Is there anybody with experience sailing the Hunter 336 on longer
voyages at open sea?
I'm especially interested in the behaviour of the boat in rough
weather and the trips that owners made at open sea or ocean (atlantic
crossings or suchlike).

Thanks,
Keith

Pull out one of the drain holes above the waterline and look at the
thickness of the hull........count all those carefully laid layers of
roving fiberglass mat that gives this Hunter its tremendous hull
strength at sea.

Now, go down in the bilge on the other side of the drain hole and see
how far apart the stringers and other supporting structures are that
keep that hull thickness from collapsing when that big 20' wave slaps
against the hull like a sledge hammer.......

Ask Yourself - Do you REALLY want to test it to see if it's strong
enough for that wave???......



On 8 Feb 2004 12:11:55 -0800, (Keith) wrote:

Is there anybody with experience sailing the Hunter 336 on longer
voyages at open sea?
I'm especially interested in the behaviour of the boat in rough
weather and the trips that owners made at open sea or ocean (atlantic
crossings or suchlike).

Thanks,
Keith


Larry W4CSC

No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH!
Kirk Out.....

Pull out one of the drain holes above the waterline and look at the
thickness of the hull........count all those carefully laid layers of
roving fiberglass mat that gives this Hunter its tremendous hull
strength at sea.

Now, go down in the bilge on the other side of the drain hole and see
how far apart the stringers and other supporting structures are that
keep that hull thickness from collapsing when that big 20' wave slaps
against the hull like a sledge hammer.......

Ask Yourself - Do you REALLY want to test it to see if it's strong
enough for that wave???......



On 8 Feb 2004 12:11:55 -0800, (Keith) wrote:

Is there anybody with experience sailing the Hunter 336 on longer
voyages at open sea?
I'm especially interested in the behaviour of the boat in rough
weather and the trips that owners made at open sea or ocean (atlantic
crossings or suchlike).

Thanks,
Keith


Larry W4CSC

No, no, Scotty! I said, "Beam me a wrench.", not a WENCH!
Kirk Out.....

Hunters aren't well regarded for serious offshore use. I
wouldn't feel safe in one in serious seaway.

Doug
s/v Callista

"Keith" wrote in message
om...
Is there anybody with experience sailing the Hunter 336 on longer
voyages at open sea?
I'm especially interested in the behaviour of the boat in rough
weather and the trips that owners made at open sea or ocean (atlantic
crossings or suchlike).

Thanks,
Keith

Hunters aren't well regarded for serious offshore use. I
wouldn't feel safe in one in serious seaway.

Doug
s/v Callista

"Keith" wrote in message
om...
Is there anybody with experience sailing the Hunter 336 on longer
voyages at open sea?
I'm especially interested in the behaviour of the boat in rough
weather and the trips that owners made at open sea or ocean (atlantic
crossings or suchlike).

Thanks,
Keith

I own a Hunter 336. They are fine as coastal cruisers, but aren't
really designed for offshore use.

That doesn't mean you can't take one offshore, people are sailing
around out there right now in leaky 24-footers. But I wouldn't take
mine any further than the occasional trek out into Block Island Sound.

That stuff about the thickness of the hull and the placement of the
stringers doesn't mean much to me. The cheapest fiberglass boat has
enough hull strength, fiberglass is tremendously strong compared to
its predecessor, wood.

But, this Hunter doesn't have a through-bolted hull and deck joint. It
isn't made to heel in a blow, there's too much freeboard. I don't
think that the deck fittings are adequately backed to stake your life
on them.

There are boats that cost the same, a little older probably, that
maybe aren't as cushy in port, that would do much better in a seaway.

And, the boat doesn't need a backstay. It's fairly easy to prove that
tripod rigs are *stronger* than conventional rigs because of reduced
catenary forces. However, I think that no-backstay rigs are a pain in
the ass and I'd never have one again.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Paul

I own a Hunter 336. They are fine as coastal cruisers, but aren't
really designed for offshore use.

That doesn't mean you can't take one offshore, people are sailing
around out there right now in leaky 24-footers. But I wouldn't take
mine any further than the occasional trek out into Block Island Sound.

That stuff about the thickness of the hull and the placement of the
stringers doesn't mean much to me. The cheapest fiberglass boat has
enough hull strength, fiberglass is tremendously strong compared to
its predecessor, wood.

