Do Hunters Make Good Bluewater / Liveaboard Boats ?

[malbert73]

I DO wonder if someone is trolling. That said, the same group of Hunter owners seems so defensive every time the question comes up. If you love Hunters and want to keep owning them and think they're great quality, who care what others think? On the contrary you should throw fuel on the fire so that they are priced even cheaper when it is time to replace yours.

Me? For initial quality and appeal it is tough to beat a Hunter interior. From the outside, most models are too ugly for me to consider owning. That's not snobbery, or anything like that. My boat cost less than most hondas, despite a perfect hull and deck, solid rig and new engine. So if you proudly own a 2000+ Hunter 45+ we're in completely different markets. I don't want a boat payment, and I'm too young to divert my funds to a new boat.

I just like boats that look good, and most Hunters don't TO ME, so don't bite my head off if you like how they look. If you own one, you probably think it looks just fine, and that's great. Of course, some will argue that high freeboard for the huge interior creates lots of windage, and flat sheerlines place too much freeboard in the middle of the boat where it serves no purpose. Those people will also argue that the subtle things that make a boat look good make them subtly better while sailing at sea. But these are subtle things and most probably wouldn't notice. And who wouldn't like a hot tub in the owners cabin, if only you could get the boat to stop heeling.... . (my water tanks would probably barely fill the thing)

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by malbert73

I DO wonder if someone is trolling. That said, the same group of Hunter owners seems so defensive every time the question comes up. If you love Hunters and want to keep owning them and think they're great quality, who care what others think? On the contrary you should throw fuel on the fire so that they are priced even cheaper when it is time to replace yours.

Me? For initial quality and appeal it is tough to beat a Hunter interior. From the outside, most models are too ugly for me to consider owning. That's not snobbery, or anything like that. My boat cost less than most hondas, despite a perfect hull and deck, solid rig and new engine. So if you proudly own a 2000+ Hunter 45+ we're in completely different markets. I don't want a boat payment, and I'm too young to divert my funds to a new boat.

I just like boats that look good, and most Hunters don't TO ME, so don't bite my head off if you like how they look. If you own one, you probably think it looks just fine, and that's great. Of course, some will argue that high freeboard for the huge interior creates lots of windage, and flat sheerlines place too much freeboard in the middle of the boat where it serves no purpose. Those people will also argue that the subtle things that make a boat look good make them subtly better while sailing at sea. But these are subtle things and most probably wouldn't notice. And who wouldn't like a hot tub in the owners cabin, if only you could get the boat to stop heeling.... . (my water tanks would probably barely fill the thing)

I don't think OP is a troll. Just a new person asking a question that opens old wars...

I love your post. It is a lot about personal taste. One has to make a list of priorities and the figure out how to evaluate. Interior space and layout is highnon my list, so are aesthetics outside and sailing convenience. I have sailed bennes, hunters and catalinas.

Here is my personal opinion, yours may vary.

Benneteau - my favorite. The sailng layout is good, and I love the lines. And everyone one I have been on is "pretty" quick compared to peers. I haven't really evaluated the interior as I am not in the market to buy but if the hunter offers "way" more and better interior its gonna be a tough call.

Catalina. I personally did not like the sailing layout on the ones I have been on, although it has been awhile. My lingering impression was always having to dodge the shrouds when trying to get to the foredeck. But I like the lines.

Hunters. I don't like them aesthetically and like a Volvo I find them "boxy but nice." I have raced against them and raced on them and they get beat a lot. Foot for foot they are not the fastest boats imo. As far as cockpit and cabin. Hard to beat. But I think this is what Hunter is after. Their market is the 90 percent of people that daysail, party sail, weekend sail and socialize and they hit that mark pretty good. In regards to windage, yup. But that's why they got that big space and probably why they are a bit slower. It wouldn't be a deal breaker though as the docking problem is just a skills problem. Lots of boats have windage, just something to deal with...

So dollar for dollar and foot for foot is how we all ultimately fill our wants and needs. Eventually the dollars run out and we have to compromise, even with ourselves.

[cfarrar]

Personally I'd rather be on any Hunter in the Bahamas right now than sitting here in Colorado, on my ass watching a football game, surfing the interwebs, and dreaming of going sailing.

Now that's a great post.

[Jimbo2010]

There are really two issues, one is the build the other is the designer.

I haven't looked but who are the designer(s) of the hunters?

