Bavaria or Hunter Bashing

[RTB]

Originally Posted by colemj

This has been our experience also. We have had people see our boat, come right up to us and start angrily telling us how dangerous catamarans are, how they know many people who have flipped theirs, how they would never be caught on one - not even on a dock, etc. As I ignore them, or calmly thank them for their opinion, they get even angrier and louder.

Mind-blowing, actually - but these people do exist in larger numbers and wider distributions than I would ever had imagined.

Mark

Wow, that is hard for me to believe. We met up with a nice couple from Australia when we spent hurricane season in Brunswick, Georgia. I love their Chris White cat.

They had sailed it to Brunswick after the build was finished in South Africa. We were invited over for meals, did some walks around Brunswick on First Fridays, and invited over for a birthday party for the captain. We never heard any negative remarks from them about our little Hunter. And of course, I could only drool on his boat. I guess even the difference in our "wealth factor" was unimportant in our relationship.

I sailed on this catamaran from Florida to Cartagena, Colombia - The red one called "IMAGINE".

Once I got comfortable, I never worried about flipping. The ride is different from a mono for sure, but just takes some getting used to. Some slamming from time to time in certain conditions, but would love to have a cat over a mono. That was i2f, who also never said a negative word about my boat, but offered only encouragement to me, to go cruising with my wife.

We've shared sundowners on many different boats, and mostly no one talks about boats. Hey, we all had to get there to be anchored close to one another. Mostly, just getting to know other people, and share stories of our adventures. The boats seem unimportant, but I do admit to envy of other's boats from time to time.

Ralph

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Well, I'm pretty sure Ted Turner would make the cut as a "real sailor", no?

Presumably, you've never heard his classic remark to Brit Chance (the designer of my little tub, btw), after Brit's 12-Metre dog MARINER had been eliminated early on during the America's Cup Defender trials in 1974...

If this doesn't ring a bell, try plugging 'Ted Turner', 'Britton Chance', 'taper' and 'TURD' into the Google machine...

:-))

Hey Jon,
I am very aware of TT's remarks, remember I'm an old guy!! Ted was a very good sailor and it was my mistake in wordsmithing as I should have used the word cruiser. Cheers, R

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Hey Jon,
I am very aware of TT's remarks, remember I'm an old guy!! Ted was a very good sailor and it was my mistake in wordsmithing as I should have used the word cruiser. Cheers, R

I don't know much of Ted's background but was he a very good sailor before he was a rich guy or did he become a rich guy because he was a very good sailor?

Otherwise it is very easy to be great in any personalized sport provided one can afford a bunch of minions who will do all the legwork and all one is left to do is to receive the trophy. Sort of like the English royalty and their equesterian trophies.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

I don't know much of Ted's background but was he a very good sailor before he was a rich guy or did he become a rich guy because he was a very good sailor?

Otherwise it is very easy to be great in any personalized sport provided one can afford a bunch of minions who will do all the legwork and all one is left to do is to receive the trophy. Sort of like the English royalty and their equesterian trophies.

Ted Turner is a very bright guy and took on the establishment when he won the America's Cup as he wasn't in the elite group at that time, well not the top group anyways. My Brother did business with him and said he had the attention span of a gnat but was very smart.

[jeepbluetj]

I've a theory that the brand-bashing (or the equally as annoying "vehement anti-bashing") has a lot to do with being bored at work (or wherever).

IOW, if you're sitting around bored, and nothing's currently interesting on CF... so starting a good "huntabenalina's are crap" or "huntabenalina's can easily go 'round the cape" thread helps to alleviate the boredom.

Unlike in autos, there's just not enough data to make data-driven generalizations. When comparing a boat brand that made something like 35 hulls to some brand that made 7500 there is no basis for comparisons. So being bored at work starts to argue "facts" - which are not statistically significant. So a Catalina 30 crossed the pacific - it must be a great boat for that (etc...)

For some reason, folks like labels as a shorthand to assign value to something. We like to know that Fords are better than Chevys. It's easier that way. But boats are so low production and are so different (even within a brand - a Catalina 38 is a radically different boat than a Catalina 36) -- it's gonna boil down to horses for courses. But that's not nearly as much fun to argue on the 'net.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by jeepbluetj

I've a theory that the brand-bashing (or the equally as annoying "vehement anti-bashing") has a lot to do with being bored at work (or wherever).

IOW, if you're sitting around bored, and nothing's currently interesting on CF... so starting a good "huntabenalina's are crap" or "huntabenalina's can easily go 'round the cape" thread helps to alleviate the boredom.

Unlike in autos, there's just not enough data to make data-driven generalizations. When comparing a boat brand that made something like 35 hulls to some brand that made 7500 there is no basis for comparisons. So being bored at work starts to argue "facts" - which are not statistically significant. So a Catalina 30 crossed the pacific - it must be a great boat for that (etc...)

