Yacht brokers willing to sell used Hunters at all, usually will make
mention of offshore Hunters showing up with broken tabbing, loose decks, flexed
hulls and a host of other issues having to do with structural integrity.

Jax, I personally know a fellow who made structural repairs to hunters in the
early 90's due to severe hull flex.
That said, Hunter has much improved over recent years. I was recently aboard a
few of their DS yachts and I was impressed. I think Hunter has matched the
quality of Catalina (a smart move) in recent years and is better than Beneteau.
I repeatedly see Beneteau's with issues and I'd never buy one.
Anyone going offshore would generally be happier with something purpose
built-you're right on that account.

RB

On 20 Feb 2004 13:31:11 GMT, (Bobsprit) wrote:


I repeatedly see Beneteau's with issues and I'd never buy one.

Having looked in the crannies of Tartans and Dufours at boat shows,
both of which are supposedly offshore-capable, I am suspicious of most
new production boats from the "popular" builders. A backing plate is
not rocket science, nor are proper handholds, lifelines higher than
24", proper scuppers for large cockpits, or hard points for harness
attachments, jacklines and so on. And yet some or all of these basic
offshore design elements are absent on many new boats. I won't even
get into hull shapes and rigging issues. My question is how such boats
get "certified A/ocean ready/whatever" by Lloyd's and so on when they
seem to me to be unconvincingly designed, like most Hunters, for
offshore stresses.

Anyone going offshore would generally be happier with something purpose
built-you're right on that account.

In defense of the builders, they are well-aware that the number of
passagemakers is very small in their target market, and that they are
building perfectly safe boats for 10 knot winds and three foot seas
off Florida or the BVIs or San Diego or whatever. The French build for
the Med for the same reason, although there are obviously a lot of
European builders who assume that the Bay of Biscay or the North Sea
are there to be sailed in and that a "spot of bad weather" isn't a
deterrent.

Even here on Lake Ontario, which is "coastal" sailing, admittedly, but
can get briefly "oceanic" in a very short time, you have the paradox
of what I call the "15 knot rule". That's enough to build, depending
on direction, duration and fetch, four foot waves on the lake with
visible whitecaps, but no spray. At this point, 70% of the available
boaters come in, because their drinks are beginning to spill and it's
getting hard to read Jackie Collins in the V-berth, 15% stay out
because it's fun to sail in bigger air, and they are discovering their
pokey old C&C is taking to it like a geezer to Viagra, and the last
15% are thinking: "Wow, finally enough of a breeze to go sailing!".

At 25 knots, it's me, a few old guys in Niagaras, Douglas 31s, Whitbys
and Albergs and the J boats race-ready C&Cs, Kirbys and Mumms out
there. I tend not to see new boats that aren't race-crewed. But that's
actually when the best sailing happens on the lake

The upside is that with a few exceptions, the potential ocean cruiser
can cross a huge proportion of current offerings off his or her list.
It's informative that both Skip and Wendy on this list have gravitated
to older, conservative designs after their respective searches.

On 20 Feb 2004 13:31:11 GMT, (Bobsprit) wrote:


I repeatedly see Beneteau's with issues and I'd never buy one.

Having looked in the crannies of Tartans and Dufours at boat shows,
both of which are supposedly offshore-capable, I am suspicious of most
new production boats from the "popular" builders. A backing plate is
not rocket science, nor are proper handholds, lifelines higher than
24", proper scuppers for large cockpits, or hard points for harness
attachments, jacklines and so on. And yet some or all of these basic
offshore design elements are absent on many new boats. I won't even
get into hull shapes and rigging issues. My question is how such boats
get "certified A/ocean ready/whatever" by Lloyd's and so on when they
seem to me to be unconvincingly designed, like most Hunters, for
offshore stresses.

Anyone going offshore would generally be happier with something purpose
built-you're right on that account.

In defense of the builders, they are well-aware that the number of
passagemakers is very small in their target market, and that they are
building perfectly safe boats for 10 knot winds and three foot seas
off Florida or the BVIs or San Diego or whatever. The French build for
the Med for the same reason, although there are obviously a lot of
European builders who assume that the Bay of Biscay or the North Sea
are there to be sailed in and that a "spot of bad weather" isn't a
deterrent.

Even here on Lake Ontario, which is "coastal" sailing, admittedly, but
can get briefly "oceanic" in a very short time, you have the paradox
of what I call the "15 knot rule". That's enough to build, depending
on direction, duration and fetch, four foot waves on the lake with
visible whitecaps, but no spray. At this point, 70% of the available
boaters come in, because their drinks are beginning to spill and it's
getting hard to read Jackie Collins in the V-berth, 15% stay out
because it's fun to sail in bigger air, and they are discovering their
pokey old C&C is taking to it like a geezer to Viagra, and the last
15% are thinking: "Wow, finally enough of a breeze to go sailing!".

At 25 knots, it's me, a few old guys in Niagaras, Douglas 31s, Whitbys
and Albergs and the J boats race-ready C&Cs, Kirbys and Mumms out
there. I tend not to see new boats that aren't race-crewed. But that's
actually when the best sailing happens on the lake

The upside is that with a few exceptions, the potential ocean cruiser
can cross a huge proportion of current offerings off his or her list.
It's informative that both Skip and Wendy on this list have gravitated
to older, conservative designs after their respective searches.