But, this Hunter doesn't have a through-bolted hull and deck joint. It
isn't made to heel in a blow, there's too much freeboard. I don't
think that the deck fittings are adequately backed to stake your life
on them.

There are boats that cost the same, a little older probably, that
maybe aren't as cushy in port, that would do much better in a seaway.

And, the boat doesn't need a backstay. It's fairly easy to prove that
tripod rigs are *stronger* than conventional rigs because of reduced
catenary forces. However, I think that no-backstay rigs are a pain in
the ass and I'd never have one again.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Paul

Wow. An honest man. Most guys would like to pretend the boat they
chose to buy is Absolutely the Best Thing Going In All Sea States.

You seem, by contrast, refreshingly realistic.

I have got flak on occasion for being crtical in print of a lot of
today's designs for ignoring things like excessive beam, proper
backing of deck gear, excessive freeboard, and so on. I've been
accused of only liking dark, dank and narrow older designs.

On the contrary, I like designs that won't kill me and will sail
effectively. I am sure your Hunter does that admirably in the
conditions in which you sail. I dock beside a Hunter 336 (I have a '73
Viking 33, which is exactly the same length) and the contrast is
stunning. My boat looks like a pup tent next to a condo. I see (and
hear) quite a bit of partying on the Hunter next slip over, but I
think I miss most of it....I'm usually off sailing.

Glad to hear you are, too.

R.

On 9 Feb 2004 12:24:35 -0800, (Paul) wrote:

I own a Hunter 336. They are fine as coastal cruisers, but aren't
really designed for offshore use.

That doesn't mean you can't take one offshore, people are sailing
around out there right now in leaky 24-footers. But I wouldn't take
mine any further than the occasional trek out into Block Island Sound.

That stuff about the thickness of the hull and the placement of the
stringers doesn't mean much to me. The cheapest fiberglass boat has
enough hull strength, fiberglass is tremendously strong compared to
its predecessor, wood.

But, this Hunter doesn't have a through-bolted hull and deck joint. It
isn't made to heel in a blow, there's too much freeboard. I don't
think that the deck fittings are adequately backed to stake your life
on them.

There are boats that cost the same, a little older probably, that
maybe aren't as cushy in port, that would do much better in a seaway.

And, the boat doesn't need a backstay. It's fairly easy to prove that
tripod rigs are *stronger* than conventional rigs because of reduced
catenary forces. However, I think that no-backstay rigs are a pain in
the ass and I'd never have one again.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Paul

Wow. An honest man. Most guys would like to pretend the boat they
chose to buy is Absolutely the Best Thing Going In All Sea States.

You seem, by contrast, refreshingly realistic.

I have got flak on occasion for being crtical in print of a lot of
today's designs for ignoring things like excessive beam, proper
backing of deck gear, excessive freeboard, and so on. I've been
accused of only liking dark, dank and narrow older designs.

On the contrary, I like designs that won't kill me and will sail
effectively. I am sure your Hunter does that admirably in the
conditions in which you sail. I dock beside a Hunter 336 (I have a '73
Viking 33, which is exactly the same length) and the contrast is
stunning. My boat looks like a pup tent next to a condo. I see (and
hear) quite a bit of partying on the Hunter next slip over, but I
think I miss most of it....I'm usually off sailing.

Glad to hear you are, too.

R.

On 9 Feb 2004 12:24:35 -0800, (Paul) wrote:

I own a Hunter 336. They are fine as coastal cruisers, but aren't
really designed for offshore use.

That doesn't mean you can't take one offshore, people are sailing
around out there right now in leaky 24-footers. But I wouldn't take
mine any further than the occasional trek out into Block Island Sound.

That stuff about the thickness of the hull and the placement of the
stringers doesn't mean much to me. The cheapest fiberglass boat has
enough hull strength, fiberglass is tremendously strong compared to
its predecessor, wood.

But, this Hunter doesn't have a through-bolted hull and deck joint. It
isn't made to heel in a blow, there's too much freeboard. I don't
think that the deck fittings are adequately backed to stake your life
on them.

There are boats that cost the same, a little older probably, that
maybe aren't as cushy in port, that would do much better in a seaway.

And, the boat doesn't need a backstay. It's fairly easy to prove that
tripod rigs are *stronger* than conventional rigs because of reduced
catenary forces. However, I think that no-backstay rigs are a pain in
the ass and I'd never have one again.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Paul

Is there any report of loosing a mast of a Hunter 336 in bad weather conditions ?
And why is this fraccional rig ä pain in the ass ?