For some reason, folks like labels as a shorthand to assign value to something. We like to know that Fords are better than Chevys. It's easier that way. But boats are so low production and are so different (even within a brand - a Catalina 38 is a radically different boat than a Catalina 36) -- it's gonna boil down to horses for courses. But that's not nearly as much fun to argue on the 'net.

Point well made!

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by jeepbluetj

I've a theory that the brand-bashing (or the equally as annoying "vehement anti-bashing") has a lot to do with being bored at work (or wherever).

IOW, if you're sitting around bored, and nothing's currently interesting on CF... so starting a good "huntabenalina's are crap" or "huntabenalina's can easily go 'round the cape" thread helps to alleviate the boredom.

Unlike in autos, there's just not enough data to make data-driven generalizations. When comparing a boat brand that made something like 35 hulls to some brand that made 7500 there is no basis for comparisons. So being bored at work starts to argue "facts" - which are not statistically significant. So a Catalina 30 crossed the pacific - it must be a great boat for that (etc...)

For some reason, folks like labels as a shorthand to assign value to something. We like to know that Fords are better than Chevys. It's easier that way. But boats are so low production and are so different (even within a brand - a Catalina 38 is a radically different boat than a Catalina 36) -- it's gonna boil down to horses for courses. But that's not nearly as much fun to argue on the 'net.

Bravo.

But the real question about any given vessel quickly becomes "Is it a bluewater boat?"

'Cause if it's not, well, what are we talking about?

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

So even when we do our best not to bash we still end up with bashers. I think we all know that some boats are better suited to one mission or another but just for the hell of it why can't we seem to rise above it and discuss the history of why these two brands got tarnished on the internet. Discovering the history is a little harder than bashing. Many of you have made a good effort and I certainly appreciate that but can't we do our best to stick to the history of why it is happening??

Actually, I didn't see cwyck's post as bashing really. He was stating his personal preference more than anything. Like I said in my earlier post, I too am not a fan of the current Hunter styling. I prefer the look of the Beneteaus and Jeanneaus.

As for the "optimized for dock and anchor" comment, I would tend to agree with that somewhat. The difference is, I don't see that as a bad thing really - especially for a cruising boat. And even with this leaning in the design, these "bloated" cruising boats still typically sail faster than the older heavies.

So, again, I don't see someone stating personal preference as "bashing".

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

I call it "IKEA" interior. Hanses are also notorius for this. But the main culprit ifor this trend I think are the consumers themselves. They have been deluded (self deluded or via marketing) into thinking "bigger is better" and instead of say getting a 32-34 footer from a quality manufacturer they are suckered into getting a 45 Hanse for the same $$. This is the same mentality that allows for proliferation of those "all you can eat" buffets where one pigs out on crap instead of for the same cost to have just a few tasty items at a decent restaurant.

I don't know about the rest of your post - which seemed to take some pretty big leaps from interior finish to deluded consumers to smaller boats to buffets to pig crap...but I've seen the IKEA comment a lot. And, generally, I think it's a pretty weak argument.

If you mean style - yes I can see that. The interiors are definitely leaning toward a much more modernist, European feel. And I think that's great. And I'm sure it will swing back at some point.

If you're talking about quality, that's a much finer line. There's a reason IKEA is so successful. And that is because most people think the style-to-quality-to-cost ratio is worth it - to the point that we put the stuff together ourselves. (Yes I buy IKEA furniture sometimes.)

There's nothing wrong with IKEA-style interiors. It's only wrong if it's falling apart on a regular basis - or not lasting past the time people typically own their new boat. I've not seen those kinds of complaints showing up.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Actually, I didn't see cwyck's post as bashing really. He was stating his personal preference more than anything. Like I said in my earlier post, I too am not a fan of the current Hunter styling. I prefer the look of the Beneteaus and Jeanneaus.

As for the "optimized for dock and anchor" comment, I would tend to agree with that somewhat. The difference is, I don't see that as a bad thing really - especially for a cruising boat. And even with this leaning in the design, these "bloated" cruising boats still typically sail faster than the older heavies.

So, again, I don't see someone stating personal preference as "bashing".

Well it fine you feel that way but it was my feeling that some of the personal views really didn't speak to the history I was looking for. Look I am as bias as anyone but my personal bias's don't really answer the history question.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by MarkSF

This implies that beauty is entirely subjective. This is not the case.

A Jaguar XKE is better looking than a Pontiac Aztec.
A pastoral landscape is better than a garbage dump.
The Mona Lisa is better than graffiti.
Rachmaninov's 2nd Piano Concerto beats the clamour of Universal 3-cylinder diesel.

These things are fundamentally true, not in the eye of the beholder.

Sigh. It's obvious that you're not very good at parties...or analogies.

Hint: When you're drifting toward the rocks after a sheet lets go...the clamor of your Universal 3-cylinder diesel is music that puts Rachy's entire anthology to shame...every time. Actually, The Dropkick Murphys can do the same.

