Hunter 42 for Offshore Work?

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

I agree there is a lot of Hunter bashing. As stated above, they are noted for there comfortable interiors. As well as the Hunter bashers, there is an equal amount of folks who claim they would not hesitate to take theirs offshore...but don't. However, you mentioned that your wife liked the Passport. That is a true offshore vessel.

NOOOO. They are also built to GO FAST and RESPOND QUICKLY! My 2983 31' Hunter is a firecracker and the 33' Cherubini even more so.

What the older Hunters lack is sexy lines on the water. The same traits (ex: fin keel) that cause them to respond so fast also make them pretty tender in rough water. I would not want to be on MY 31' Hunter in the Indian Ocean or going around the tip of Africa or South America although I'm sure there are people here who could pull it off (my boat does have a back stay).

By the time you get to 42 ft it could be an entirely different story.

I had three requirements for my live aboard -- good space below, spunky and responsive when sailing -- and beautiful lines on the water. I had to give something up, and it was gorgeous lines.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

Yes Jack that was a good thread. In fact it led me past my Hunter hating thinking and allowed me to get my Hunter 410 which is a great boat (in fact I started that thread asking about the same model as the subject of this thread)! I question why you always appear willing to jump onto the boat trashing party.

Not all Hunters are good passage boats because they sell to all markets, which does not make the ones they make for passages bad boats! But this thread isn't about all those entry level starter boats it's about a Hunter that was built as a passage maker!

Exactly. I warn people sailing on mine for the first time -- if you are prone to sea sickness take something before you get on my boat, because if it gets rough it's quite the ride ...

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

I would bet your problem isn't with the B&R Rig, its' with swept back spreaders. Lots of other boats have swept back spreaders and you learn to sail around the loss of using wing-on-wing as a "standard" trim (it can be sailed wing-on-wing but you have to really pay attention). Normally I only find myself limited with coming back in though a tight channel. In that case I either center the main and sail on the head sail, or since that means I only have a short distance to get in I just start the engine 1/2 mile sooner than I originally planned to. Definitely not something worth using as the go/no-go for deciding what boat to buy!

Exactly right. It WILL sail wing on wing but I only do it if there's no other choice, and I use a preventer.

Like when the engine died and the wind would be right on our tail through a narrow channel with "there be dragons to grab yer keel" on both sides of it ...

[GeoPowers]

I don't understand why some people can't understand that modern production boats, including Hunters, regularly and safely cross oceans.

On the other hand I also can't understand those modern production boat owners who claim that their production boat can cross oceans as good or better than a purpose-built vessel which sacrifices certain in-port or at anchor comforts for additional levels of performance, safety, etc while at sea.

Every boat is a tradeoff.

Frank

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by LakeSuperior

I think the OP asked for both positive and negative points about the Hunter. The post you are referring to references Hunter sea berth options and I think that would be informative to the OP who wishes to sail the Pacific.

I think that most people would not consider posting on this thread even if they had some good information to offer the OP.

Please consider letting the OP moderate the thread, he started it.

I feel the post about the berths was being used as "why the Hunter aren't good passage maker". It used bold highlights to the point Hunter made that they weren't building boats for the 3% so they don't build dedicated sea berths into the boats. This is absolutely correct! But if you read the whole answer you find that the boats have a fine settee that makes a good sea berth if you install a lee cloth, and that the other has a drop down table that becomes another good sea berth (this is the 1 I use on my boat). So the boat has as good of sea berths as 99% of boats.

On the flip side would a cruiser want a boat in the 40-45' range that has build in sea berths instead of a normal salon? I sure wouldn't! I would much prefer to have the space and comfort of a real salon 99% of the time and convert it to sea berth 1% of time than to have to put up with the loss of the salon 99% of the time to get a sea berth than is just a little better the 1% of the time!

Far as the weather issue; I feel you made this as your way of basically saying the Hunter construction wasn't strong. To that all I can say, as I already challenged, is to say you are wrong and are making some assumption based on an internet forum thread.

I only post on these to try to say to those that just go the all Hunter's are not capable as wrong so others doing research read other view points. It wasn't that long ago that I too was a Hunter basher, because I learned to be one on internet forums. But because the value of the boats looked good, and the layout was great, I took another look and in the end could only find internet forum experts to support the Hunter hater position.

Not all Hunter's are good, some may even be bad! But the good boats are good and that is just the facts!