[Lagoon4us]

Originally Posted by Tim Schaaf

i bought my 1980 Hunter (Cherubini 33) in early 1982. I spent the next few years feeling bad, listening to all the nay sayers. Then, I realized that they were sitting on their boats in their slips, and I was out thrashing around SF Bay. So, I started enjoying my Hunter. The 33 happens to be an extremely well thought out and laid out boat. Some were built very well, some poorly, and some in between. Mine was in between, but after banging around SF Bay for six years, I had broken what might break and beefed it up. Since then, I put around 20,000 singlehanded offshore miles on my Hunter, and rode out a hurricane. She never let me down. Although she is now laid up ashore, I still own her.

As to Boat of the Year tests (I have been aboard on one that included Beth), they are just snapshots in time. It is the best that can be done, but the results are a distillation of momentary impressions of judges with varying priorities. In the real world, some boats hold up much better, and do better in conditions other than those in which they were tested, and some do worse. I can list several highly touted boats that turned out to be pretty shaky.

Same thing for statistics from events like the ARC. A great many of those events are mostly populated with relative newbies, with boats outfitted by non-experts, and with lots of operator error. Just read the reviews on "equipment tests in the ARC" or some such. Lots of the folks barely know how to operated the stuff they have. The only conclusion that can be reached with validity is that what was carried on the ARC is what was marketed well enough to pursuade a bunch of folks to buy it, not what was the best or longest lasting equipment. And, it tends to be self perpetuating. This should be obvious!

So, ease off on the Hunters. Lots of them are good boats, good for ocean cruising or living aboard. I lived on mine for nineteen years, so maybe my opinion counts for more than someone who never spent a night on one. Some Hunters aren't great boats. Same for any brand. You can find Hunters all over the world. Maybe not lots, everywhere, but quite a few in many places. They go by the name "Legend" in the UK, by the way. Don't know what the number of places you can find Hunters has to do with anything, however. What is relevant is the number of Hunter owners who are fiercely loyal to their boats, boats that have been somewhere. Now, THAT is significant, and THOSE FOLKS are the ones with something relevant to say.

Agree so ill say it again.....Don quoted....."Arm chair opinions about boats that a person has never been on is worth less than what you paid for it."

So true, boats always seem to attract so much so called "expert opinion".
Every boatyard, marina and creek bank is so full of advice and a lot of it accumulated by people who would love to/but never have, around here we call them "Gonna's" or "Shoulda's"...

As in I'm 'gonna' go there or you 'shoulda' done it this way!!!!

Agree totally we make our own decision to have the boat we do and to make me feel more comfortable about my choice i don't need the world to choose the same boat, "Viva la difference"

[donradcliffe]

I used to be down on Hunters, but this year I met a couple on a Hunter 46 in Hawaii who cruised it down to Mexico, then Hawaii, Alaska, and have just passed me going down to Mexico again. They have had their share of problems with the boat, but most of them have been with the equipment and installation, not with the part Hunter built. I ran into a couple on an Outbound 44 a few years ago-- a lot more expensive boat, but they had spent a lot of their time dealing with similar problems. I think boat boats are capable of circumnavigating.

[elliebell]

Not a troll, can see why one would think that, but I've found that if you sift through all the bs replies, one can still find good bits of information imbedded deep within. I've researched the search engine on this thing and found a similar post, but didn't really find what I'm after in it. What am I after? More information from Hunter owners or those who know one, really. I like to have the most information possible when I make a decision, so while a more specific question might seem more appropriate to you, this thread is booming with info, while a more specific question might eliminate some of the answer's that im getting.

[Hillbillylad]

If you can't be with the boat you love,
Love the boat you're with.

[elliebell]

Plan to use it as a sailing/liveaboard starting in the carib for the first couple of years or so, then through the canal or around the horn, then to the South Spacific 2 people with dive gear and maybe a surfboard or 2 strapped to the deck.... And I shoulda mentioned before, a length of 28-34 is what we require

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by Jimbo2010

There are really two issues, one is the build the other is the designer.

I haven't looked but who are the designer(s) of the hunters?

I think it's their in-house design team, including Steve Pettingill and Glenn Henderson. Definitely have good credentials, but you can tell their design brief starts in the cabin and then builds the hull and deck around the accomodations, rather than optimizing hull and putting a cabin inside. Otherwise they'd be a bit less boxy and wide.