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

I don't know about the rest of your post - which seemed to take some pretty big leaps from interior finish to deluded consumers to smaller boats to buffets to pig crap...but I've seen the IKEA comment a lot. And, generally, I think it's a pretty weak argument.

If you mean style - yes I can see that. The interiors are definitely leaning toward a much more modernist, European feel. And I think that's great. And I'm sure it will swing back at some point.

If you're talking about quality, that's a much finer line. There's a reason IKEA is so successful. And that is because most people think the style-to-quality-to-cost ratio is worth it - to the point that we put the stuff together ourselves. (Yes I buy IKEA furniture sometimes.)

There's nothing wrong with IKEA-style interiors. It's only wrong if it's falling apart on a regular basis - or not lasting past the time people typically own their new boat. I've not seen those kinds of complaints showing up.

By IKEA-like I mean quality not style. I actually like the more modern "clean look" style in my home furniture but a more traditional teak "woodsy" style on a boat. But my biggest complaint re: modern cookie cutter mass production boats is not just the quality of their finish but often incompatibility with the officially stated purpose. On a boat which supposedly wants to be taken seriously as a "bluewater capable cruiser" there is no room for sharp ends and corners in its cabinetry, especially doors into which one is bound to slam and not too infrequently. There have to be handholds and not as an add-on to be ordered separately but as part of the basic package. The cabinetry should not be made of pressed paper, not even epoxy infused. I have yet to attend a boat show where a corner of a cabinet or two on a practically brand new boat did not exhibit signs of delamination or near delamination. I can only imagine how it will look after one or two rough passages across the pond. Of course one can make a number of such passages with a delaminated cabinetry throughout but such defects also speak volumes of what the manufacturer was doing with the rest of the boat's systems and components. And I don't need a long list of photos of rudder failures to know that a boat which has delaminating cabinetry before it even left the boat show has a greater chance of those rudder failures than a boat whose manufacturer paid attention to such details.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

On a boat which supposedly wants to be taken seriously as a "bluewater capable cruiser" there is no room for sharp ends and corners in its cabinetry, especially doors into which one is bound to slam and not too infrequently. There have to be handholds and not as an add-on to be ordered separately but as part of the basic package.

Then you really should avert your eyes from the new "bluewater capable cruisers" coming out. You won't like most of them.

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

The cabinetry should not be made of pressed paper, not even epoxy infused. I have yet to attend a boat show where a corner of a cabinet or two on a practically brand new boat did not exhibit signs of delamination or near delamination. I can only imagine how it will look after one or two rough passages across the pond. Of course one can make a number of such passages with a delaminated cabinetry throughout but such defects also speak volumes of what the manufacturer was doing with the rest of the boat's systems and components. And I don't need a long list of photos of rudder failures to know that a boat which has delaminating cabinetry before it even left the boat show has a greater chance of those rudder failures than a boat whose manufacturer paid attention to such details.

Yeah - I agree that delaminating cabinetry at a boat show is very bad form.

[Panope]

Why bash Bavaria and Hunter?

It may be that people just need a punching bag of some sort and those two brands are the easiest targests.

Growing up in the 70's and 80's immersed in the metal boat crowd, I was taught to bash not just a brand, but ANY boat made of fiberglass. "Tupperwear" was the preferred jab followed by the prediction that they would "shatter" upon impact.

Kind of ironic that the very boats that were being "bashed" (for being fragile) back then are the boats that are now considered the ones that are built like tanks.

Wait another 30 years and it will be very interesting to see what kind of boats will be bashed by the owners of those "old, heavy, overbuilt" Hunters.

Steve

[Polux]

Originally Posted by carstenb

First a disclaimer, I owned and sailed a BAvaria 33 Cruiser (2006) for 4 years. We sold it because we decided we wanted to go permanent crusiing and do an RTW. Therefore we wanted a bigger boat. During the 4 years we owned the boat (bought after 1 season from a german charter company), we had -0- problems with the boat, only regular maintenance. We sailed in fairly heavy weather and never felt nervous about the boat surviving.
...
carsten

The image Bavaria seems to have in America is so bad that when I said that I had bought a new Bavaria 36 and had sold it 6 years later without any problem on the boat except regular and inexpensive maintenance there were some that they did not believe it. Maybe with two they start to believe

Bavaria has a negative image because they are the ones more used in charter and are associated with the typical charter boat but curiously they are the ones more used because charter owners are no fools, know a lot about boats and buy the ones that are less expensive and give them less maintenance problems.

On the other thread about mass production boats and bluewater sailing I have been looking and posting about mass production boats that circumnavigated and the ones that I find more are Bavarias, many bought already used, some after 4 or 5 years of intense charter use.

In Europe nobody bashes Bavarias that are looked as strong boats, just not as smart looking as French boats and even that seems to have changed with the new Vision series.