Sudden Attraction to Hunters

[ColdEH]

I read this thread occasionally and sometimes I wonder..... Why does Hunter have such a bad rap. Lets see the proof , does anyone one have any documented proof of failures, be that rig , or hull. Photos would be good , show me a fallen mast , then lets see the broken chain plate. Hunter must have some warranty claims, people must have these documents.

I have sailed Hunter's , Beneteau's , Jeanneau's , Catalina's. and many more. All had there good points, and points I didn't like , none of them lost there mast or had a hull failure. Lost the mast on my Flying Dutchman once, but that's another story.

So lets see the proof!!

[jackdale]

A Google search on "dismasted" leads to lots images of many different boats. For a Hunter, try this series.

Hunter Dismasted - a set on Flickr

There is no explanation or comment on the images. I do not know which rig it is.

[ColdEH]

Hey.... the guy could have run into a bridge , LOL

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by typhoon

Hey.... the guy could have run into a bridge , LOL

Or a UFO.

On closer inspection I think I see a backstay tensioner, so it is probably not a B&R rig.

[gonesail]

Originally Posted by typhoon

sometimes I wonder..... Why does Hunter have such a bad rap

you can see the proof for yourself .. head to the docks and look a 10 or 20 year old hunter .. they just aren't built for the long haul. buying a new boat for less money is the thrill ... mostly they are parked at a marina.

[simonmd]

Crap, utter crap. Sorry, but ANY boat can be neglected, to make such a generalised statement is very nieve.

I recently saw a 1994 Hunter 40.5 and she was MINT. Rigging was shiny and in good order, NO stress cracks, no blisters, no evidence of any leaks from windows, all interior wood like new, etc, etc. Anyone who doesn't know alot about boats would have said she was 4 or 5 years old max. In fact, when I first saw her, I thought it was a much later Hunter 410, not a boat that has been a family cruiser for nearly 17 years.

The only reason I didn't buy it was that the owner knew what a good boat she was and wouldn't budge on price.

I have certainly seen more respected brands like Swan, Oyster, Moody, etc. that have been treated worse and looked it.

Sure, sail a Swan and a Hunter together round the world a few times and i'm sure the Swan would last longer BUT a Swan costs probably 3 times as much and is out of reach of most buyers. It's like expecting ALL motorists to only buy a Mercedes S class because they are arguably better than a Ford, etc.

[ColdEH]

Originally Posted by simonmd

Crap, utter crap. Sorry, but ANY boat can be neglected, to make such a generalised statement is very nieve.

I recently saw a 1994 Hunter 40.5 and she was MINT. Rigging was shiny and in good order, NO stress cracks, no blisters, no evidence of any leaks from windows, all interior wood like new, etc, etc. Anyone who doesn't know alot about boats would have said she was 4 or 5 years old max. In fact, when I first saw her, I thought it was a much later Hunter 410, not a boat that has been a family cruiser for nearly 17 years.

The only reason I didn't buy it was that the owner knew what a good boat she was and wouldn't budge on price.

I have certainly seen more respected brands like Swan, Oyster, Moody, etc. that have been treated worse and looked it.

I agree .

A friend of mine , actually he has his boat a few slips away, has a lovely Tayana mid eighty's double ender, and it's trashed! What a shame,

So I agree , maintenance is everything!!

Regards

[sailorboy1]

Saying a mast failure of a Hunter is a Hunter failure is the same as saying that a Yanmar engine failure on a Hunter is a Hunter failure! Or a shaft of oven, or GPS or anchor etc., etc. In other words it doesn't really have anything to do with Hunter boats, but a sub system built by another manufacturer, that is used on lots of boats.

A tire failed on my Acura the other day, now I'm going to have to get rid of the POS car!

This thread is becoming just a general Hunter blashing from a small number of people/person,'s based on a real small number of models experienced on. This is excatly what in my research I found is the problem in some circles with the Hunter image!

[jackdale]

Don

Someone asked for an example of a mast failure on a Hunter. In my post I indicated that mast failures occur on all kinds of boats for many different reasons.

