We've just been to a seminar where a speaker said Hunter sailboats are worthless for ocean and heavy weather sailing because of the way the keel, shaft,and rudder relate (he owns an Outbound 46). Anyone done ocean passages and heavy weather sailing successfully with a Hunter? Please say yes, and how it's done - we haven't done ocean sailing yet.
Ocean and heavy weather sailing
- Thread starter Susan Roller
- Start date
Do a search on this site for postings by "Sequitur". He and his wife sailed from Vancouver to FL, rounding Cape Horn, in a Hunter 49. Their blogs are still at http://www.sailblogs.com/member/sequitur/234839#top
My 34 is definitely not made for heavy weather sailing as is the case for many modern cruising boats. She has a flat bottom with a fin keel and a tall mast for light air. That makes her relatively fast in moderate weather like the kind you go sailing in on the weekends. A heavy weather boat is not as much fun to sail on a sunny, moderately breezy Saturday. It's about having the right tool for the job.
I guess he should tell all those around the world who got there on their own bottoms. My neighbor and girlfriend took their 40.5 from California to Australia for just one example of the hundreds out there along with the Catalinas, Beneteaus, Jeanneaus, Morgans, Cals, etc. What an utterly stupid thing to say.
This old cr*p gets really tiresome. Unfortunately, some people feel the need to bash a brand of sailboat to make them sound like an "expert" to the unwary, and to justify the ~2x $ spent on their chosen boat over the equivalent mid-40 ft. Hunter. What were the credentials of this seminar speaker, including time personally spent on a mid 40 ft Hunter? What was the reasoning of the "way the keel, shaft,and rudder relate" causing an issue with ocean and heavy weather sailing? Be careful of self declared "experts" and spend your time building your own experience, and doing good route planning and weather forecasting.
Just remember the two most widely cited definitions of expert: 1) Anyone from 20 or more miles down the road; and 2) Someone who knows more and more about less and less until he knows everything about nothing.
A lot of good advice so far. Narcissitic, self proclaimed experts usually have an opinion on things they know nothing about and tell you quite vehemently about them from no experience what so ever. That being said, I don't think I've every really hit heavy weather as I use a weather router on all trips more than 10 miles outside the line of demarcation for any given area. If I'm in the ocean for a trip I buy a card for the satellite phone and hire a weather router for the duration. This picture is from a trip on the "outside" up the east coast from Hilton Head SC to Port Washington NY. About 30 miles off NJ with an inland storm.
Attachments
What is important is the knowledge, experience and attitude of the capt and crew; not the particular boat. People have taken a rowboat across the ocean. (I've had some ocean experience; I've sailed across the North Pacific, and in the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico and the carib.)
Allan
Allan
I guess the European Commission didn't know what they were doing when they gave the Hunter 410 an EC Offshore Class A certification.
I have not cruised beyond 8 hours from shore, but I do have a degree in fluid mechanics, and I have enjoyed reading detailed analyses of heavy weather encounters by those that have. I don’t recall a single loss of a boat due to anything that could be construed as the relationship among the keel, shaft, and rudder! What a crock!
I think this means only that the boat has escape hatches big enough for a large overweight guy to get out b/f it sinks, and that the cockpit sole is high enough above the water line for the cockpit to drain at a certain minimum rate. Other than that and perhaps LOA, I doubt it (the rating) has much to do about anything else, including the quality (or lack of it) of construction via materials and workmanship.
Last edited:
Yeah--but you didn't mention the number, duration, and strength of the storms you weathered w/o a scratch. In Force 10 conditions, how did you sail the boat--how was it rigged and what damages did or did not you experience?
While I have not crossed any oceans in my H44 I have had it out off shore in heavy weather. I'm talking 8 to 10 foot seas (short period) and wind gusts in the low 30s for about 3 hours. I won't claim that it was totally comfortable but the boat performed well and after awhile we settled in and knew we were fine. I've also had the opportunity to sail from Spain to Gibraltar on a much heavier Oyster 49 in similar conditions. The Oyster which weighd 2X more than my H44 and probably cost at least 3X more provided a much more comfortable wide (less pounding) and it was a center cockpit that provided even more security. It also had numerous backup systems and a watermaker.
For coastal cruising, going to the Bahamas, Bermuda etc the Hunter is just fine. Im sure it can go accross oceans but if that is really what you are planning to do, it might make sense to get a boat that is specifically built to circumnavigate.
For coastal cruising, going to the Bahamas, Bermuda etc the Hunter is just fine. Im sure it can go accross oceans but if that is really what you are planning to do, it might make sense to get a boat that is specifically built to circumnavigate.
Read the book Sailing a Serious Ocean by John Kretschmer. He discusses what features a world cruising yacht of moderate length that could meet severe weather should have. Hunters are not among the boat designs he offers as examples if I recall correctly; but then, neither are many other brands, including Bavaria, which have crossed oceans. Nevertheless, the cruising version of the Hunter 54 (1982) built by Luhrs is recognized as a world cruiser, among a few other Hunters. I think many would agree that larger boats (e.g., > 42-45 ft LOA) are generally better choices for ocean cruising than smaller ones.
Last edited:
Boats that vary in cost by a factor of 2x are not "equivalents."
Equivalent to a Hunter 40, for example, might be a Catalina 40; certainly not a Bermuda 40 (Hinkley) or Moody 40. Let's get real. Of course, if you're tied to the dock most of the time then one appears as good another, I suppose.
Most modern production cruisers can (and regularly do) cross oceans. Purpose-built blue-water cruisers will usually do it with:
Less preparation
Wider safety margin
Greater comfort
At the end of the day, it always comes down to the people on the boat. When YOU'RE ready, you'll know about the boat.
Less preparation
Wider safety margin
Greater comfort
At the end of the day, it always comes down to the people on the boat. When YOU'RE ready, you'll know about the boat.
Last edited:
Yea I was going to comment on that as well. While my comment above this one is true, I'm willing to bet that most people that rush to defend the 'production cruiser' in this type of scenario have never spend quality time on a boat actually designed to do that kind of work. There is REAL differences that go way beyond skin deep. So while I appreciate a Oceanis 50 and would cross an ocean on one after some very proper prep, it is in no way an Amel 50, which you could jump on today and cross tomorrow right out of the box.Boats that vary in cost by a factor of 2x are not "equivalents."