Hunter 356 Bluewater Capable?

[smackdaddy]

Yes, we have cushions on the floor in Ralph's Hunter (which is perfectly reasonable...but certainly not the throwing around of people from one side of the boat to the other and the boat itself coming apart) - and we have an old cat that slams around in big wakes/waves and DOES actually throw stuff around, though it doesn't seem to be coming apart. Of course, it's an old cat - so not really applicable here.

So, yes, I'm following along. Still not seeing Keno's scenario play out yet. But I'm open minded.

[Tx J]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

So let's cut to the chase - is your point that it would be okay for this guy to do this trip in a Hallberg-Rassy? It's just the "marginal boat" that's the problem?

Now simmer down Smack, I had no intention to diss Hunters or any other. I was trying to tippytoe around the flying fur here. I thought I carefully worded it to remain neutral.
Although you may note I have an (older) Newport and Robalo (CC offshore fishing). Both of which are built like the proverbial 'brick 'hithouse' compared to many more modern boats. I once thought about getting a newer Mako CC, but looking them over at a dealer, pressing your hand against the hull would flex it kinda scary-like. My old Robalo could probably get rear-ended on the highway and total the vehicle that hit it (and the Newport seems as tough).

Meanwhile, I'm still back on page 7 or 8 of this thread on a slow connection trying to keep up with this interesting discussion...

[Exile]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Yes, we have cushions on the floor in Ralph's Hunter (which is perfectly reasonable...but certainly not the throwing around of people from one side of the boat to the other and the boat itself coming apart) - and we have an old cat that slams around in big wakes/waves and DOES actually throw stuff around, though it doesn't seem to be coming apart. Of course, it's an old cat - so not really applicable here.

So, yes, I'm following along. Still not seeing Keno's scenario play out yet. But I'm open minded.

Oh, I already know how open-minded you are. Insightful too.

So now we know that a couple of Hunter's throw people around, but others merely throw their cushions on the floor. But older catamarans seem to throw everything around but don't actually fall apart. I can already tell we're getting back into the educational stuff now.

[Steadman Uhlich]

To TXJ:
Thanks for posting the graphics and text info on the storms in the area in question. I found that VERY interesting and clear. I did not know there were so many of such strength in that same area. It is very good to know.

20 named storms!
14 hurricane strength!
8 major hurricane strength!

That is some dangerous water to cross!

Winds of 160 MPH!

Wow!!

I would NOT want to be in one of those hurricanes, on any boat.

[s/v Beth]

You know for those prices plus another 100k for extras, I could get that Chris White cat. I know what I would buy.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Tx J

Now simmer down Smack, I had no intention to diss Hunters or any other. I was trying to tippytoe around the flying fur here. I thought I carefully worded it to remain neutral.
Although you may note I have an (older) Newport and Robalo (CC offshore fishing). Both of which are built like the proverbial 'brick 'hithouse' compared to many more modern boats. I once thought about getting a newer Mako CC, but looking them over at a dealer, pressing your hand against the hull would flex it kinda scary-like. My old Robalo could probably get rear-ended on the highway and total the vehicle that hit it (and the Newport seems as tough).

Meanwhile, I'm still back on page 7 or 8 of this thread on a slow connection trying to keep up with this interesting discussion...

Okay, okay - you actually did a pretty good job of being objective.

The reason I honed in on that point is that I actually see that as the real danger in this kind of BWC advice people tend to give (and take). For example, when newbs are told that they'll be "safer in a heavier, stronger, blue water boat" (which typically translates to old unless that newb has an extra mil to drop on a boat)...then the conclusion can quickly become that the route is doable as long as the boat isn't "marginal".

I don't think it's a surprise to anyone that this mindset has been at the root of many SAR missions.

At the end of the day, it's the conditions - as you note - that dictate pretty much everything. The boat, even if it's a "safe, heavy, strong blue water boat", is not going to fix what NOAA has coming your way on that map.

Originally Posted by Steady Hand

I would NOT want to be in one of those hurricanes, on any boat.

Bingo.

[smj]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Yes, we have cushions on the floor in Ralph's Hunter (which is perfectly reasonable...but certainly not the throwing around of people from one side of the boat to the other and the boat itself coming apart) - and we have an old cat that slams around in big wakes/waves and DOES actually throw stuff around, though it doesn't seem to be coming apart. Of course, it's an old cat - so not really applicable here.

So, yes, I'm following along. Still not seeing Keno's scenario play out yet. But I'm open minded.

The cat was definitely not falling apart. Well built but not a good design. So would you rather have a well built vessel but not a good design, or a well designed vessel but not well built?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by smj

The cat was definitely not falling apart. Well built but not a good design. So would you rather have a well built vessel but not a good design, or a well designed vessel but not well built?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Good to know. So that takes another off of Keno's list. Sigh.

As for your question - I prefer both. That's why I bought my Hunter. Heh-heh.

Seriously, where were you anchored in your old cat and why was it so violent? I assume you moved out of there when it was getting whacky?

[Tx J]

Originally Posted by Steady Hand

To TXJ:
Thanks for posting the graphics and text info on the storms in the area in question. I found that VERY interesting and clear. I did not know there were so many of such strength in that same area. It is very good to know.

20 named storms!
14 hurricane strength!
8 major hurricane strength!

That is some dangerous water to cross!

Winds of 160 MPH!

Wow!!

I would NOT want to be in one of those hurricanes, on any boat.

De nada...

The EP zone tends to be/is much more concentrated than the wide Atlantic hurricane zone. It's also trending to more frequent, more intense storms the last decade or so. An area to be extremely cautious about in anything smaller than a DD or CV.
You're in TX, so you may have experienced some tropical chit, albeit less frequently than the EP area. Some of those storms you don't even want to be on shore, let alone on a boat (I've lived/live from the RGValley to the Coastal Bend, every so often we get slammed).

