circumnav, or other offshore work of significance, I would love to hear from you! 

Sailing fool, if "relatively inexpensive dockiminiums" are on one side of the scale, then it would seem that "dark overpriced clausterphobic caves" are on the other...

Is there a happy medium, production or other?? A bright comfortable boat that will cross oceans safely and not have me saving so long that I never leave my "condo"-minium (50G range).

This is a tough scene to crack. I'm unwaveringly convinced that the payoff will be worth every second, but sadly I am no closer to matching the boat to our dream today than I was when we decided to sell up and get out there. 

ps - thanks for the cert info headingsouth, thats what I was after.


----------



## cardiacpaul (Jun 20, 2006)

the payoff will be worthit...
that being said... you CAN drive across country in a fiat, but why would you? 
Its been said here(and on other forums) many times that the boats you have asked about are "capable....but....". The question remains however, do YOU want to try it?. take the opinions for what they'tre worth, judge for yourself, no one can make the final determination but you.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Another reason those models are available at "bargain" prices could be that their "innovate" ideas simply didn't catch on in the marketplace. The massive freestanding mast alone will give some people pause as to its effect on the boat's motion and stability.

Check into some bluewater forums, or talk to those who have been there done that, I reckon over 95% of successful offshore cruising boats are not unstayed rigs. (Tree trunk rigged Sprays and junks notwithstanding)

One other thought: especially in a seaway, standing rigging provides some pretty handy grab spots and some security when moving around on deck. It's strange to me to walk on the deck of a boat with an unstayed rig and not have a shroud to grab onto along the way.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

newtoschool said:


> Thanks for the quick replies!
> 
> ...... So I won't! That said, if there are those of you out there that have used one of these boats for a circumnav, or other offshore work of significance, I would love to hear from you!
> 
> ...


Hmmm, since you ask, here's an example that, while not really a dockaminium, is also not dark, over-priced or particularily tight down below. You'll have to talk to the prior owner for testimonials regarding her two trips from New England to latin america, or read his just completed book:

http://www.sailboatowners.com/classified/ownerview.tpl?owno=11605739411290807&fno=400&brsku=11605739411290807.2&bd=CS&p1=0&p2=1000000&xs=All&l1=36&l2=36&active=T&sb=placed&dr=de&ad=all


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*I Want to Buy a Flying Scot*

I am looking at a 1973 Flying Scot. The hull has been refinished last year. It looks great. Should I be concerned about buying such an old boat? How can I tell if there is water inside the hull? How can I tell if the hull is "soft". Any advice would be appreciated.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Newtoschool...
The boat is totally unsuited for serious bluewater cruising. If you want to do bay/coastal sailing...no problem but if you are looking for offshore adventure you need a different boat or you're looking for a different kind of adventure. Let me make a suggestion before you invest a lot of money.
Buy an offshore passage or offer to crew with someone. See what it is like and then if you still want that Vision...you'll at least be making the decision with some real bluewater under your belt.


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

Camaraderie and others are giving you sound advice. The Vision line is not suitable for bluewater sailing in my view. How sturdy are those large ports (imagine waves breaking over the bow), or the huge aluminum mast itself for that matter? Imagine being below in that boat with 15 feet seas and the boat lurching from side to side -- where are the handholds to protect yourself? That wide open cabin is an invitation to gashes and broken bones. Get some bluewater experience yourself first. People buy certain style boats for the open ocean for certain reasons that you may only understand after you've been there.One last note-- there used to be a Vision 32 in my marina back when I had a Pearson 27. I routinely sailed cirlces around the Vision with my 27 footer. At least that Vision was painfully slow.


----------



## CBinRI (May 17, 2004)

If you are serious about bluewater cruising you might think about a late 70s/early80s Tartan 37. This is a well-built and very popular boat that is much more suitable for bluewater and might be found in your pricerange.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Thanks everyone for your replies. This is a great board, I really didnt expect so many responses being a new user. Will keep you posted on how the saga ends... and hopefully can count on some more good advice as we narrow in on "the" boat.