[Randyonr3]

Originally Posted by LakeSuperior

I started out simply try to contribute some things for the OP to consider and got hit with lots of hostility.

Go Back to your post in #32 of this thread and then post this again..

If you cant post information true to the origional subject, good or bad and stay away from hearsay, or your openion without showing knowledge of the subject, it probably best if you pass on it..
Your information of weather and the conditions of the north Atlantic were duly noted, and additional information was given as to take a more reasonable route.. Dont keep pressing the issues..

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by GeoPowers

I don't understand why some people can't understand that modern production boats, including Hunters, regularly and safely cross oceans.

On the other hand I also can't understand those modern production boat owners who claim that their production boat can cross oceans as good or better than a purpose-built vessel which sacrifices certain in-port or at anchor comforts for additional levels of performance, safety, etc while at sea.

Every boat is a tradeoff.

Frank

No one is saying that. I said that *I* would not want to do it. My 31' is not what most people would call a bluewater boat. Sail a tender boat around the world and you need really good sailing skills. I've been sailing for about 5, and it's not the optimal boat for that.

Please don't turn that into "Hunters can't do ... whatever." That's not what I said. I recognize both my own experience level and the natural traits of my boat, that's all.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

So, did you real all of the interview?

I read the article; that is why I posted it. I thought that it was quite informative. I especially liked the idea that the "charter version" with twin aft cabins would make for suitable sea berths - spot on.

The comments about the knockdown with little damage also struck me.

BTW - I would sail an HC 50. One did the 2010 Vic Maui race. I saw her in Lahaina when we were getting Turicum ready to the delivery back to Vancouver. I am not sure what mods had to be done to get it to ISAF Category 1 specs.

As an aside - ISAF Category 1 rules are good place to get some ideas for safety modifications. It is not gospel; I would not necessarily strip the vinyl off the lifelines.

Give it up and go trash something else as you sail on "other people's boats"! You have limited experience on the boats based on only 1 boat (that you still chose to go on), yet somehow know more than those of us telling you otherwise and feel that makes you an expert to trash a whole line of boats

I have taken only one Hunter into blue water. I have sailed others in the Gulf Islands while conducting skippered charters.

Why do you feel the need to do this??????? Because you clearly from this thread and others on CF and other sites feel the need to be the expert when it comes to bashing Hunters in general!

I wish you would stop so I could stop responding so people who are interested in the models could make a decision for themselves based on their own eyes and real reviews.

The opportunity to teach on "other peoples' boat" has given me the chance to assess what world for me and what does not work for me. On SN I recently posted some of my views on Catalinas when some asked specifically about them.

I have not yet sailed the perfect offshore boat. Each has had something that I found not to my liking. For example, the Nauticat 37 has both heads on the port side. The galley sink is outboard and fills with water when heeled. All the sink drains have to be closed underway. I like centre line sinks, especially in the galley. The Saga 409 does have a nice centre line sink in a small galley, but the head is too big; it is hard to use on a starboard tack. The head is also fresh water and electric; I like neither. The sleeping arrangement on a Hylas 46 is similar to some Hunters; island queen (unusable when heeled) and a pullman (unusable in a port tack.) As race boat, the C&C 44 is just uncomfortable as the interior has been gutted. On the next return, I have asked that dodger be re-installed to protect us from the seas on the upwind course back home. I have sailed Turicum (C&C 44) in coastal cruising trim, she was quite comfortable. I have taken each of these boats into bluewater, I have done passages on the Hylas (Newport, RI to St. Barths via Bermuda) and the C&C (Lahaina to Vancouver).

Yes, I have some strong preferences in sail plans, deck layouts and interior layouts.

The OP in the thread asked about Hunters. I responded about Hunters saying that I would not take a Hunter offshore unless modified. I also listed some of the modifications.

I know you put a lot of thought into buying your Hunter and I hope you love it, as I hope anyone who buys a boat loves theirs. My comments are not meant to be personal.

[GeoPowers]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

No one is saying that. I said that *I* would not want to do it. My 31' is not what most people would call a bluewater boat. Sail a tender boat around the world and you need really good sailing skills. I've been sailing for about 5, and it's not the optimal boat for that.

Please don't turn that into "Hunters can't do ... whatever." That's not what I said. I recognize both my own experience level and the natural traits of my boat, that's all.