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

So, yes, I'm following along. Still not seeing Keno's scenario play out yet. But I'm open minded.

You're being ridiculous. Please step away from the computer and get out on your boat and spend some time at area anchorages enjoying yourself instead of playing these silly word games on the internet forum with people who are actually trying to help you out. I wish you well, but really all you're doing is.... making nonsense.

Over and out now... don't know where the OP went or if he ever intends on returning to his thread. Left him a PM several days ago, still without a response. Hopefully, he was sincere and not just throwing some bait out on the forum.

[Tx J]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Okay, okay - you actually did a pretty good job of being objective.

The reason I honed in on that point is that I actually see that as the real danger in this kind of BWC advice people tend to give (and take). For example, when newbs are told that they'll be "safer in a heavier, stronger, blue water boat" (which typically translates to old unless that newb has an extra mil to drop on a boat)...then the conclusion can quickly become that the route is doable as long as the boat isn't "marginal".

I don't think it's a surprise to anyone that this mindset has been at the root of many SAR missions.

At the end of the day, it's the conditions - as you note - that dictate pretty much everything. The boat, even if it's a "safe, heavy, strong blue water boat", is not going to fix what NOAA has coming your way on that map.



Bingo.

I agree. I'm making do with what I got, could possibly upgrade to a 'real' BW someday (heh, actually had a Boston Whaler before). Meanwhile, the refit continues and intending to do some moderate cruising. And hoping that my SiL never has to bail my sorry butt out (See those grandkids in front of that red flingwing SAR 'ship' in my avatar?)

As far as rolly anchoring, anybody know how an IP Packet Cat 35 does on the Blue? It has a funny center 'pod/almost hull section' in between the cat hulls up front (used as storage, IP called it a "DeltaPod").


(Not sure if the above picture will come out, if not go to the next link; borrowed that pic from a PNW webpage where the boat is for sale ( Excalibur , wouldn't think they'd mind)

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Exile

Good of you to be so patient [smackdaddy], but it's [anchoring in a wind opposing swell or swell on beam anchorage] already been explained by both Kenomac & Steady Hand, and is common knowledge even for noobs who opt to stay on their anchored boats as opposed to finding a dock and hotel to overnight in.

Apparently, "common knowledge" isn't as common as it used to be. Now, off to bed.

Ken

[Exile]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

The reason I honed in on that point is that I actually see that as the real danger in this kind of BWC advice people tend to give (and take). For example, when newbs are told that they'll be "safer in a heavier, stronger, blue water boat" (which typically translates to old unless that newb has an extra mil to drop on a boat)...then the conclusion can quickly become that the route is doable as long as the boat isn't "marginal".

You are constantly repeating this "point" but without any validation. In light of your recent misleading if not incredulous posts, I'd like to hear who & when you have heard give advice that it would be OK to set out on a potentially difficult or dangerous route, but only if they were in a particular kind of boat over another. All I've read on this thread is the opinion of some that heavier boats may be more comfortable and potentially less risky in difficult conditions, but there have been others who claim just the opposite when it comes to lighter boats.

If you're simply advising caution re: potential deficiencies & maintenance issues to those who buy older boats, then I would agree, whether those boats be light, heavy, expensive or cheap. But where do you come up with these broad generalizations & prejudices towards certain categories of boats & their owners? And who in their right mind would advise sailing north up the Baja coast in hurricane season, for example, but only if they are on Brand X boat vs. Brand Y? Maybe more importantly, who would actually follow that advice?

I don't think it's a surprise to anyone that this mindset has been at the root of many SAR missions.

It's certainly a surprise to me. Do you have any actual evidence from people who have been rescued that the only reason they undertook a perilous voyage was because they were in a heavy bluewater boat and thus believed they would be immune from danger? Or better yet, that some "BWC" as you like to label them had told the rescued people they would be OK in hurricane conditions, but only so long as they were in a bluewater boat?

At the end of the day, it's the conditions - as you note - that dictate pretty much everything. The boat, even if it's a "safe, heavy, strong blue water boat", is not going to fix what NOAA has coming your way on that map.

Yet another restatement of the obvious. Perhaps one might be better off riding it out in their slow, heavy bluewater boat like the guys in the IP who were knocked down three times but survived. Others might argue that a lighter, faster boat might allow you to get out of harm's way. But again, who have you heard advising it would be OK to set off in potentially extreme conditions, but only if they do it in a "bluewater" boat?

I know, I know, I shouldn't pick on you so much. After all, you're just trying to protect those poor, naive noobs who keep being victimized by all that dangerous advice from those curmudgeonly bluewater boat folks.

[Tx J]

Originally Posted by Exile

After a lengthy post detailing all the unusual weather patterns, the possible lack of experience of the OP, and assorted other factors, this is all you came away with??

[SimonV]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Honestly, how do you come up with this stuff (crap)?

I guess we can add: Never having anchored in a wind opposing swell situation to the long list of things that you haven't done.

Example: You're anchored in a secure anchorage, then the wind shifts 90 degrees or dies completely.... your boat is now facing parallel to the 1 meter swell. In the Hunter 450, everything including the people end up being launched across the boat due to the high freeboard, shallow draft keel. Everyone in the anchorage is rolling, some more than others. You don't need to be in a surf to experience this, it happens to everyone eventually and can happen anytime the wind dies but the swell continues.

Seriously.... Have you spent any time at anchor??

Any vessel will roll in this situation. A prudent sailer would put out a stern anchor holding bow too.

Sent from my GT-N7105T using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app