Catalina 350 or Hunter 36?

[Fred Ficarra]

Yea, but T'

Think about why and how the coasties were awakened and what they just went to do. Unless they had to go seize a drug run, they're heroes.

 

[Tom S]

True.

nm

 

[Wanderer138]

Why reversing out works

Right before you ran aground the boat was afloat. Unless the tide is going out a huge clip, there's sufficiently deep water probably less than a boatlength astern. Get something heavy off the boat right away (on my boat, that's usually me!) and back up, quick! The propwash in reverse sometimes clears the sand out from under the keel. Now, if you happened to run aground on a rock, you're on yer own.PeterH23 "Raven"

 

[Jack Tyler]

Can we go back to the original question for a bit?

I've regularly visited this thread because, being distant from both these products except at boat shows, I was curious to hear how they were viewed given their distinct differences. The content of the comments, the C36 info aside, seems sparse in detail when compared with my expectations. I thought I'd hear about lead vs. iron keels, or the distinctly different rigs (how DO you tune a Hunger rig, anyway? riggers I know are uneasy about this...), the 'bathtub' vs. 'lunch bench' cockpits, the strikingly different sailplans (at least as they look to me; big main/smaller foresail of the Hunter vs. larger foresail area of the Catalina), and the many smaller differences (what about that vertical reefer door vs. the conventional top-loader). In fact, stepping back from the trees for a view of the forest, I was looking for an overall view of one manufacturer vs. the other (warranty responsiveness? repair histories? owner associations? factory support efforts?) or even a general comment about overall appearance - did one make the heart sing vs. another in owners' eyes, and why.I've ended up wondering if we're looking at two loaves of Wonderbread, one white and the other wheat, different but alike. From a distance, these boats strike me as significantly distinct from one another. Why do you think it doesn't come across that way when the question is posed?Jack

 

[John]

We Could Go Back, But....

The original post wanted a comparison between the Hunter 36 and the Catalina 350 from folks who have sailed both boats. Since these boats are more or less competing with each other in the marketplace, I doubt if there are too many, if any, persons who have sailed both enough to be able to do the comparison.Back in 2002, Catalina prepared a PowerPoint presentation on the 350, which included a number of pages of a three-column side-by-side comparision with the Hunter 356, and the Beneteau 361. Here is the web link: http://www.navypointmarina.com/Catalina%20350%20presentation.PDFIt goes a long way towards addressing the questions asked by the poster (all of which were asking about Hunter features). The only comment I would make is I'd take 35 HP over 27 HP anytime.

 

[Tom S]

Jack, you are (kind of) looking at 2 loaves of

bread like you said.From a historical perspective both the H356/36(?) and the C350 have only been out a few years and from a distance I would definitely put them in the same category. Heck what other boats on the market are closer to these boats? These are the closest these boats are to each other. Now the layout and such are a bit different, but lets take a quick look a bigger differences.To me the biggest difference is the rigging, the Hunter is B&R rigged without a backstay and fractional rigged and typically a larger mainsail and smaller jib and the Catalina is traditionally stayed, masthead rigged with a larger jib.Now how and what are the advantages and the disadvantages are really depending on what you do or don't want in the way a boat is rigged - which could be a whole other discussion - which has been done dozens of times. I will say (and this is probably true of either boat) if you want performance and you live in a light wind area, you might want to opt for the regular Mainsail and skip on the mast furling option. These sails tend to lose alot of efficiency due to the lost roach and battenless sail and in light winds you'll notice that. But if you live in San Francisco Bay or really want the convenience then get the roller main, but you might be motoring more often in winds under 6knots.(ps. Both boats have Lead keels)As far as asking about overall veiw of one manufacturer compared to the other, well all I can say is "You must be new around here (LOL)" *pop . That discussion has been done hundreds of times and there is no need to start up here as it would greatly derail the subject at hand. (Just do an Archive search of Catalina vs. Hunter or Beneteau, you'll have enough reading to last you to the next Ice Age).FWIW I saw a 48North reveiw on C350 Here http://www.48north.com/jun_2003/cat350.htmAnd I think this is the link to the comparison of the slides John below was refering to http://www.catalina.com.au/C350%20Page.htm~~ To me these comparison charts speak volumes ~~And here is the general veiw from an Australian Mag.http://www.catalina.com.au/C350_Review.htmI will make one point about Catalina and owners associations. I know them to be *very* strong and vibrant. Catalina seems to keep their models in production far longer than Hunter does and this tends to create a large and loyal following. The C350 owners association has already been created - here is a website URL http://www.catalina350.net/There is also a C350 Sailnet discussion email list of owners, where you could ask questions and relay info, etc. -- shoot them an email and see their responses... