Sudden Attraction to Hunters

[robert sailor]

HJV Your rule of large numbers has some logic to it but don't let it lead your thinking. It suggests that its really only numbers that are at the root of certain boats and the quality attached to their construction as well as problems.
There is nothing that HR and Hunter share in basic construction and no matter the price difference they are not comparable. There are very few examples in life where you pay the lowest price and get the highest quality.

[capn_billl]

Hunter makes some decent boats for what they are designed to do, weekend sailing. They are comfortable, and well laid out, I just wouldn't take one around the Horn.

I'm getting a sudden attraction to a Carver, for weekend sailing it seems like a great boat, even for island hopping in clear weather.

I've been well offshore in a 18' runabout, on a calm day a canoe is all the boat you need. The bulletproof full keeled cruiser is only needed for the bad days.

[HappyMdRSailor]

Is not Hunter attraction called Sucktion???

I kid... These are awesome boats for the purpose... Skip the capes and the Nor'Easters (plus anything that approaches both) And they are wonderfully cushy and capable...

[hjv]

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

Regards Cap: O the money you would save if you could make the little sloop do.

I could not agree more. Then I'd be ready to go tomorrow.

[sailorboy1]

Just so many experts on all the different models Hunter has made. They must be experts or how else could they know so much about the boats beyond the owners/designers etc.

[robert sailor]

I think Hunters are a good high value sailboat built to a price the same as all the high production builders including Bennies, Jens, Bav etc. They offer a lot of boat for the money which is why they have been popular. They have put out a large range of designs over the years and have taken some risks with some leading edge stuff so good for them.

[Blue Crab]

ah ... Sailorboy's one note samba ... again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYdrhTL3VBk

[Capt Phil]

Had the opportunity to sail aboard a Hunter 29.5 a couple of times with an inexperienced couple and their less than 2 year old. While not the kind of vessel I would take out in to the open ocean, she was relatively stiff in gusty winds up to about 20 knots, an open transom which made boarding with a youngster and her attendant gear very easy, roomy as hell below for her LWL but few hand holds, Yanmar powered and good access to the engine area and an intriguing self tailing main of sorts. For a young family with children she is a good option in my opinion or if you are into partying and marginal, short term sailing, she bears consideration. I understand that Hunters are very cheap to buy which would suit a young family just getting into the game... Cheers, Phil

[hjv]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

HJV Your rule of large numbers has some logic to it but don't let it lead your thinking. It suggests that its really only numbers that are at the root of certain boats and the quality attached to their construction as well as problems.
There is nothing that HR and Hunter share in basic construction and no matter the price difference they are not comparable. There are very few examples in life where you pay the lowest price and get the highest quality.

From one point of wiew I agree with you. There is something to be said for beautiful craftsmanship vs mass production and HR is elite when it come to that kind of stuff. From a usability point of view on the other hand they are quite comparble. They both make seagoing vessels designed for the purpose of keeping water on the outside and air on the inside, along with what ever you might need and want to carry in them. They are also designed to carry you safely from point a to point b within their specified environment. What that environment is varies with size and model within the different manifacturers portfolio.

I do not question that HR might have some better initial quality than HuBaBeCaJa. If they didn't and still charged many times as much compared to those I'd be pissed off. But if I'm going to wait for the day I can afford a HR or the likes I will never be cruising. I don't need an overengineered solution, just to make sure it will withstand 300 percent of what mother nature will ever throw at it. What I want is a boat with sufficient quality to allow me to cross oceans with confidence in that it will not suddently develop some catastrophic malfunction that will kill me and my family. Given of course that I take care of it and don't neglect it.

It stands to reason that a manufacturer that has more frequent change of models and production lines have a higher probability of design flaws than a manufacturer that keeps doing what they've always done, making only small adjustments to their designs. The flaws tend to especially show up in the first production runs of a new model. That holds true for cars and will hold true for any product. Over time they will be ironed out although some models may never be quite up to par, just like with cars. Other models will be spot on, again just like with cars. The bad reps will arise from those unsuccsessful models, of course.

That's why the "answerbots" out there, claiming "Never buy any of those boats, they are POS boats, period!" fall on their own lack of reason. You can't claim that every single of the 40-50 000 Catalinas made are sailing coffins, just waiting to drag you to a wet grave and none of them should be considered for cruising oceans, ever. Same goes for the other brands in that category.

When they try to strenghten their claims with claiming that the boats don't come readily equipped for ocean crossing, lacking hand holds, lee cloths etc. while the high end boats do have it it just gets unreasonable. That's what HR and the other high end brands charge their higher price tag for. If the high end builders that charge the double or more compared to e.g. Hunter didn't equip their boats for every thinkable situation then they are ripping their customers off.