I agree with Ex-calif. For me it would be bene, catalina, and then hunter a distant third. But like I said, I'm a sucker for aesthetics. I would also not take any model under 35 feet from any of these manufacturers truly offshore.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Lagoon4us

Agree with most of your reply, are you suggesting mounting the radar on a pole to save it in a dismasting? Cheers Frank

Hi Frank,

No. The kind of mass production cruisers like Hunters, Benetaus and the like have sufficient final safety and a sufficient AVS but not really a very good one. The boat will rise after a knock down, but I would not want to make that righting force at 90º even worse adding weight up on the mast were it counts for 5 or 6 times more.

That is also my objection to a furling main (besides the rare but nasty possibility of jamming): When in bad weather, when that final (reserve, safety) stability is more needed and you have almost all the main furled, you don't want to diminish even more that safety stability with the weight of the sail all up on the mast.

Cheers

Manuel

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Bash

Uh huh. And it's a form of snobbery that I run into far more frequently on the net than on the hook.

In the real world of cruisers getting along with other cruisers, this sort of snobbery really doesn't exist.

I have noted the same thing.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by colemj

Attached is what an owner of a 2yr old Bavaria found after noticing his steering had become "squirrely" offshore:

You forgot the guns. And what the heck is a "floating anchor"?

Mark

Well, at least it would not feel out

That hull does not seem to me a new Bavaria hull and I am pretty sure it isn't but any boat, specially one that is mass produced has a small risk that something went wrong during its production.

Fact is that now with all the robotics they use on the Bavaria production factory those risks are minimized but off course they will be eventually more frequent on boats like Bavaria or Benetau just because they make about 2000 boats a year while other brands just make 50.

New Bavarias are probably one of the most strong boats among mass production boats. While everybody is making lighter boats (including Catalina and Hunter) to be faster and less expensive, Bavaria is making heavier and stronger boats. Take for instance the new 36ft that is more than one ton heavier than its previous 36ft. Bavarias are also the only ones among mass production boats that have kevlar protections on the impact zones of the hull.

As I have told you I know a guy that had made two circumnavigations with the same Bavaria 36, I had owned one and made 17000nm with it without any major problem and I know about many that has circumnavigated. The last and more curious case being one 44ft, bought after have endured many years of charter hardship and that pretty standard circumnavigated by the Northwest passage, breaking ice and all

I would not carry a gun in a boat unless I would go for the Northwest passage (just for scaring bears) and a floating anchor (also know as drogue or sea anchor) is a basic safety device that permits you to have the boat pointed to the waves in bad weather without carrying any sail, or that permits you to slow down the boat when running downwind in bad weather and big waves.

How to Use a Floating Boat Anchor | eHow.com

Boat Sailing (1908)

[Polux]

Originally Posted by elliebell

Plan to use it as a sailing/liveaboard starting in the carib for the first couple of years or so, then through the canal or around the horn, then to the South Spacific 2 people with dive gear and maybe a surfboard or 2 strapped to the deck.... And I shoulda mentioned before, a length of 28-34 is what we require

As a guide regarding offshore sailing you can look at the RCD EC boats that are certified for offshore work. Normally, regarding the type of boat you want, I mean light modern mass production cruiser, the minimum size of boats that can pass that certification are 33ft boats. Well, some 29/30ft also, but that is not the norm.

I would say that is the minimum, if I was you I would be looking, for what you want to do, for a 36ft boat.

It is worth to know that contrary to what most people think, if you have enough experience, a more sportive boat is more seaworthy, like for instance a used First 36.7. They have more stability for carrying more sail and be faster but in bad weather they still have more stability, including reserve stability and a better AVS, not to mention a better quality hardware. They have also less freeboard and less windage.

Of course you pay that advantages in price (when new the boat is more expensive) and in interior space.[/B]

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Polux

Bavarias are also the only ones among mass production boats that have kevlar protections on the impact zones of the hull.

Well that's not true, Hunter has been doing this for more than a decade.

But then in most of these "discussions" you normally hear of component failures pointed to as to why Brand X is a poor boat and rarely hear about a hull type issue. On my 10 year old Brand X boat the hull/deck has no issues at all, but the holding tank level gauges aren't working so ...... Brand X must be crap.


PS - it is not a given that lighter is weaker just as heavier isn't stronger. Otherwise we would still be driving cars built like a 1950 Buick.