I do believe that Hunters are good coastal boats with features that appropriate for that environment. I will not not take another into an offshore environment unless it is modified for the conditions which I expect to meet. I would consider an HC50 as one has done two Vic Maui races.

I agree that there is some bashing going on in this thread, but it is not just the boats that are being subjected to bashing.

Please tell us more about your research. I can only use my experiences in making an assessment.

While the car tire incident is somewhat over the top; I would personally consider not using that tire brand again if the problem was structural.

Jack

[reiner]

I have never sailed a Hunter or a Catalina and I only got into sailing 2 years ago. No way could I judge a Boat being good or not. But I am a coach builder by trade and I went to the Boat show here on the Gold Coast in Australia 2 weeks ago and was very disappointed in the finish of the Hunter. A friend of mine is building boats all his life and was telling me before the show how good the Hunter is. My guess is the standard has slipped to keep prices down but my next Boat is a Catalina. I hope I didn't step on any toes but I think there is nothing wrong with voicing opinions .
Good or bad. So I thought the Catalina was a better finished boat with many extras......my 2 cents worth.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by simonmd

Because a Nauticat is NOT a Catamaran. They are best known for producing monohull motor-sailors.

There's a smart new Avatar you have there Simon....

[SaltyMonkey]

I'll stick to my belief that Hunter Cherubini's are desirable boats and well worth considering.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Please tell us more about your research. I can only use my experiences in making an assessment.

While the car tire incident is somewhat over the top; I would personally consider not using that tire brand again if the problem was structural.

Jack

This thread was part of my research! Along with reading various owner reviews, various surveys, blogs of people out cruising on Hunters, reviewing build construction videos of Hunters, searching the inetrnet for every Hunter blashing thread out there, and talking with various Hunter owners.

Basically my research was getting past the blashing started by people who maybe had a bad experience on 1 boat of 1 model and therefore saying ALL boats from a builder were crap. I believe I could find that same type of example to support anything. And at the start I was kind in the Hunter blashing camp!

What is your research to say otherwise other than that limited on just 1 boat?

On one of your posts you gave an example about the stove on a Hunter. That stove example just showed how poorly that boat had probably been maintained, not how is was built. I could question the opinion of someone who should have been clued in by that stove alone on the possible condition of that boat, or make a claim based on it.

This isn't to say that Hunter probably hasn't built a lot of lighter boats etc designed for coastral cruising, day sailing etc. I am sure with the years they have been in business they have built a lot of crappy models even. On the other hand I can accept that some builders maybe have never made a bad boat because they in such a high end market (like Rolls Royce for cars which doesn't compare to cars in general).

On my tire; I got 4 more of the same made and model! The tire failed because I let it get too worn down. Kind of of like trashing a boat because someone let it get too run down.

[simonmd]

Originally Posted by boatman61

There's a smart new Avatar you have there Simon....

Why thank you, its just missing you at the helm!

[Khagan1227]

Originally Posted by reiner

I have never sailed a Hunter or a Catalina and I only got into sailing 2 years ago. No way could I judge a Boat being good or not. But I am a coach builder by trade and I went to the Boat show here on the Gold Coast in Australia 2 weeks ago and was very disappointed in the finish of the Hunter. A friend of mine is building boats all his life and was telling me before the show how good the Hunter is. My guess is the standard has slipped to keep prices down but my next Boat is a Catalina. I hope I didn't step on any toes but I think there is nothing wrong with voicing opinions .
Good or bad. So I thought the Catalina was a better finished boat with many extras......my 2 cents worth.

Don't know what a coach builder is, but I am a pretty good cabinet maker and have built a few things over the years.

I agree with your accessment of the quality of the Catalinas, but I didn't think the quality was too much superior to the Hunters. The Beneteaus were a distant third, then the Island Packets, then the Halberg-Rassey and J/boats and a WAY distant, plastic looking, butt-ugly Jeanneau.

While the way the interior of the boat doesn't determine how the boat sails, I was very disappointed in the interior of most of the boats I looked at during Strictly Sail - Chicago this year. After all, these boats will be my and more than a few other peoples homes.