That just means that the HuBaBeCaJa buyers will have to do their equipping themselves if they are going to use their boats in conditions that demand it. I'm sure it will be possible to install locks on the floor boards, make lee cloths for the beds on stormy crossings, make a harness for the galley, install hand holds where you might fancy them etc. for a lot less than it would cost to buy a high end brand with those things installed on delivery. It would not take all that much effort and time and probably be more fun too.

When it comes to buying used boats it mostly comes down to how well they are cared for. A run down nightmare is a run down nightmare, no matter what brand and model it started out as. A well equipped and well cared for boat of any brand and "good enough"model will be worth concidering if the price fits the budget and the model fits the planned use.

So for us looking at those boats the most helpful responses to questions would be the ones stating that "That model/year had an issue with this and that one had an issue with that and that one was ok initially. - And remember to check for that and that and that if you are considering buying one".

If I could find more of that and less "religious rantings" I would be very happy.

"-And as long as I'm dreaming; I want a pony!" -Calvin and Hobbes...

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

I understand that Hunters are very cheap to buy which would suit a young family just getting into the game... Cheers, Phil

I wonder what cheap means to some people. To me $115,000 for a 11 year old boat wasn't a cheap purchase. And since I got my boat the asking and sold prices have increased for the same year/model even though they are now 4 years older.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by hjv

From one point of wiew I agree with you. There is something to be said for beautiful craftsmanship vs mass production and HR is elite when it come to that kind of stuff. From a usability point of view on the other hand they are quite comparble. They both make seagoing vessels designed for the purpose of keeping water on the outside and air on the inside, along with what ever you might need and want to carry in them. They are also designed to carry you safely from point a to point b within their specified environment. What that environment is varies with size and model within the different manifacturers portfolio.

I do not question that HR might have some better initial quality than HuBaBeCaJa. If they didn't and still charged many times as much compared to those I'd be pissed off. But if I'm going to wait for the day I can afford a HR or the likes I will never be cruising. I don't need an overengineered solution, just to make sure it will withstand 300 percent of what mother nature will ever throw at it. What I want is a boat with sufficient quality to allow me to cross oceans with confidence in that it will not suddently develop some catastrophic malfunction that will kill me and my family. Given of course that I take care of it and don't neglect it.

It stands to reason that a manufacturer that has more frequent change of models and production lines have a higher probability of design flaws than a manufacturer that keeps doing what they've always done, making only small adjustments to their designs. The flaws tend to especially show up in the first production runs of a new model. That holds true for cars and will hold true for any product. Over time they will be ironed out although some models may never be quite up to par, just like with cars. Other models will be spot on, again just like with cars. The bad reps will arise from those unsuccsessful models, of course.

That's why the "answerbots" out there, claiming "Never buy any of those boats, they are POS boats, period!" fall on their own lack of reason. You can't claim that every single of the 40-50 000 Catalinas made are sailing coffins, just waiting to drag you to a wet grave and none of them should be considered for cruising oceans, ever. Same goes for the other brands in that category.

When they try to strenghten their claims with claiming that the boats don't come readily equipped for ocean crossing, lavking hand holds, lee cloths etc. while the high end boats do have it it just gets unreasonable. That's what HR and the other high end brands charge their higher price tag for. If the high end builders that charge the double or more compared to e.g. Hunter didn't equip their boats for every thinkable situation then they are ripping their customers off.

That just means that the HuBaBeCaJa buyers will have to do their equipping themselves if they are going to use their boats in conditions that demand it. I'm sure it will be posible to install locks on the floor boards, make lee cloths for the beds on stormy crossings, make a harness for the galley, install hand holds where you might fancy them etc. for a lot less than it would cost to buy a high end brand with those things installed on delivery. It would not take all that much effort and time and probably be more fun too.

When it comes to buying used boats it mostly comes down to how well they are cared for. A run down nightmare is a run down nightmare, no matter what brand and model it started out as. A well equipped and well cared for boat of any brand and "good enough"model will be worth concidering if the price fits the budget and the model fits the planned use.

So for us looking at those boats the most helpful responses to questions would be the ones stating that "that model/year had an issue wit this anf that one had an issue with that and that one was ok initially. - And remember to check for that and that and that if you are considering buying one".

If I could find more of that and less "religious rantings" I would be very happy.

"-And as long as I'm dreaming; I want a pony!" -Calvin and Hobbes...

Great, i think we discuss to the death the isue about a HR v a hunter o beneteau, and its amazing as there is still people thinking that the differences are in the cabinet hinges or in the varnish used for the interior.

First of all a full mould liner glued to the inner hull is something criminal and horrible in any boat designed to cross oceans , just take a look at the expensive brands and you can see who they are still FG the bulkheads to the hull.