----------



## winddancer88 (Oct 2, 2006)

I've sailed quite a bit over the years in benehuntalinas. I don't have any bluewater experience though, so take this with a grain of salt.

There are a few models of the larger Catalina's (42 for example) that could be decent bluewater boats. Not the best, to be sure.

From my experience with Hunters, I'd say no to any of them. I spent the summer living on a 31 in college and it was a nice light air boat and OK in stormy weather, but I wouldn't want to get caught offshore in 20'+ swells in that thing. 

The only Beneteau I've sailed was an "Oceanis" -- a nice boat, but was never out in any bad weather in it, so can't say if the model's name was appropriate.

I currently own a Catalina 34. Not an ocean crosser, though with some upgrades it could certainly do it. I'd rate it higher than the Hunter, at least. If I ever get the bug though, I'll be buying a purpose built boat. I don't think upgrading a coastal cruiser for ocean crossings is worth the time and money. 

And with regards to the CE rating, I'd use that as a minimum. I wouldn't buy a coastal cruiser that wasn't rated "A". JMHO.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Have found a well equiped Morgan 38 in my price range. The press on this boat has been much more favorable. Have any of you been aboard? Wondering about the standing headroom, and length of aft cabin. I'm 6'4 so dont expect to be able to stand up straight, but the more headroom the better!


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Headingsouth said:


> One of the ratings system you may be looking for is the "CE" Certification, with 'A' being for Offshore capability, the highest for recreational boats. The Hunter 32 and 36 are 'A' rated, I believe, but as you research you will find that these are not the most capable offshore boats out there. I've sailed older hunters, with not much enthusiasm. Very livable, but not much else. Weekends on the lake -definitely, Hawaii and beyond - questionable. There are many other ratios such as displacement to length, length to beam and ballast ration that others on this site could certainly quickly quote, which will give you much more information as to your choice than a single rating. I'm sure there will be some Hunter afficionados here that will have done what you want to do, but that doesn't make it in your best interest to do so.Good Luck.


Actually the CE RCD certifications are:

A- Ocean 
B- Offshore
C- Coastal waters
D- Protected waters

I would not consider the Hunter Vision as a bluewater capable boat.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Some very good input, thanks,

my own thoughts, until now, have been that a good coastal boat is also a good blue water boat, wheras it seems that most think of coastal boats as sailers in sight of land boats. 'Dockaminiums' also works for many.

I expect my 'wants' in a coastal are what others want in a blue water boat. But I am looking for boat to live aboard and can do an Atlantic crossing while spending most of its time coastal cruising. 

The listing thats posted as an example is great looking, the interior near perfect for my wants, unfortunately its about twice what I can spend. I have found a couple 70s era wooden boats that look good, need to go see them and maybe do a survey. Also found a Morgan 38 that looks possible. Its all a learning curve, on the left side right now.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Jake-

There are usually huge construction and design differences in boats that are coastal cruisers and those that are bluewater cruisers. For instance:

Coastal cruisers will have:

Lower tankage requirements, as usually can fill water, diesel, etc fairly frequently.

Cabin is more open, often with larger saloon and berths, as is the cockpit. This is often good for entertaining, but not so good in heavy seas on an open water passage. 

Boat is a bit wider in beam than a bluewater boat of same LOA. 

Rigging is often a bit lighter in weight, as are the sails

Finding a boat that is both capable of bluewater passages and make a good liveaboard and coastal cruiser is often a huge compromise. Most liveaboards want to have a larger, more open floor plan on their boat, which is often found on coastal cruising boats, but not on bluewater passagemakers. 

Also, many bluewater boats do not sail as well in light winds as their coastal cruising counterparts, as they are heavier in displacement. 

If I were you, I would look for a good coastal cruising boat, that has the ability to make limited offshore passages, as the bulk of the requirements and time you really want a coastal cruiser type boat, and not a bluewater boat. 

Just my $.02, which may or may not apply to you. YMMV.


----------