Unless someone quotes your post (such as I did here), or addresses you by name, don't assume they are replying to your post. My comments were general in nature to Production-Blue water Internet discussions. Thanks-

Frank

[Randyonr3]

Jackdale, coments are true to an extent, and not knocking him personally but you have to look at where the information is comming from..
Meaning a delivery skipper.. He looks for that trate that will make his dilevery smoth, fast and without issues.. what is inportant to him may have no merrit to any person other than another delivery skipper...
Sea berths being one issue.. to him, a quality issue but to myself, I could care less.. a center line Galley.. another issue as we only spend a limmited time under sail and the major part of use is while at anchor... hence, a center line galley means little..
The issue of weather conditions are another.. as where we meander amoung the anchorages, and are on more of a sight seeing, and lolly gagging around trip to the next anchorage, His goal is to deliver, in swift comparison so a more direct route and conditions come into play..
for us, we can set at anchor, or alter our destination where he cannot..

[jackdale]

The original post

Originally Posted by montenido

Hi all,

I am now boatless and looking for the next one. My wife looked at the older CSY 44 that I am so enthralled with and was less than enchanted. The C36 that we just sold was pretty perfect inside and out, so she would like something more along those lines in appearance/condition.

Trouble is, I am looking for something for cruising, including the pacific puddle jump. There are lots of really nice Hunters available, but I know that they are not held in high regard. Please give me some good arguments for or against such a boat. I know that many Catalina 42s make the jump with no issues.

Thanks, Bill

And the title of the thread is: Hunter 42 for Offshore Work?

He appears to be one of the 3% to whom Jim Bohart refers in the article I posted.

Mostly the folks buying new boats today are not in the 3% or less category that will ever cross an ocean.

[Rakuflames]

"

No one is saying that. I said that *I* would not want to do it. My 31' is not what most people would call a bluewater boat. Sail a tender boat around the world and you need really good sailing skills. I've been sailing for about 5, and it's not the optimal boat for that.

Please don't turn that into "Hunters can't do ... whatever." That's not what I said. I recognize both my own experience level and the natural traits of my boat, that's all.
Unless someone quotes your post (such as I did here), or addresses you by name, don't assume they are replying to your post. My comments were general in nature to Production-Blue water Internet discussions. Thanks-

Frank "


What is your problem? I was clarifying what *I* said -- and by the way, my boat IS a Hunter. Please don't try to micromanage how I respond. thanks.

[MikeinLA]

Originally Posted by montenido

Hi all,

I am now boatless and looking for the next one. My wife looked at the older CSY 44 that I am so enthralled with and was less than enchanted. The C36 that we just sold was pretty perfect inside and out, so she would like something more along those lines in appearance/condition.

Trouble is, I am looking for something for cruising, including the pacific puddle jump. There are lots of really nice Hunters available, but I know that they are not held in high regard. Please give me some good arguments for or against such a boat. I know that many Catalina 42s make the jump with no issues.

Thanks, Bill

Hi Bill! I will miss your avatar on the C36 forum. Not to thread-jack, but since we have all these Hunter folks here, I'd like to ask. How does the Passage 42 handle around the dock? I've also thought of a Passage 42 as a move from my Cat 36, but I do like to daysail single handed from time to time. I've had one or the other Cat 36 for over 25 years and it handles like a sportscar. Think I'll have any trouble getting the "big girl" in and out of the slip? Any comments welcome, we now return to our regularly scheduled argument.

Mike

[montenido]

Hi Mike, thanks for ths shout out. I figured that if I didn't sell my boat, all I would do is think about going bluewater, and never do it. So having no boat, but some money, opens up a lot of options. As I stated in the beginning of this post, I would like something that suits my wife in the comfort areas while still beiing bluewater capable.

I still don't think my question was answered regarding the Hunter Passage 42. Yes, some would take it offshore, but that can apply to most boats.

Was it built to take on offshore conditions (not rounding the Horns)?

Cheers, Bill

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by montenido

Was it built to take on offshore conditions (not rounding the Horns)?

Cheers, Bill

The conventional wisdom is no but then, neither are most of the boats I've seen in the Pacific no one ever heard of.

There is no definitive set of requirements with which everyone would accept and the ones which do exist regarding construction and seaworthiness all rate Hunters as offshore so any answer you get is necessarily subjective.

The problem is the question - as others have eluded, if you need to ask, you may be the limiting factor (no offense intended).