A HR again , joint the deck to the hull with a full FG tape inside making the hull to deck joint bulletproof, there you pay the diference, hull layups, bulkheads glassed, keels, keels stubs, rudders and a lots of infinte small details make the diference in Price and in quality...

[a64pilot]

An ideally designed and constructed anything, boat, airplane etc. is no stronger or heavy than required, any extra is at least a waste of money and decreases carrying capacity etc.

If I had to guess, I'd say way more than 95% of the sailboats out there don't need much in the way of handholds, lee cloths etc. as they just don't go anywhere, and most people only sail very irregularly and not in bad weather (we are talking about the people that buy new boats)

Hunter has listened to their buyers very well and gives them exactly what they want, it may be one reason they are still in business when so many are not, just because it's not what I want, does not make it a bad boat.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by hjv

I don't need an overengineered solution, just to make sure it will withstand 300 percent of what mother nature will ever throw at it. What I want is a boat with sufficient quality to allow me to cross oceans with confidence in that it will not suddently develop some catastrophic malfunction that will kill me and my family.

That's why the "answerbots" out there, claiming "Never buy any of those boats, they are POS boats, period!" fall on their own lack of reason.

If the high end builders that charge the double or more compared to e.g. Hunter didn't equip their boats for every thinkable situation then they are ripping their customers off.

That just means that the HuBaBeCaJa buyers will have to do their equipping themselves if they are going to use their boats in conditions that demand it. I'm sure it will be possible to install locks on the floor boards, make lee cloths for the beds on stormy crossings, make a harness for the galley, install hand holds where you might fancy them etc. for a lot less than it would cost to buy a high end brand with those things installed on delivery. It would not take all that much effort and time and probably be more fun too.

When it comes to buying used boats it mostly comes down to how well they are cared for. A run down nightmare is a run down nightmare, no matter what brand and model it started out as. A well equipped and well cared for boat of any brand and "good enough"model will be worth concidering if the price fits the budget and the model fits the planned use.

So for us looking at those boats the most helpful responses to questions would be the ones stating that "That model/year had an issue with this and that one had an issue with that and that one was ok initially. - And remember to check for that and that and that if you are considering buying one".

If I could find more of that and less "religious rantings" I would be very happy.

"-And as long as I'm dreaming; I want a pony!" -Calvin and Hobbes...

Sorry about the editing, but you're way off on most of your statements. Hunter Marine had taken some shortcuts on some of it's models, like the 450 passage that we owned. When I purchased the boat, I didn't expect the necessity to remove the keel, make expensive modifications and reinstall it properly because the manufacturer wanted to save just a few dollars during the manufacturing process. On a boat with only 620 hours on it and one which had spend almost 10 years sitting in a slip in San Francisco, I wouldn't normally expect the keel to come loose.

Other than that and the extremely poor customer service, the boat was fine. For our intended use in Southern California, I would buy it again. But I do encourage other owners to double check their keel junction, keel bolts and rudder shafts during haul outs. Nothing wrong with warning others about problems with some designs so that they can be proactive.

[hjv]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Great, i think we discuss to the death the isue about a HR v a hunter o beneteau, and its amazing as there is still people thinking that the differences are in the cabinet hinges or in the varnish used for the interior.

First of all a full mould liner glued to the inner hull is something criminal and horrible in any boat designed to cross oceans , just take a look at the expensive brands and you can see who they are still FG the bulkheads to the hull.

A HR again , joint the deck to the hull with a full FG tape inside making the hull to deck joint bulletproof, there you pay the diference, hull layups, bulkheads glassed, keels, keels stubs, rudders and a lots of infinte small details make the diference in Price and in quality...

You know, I'm a numbers and statistics kind of guy. And I have read page up and page down on the forums regarding the topic you bring up, without it ever reaching any usable conclusion. It always ends up in people glaring at each other accusing the ones that doesn't hold their belief of being stupid, malignant, or both.

Thus I really don't know what to think, except accepting the fact that there are a hell of a lot of these boats out there actually floating, and cruising. In fact I did kind of touch the subject when I stated that I didn't need an overengineered solution, designed to handle 300% of what mother nature will throw at it. I just need it to be good enough. If the liner solution is good enough then I won't exclude it from my research.

So, until someone can point me to statistics showing that the mentioned solution is in fact dangerous or makes for a hellish maintenance scenario then for me it's just an opinion, just like any other out there. They don't help me much.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

I wonder what cheap means to some people. To me $115,000 for a 11 year old boat wasn't a cheap purchase.

I agree 100%. We paid $139k for our 14 year old Hunter 450; I thought that was a lot of money. Folks buying the new model 45 footer for around $300k deserve some quality for their money.... wouldn't you agree?

If we were discussing an automobile model where the front wheels kept falling off or the suspension kept breaking.... would this situation be acceptable? Even if your wheels on the same model car, hadn't yet fallen off?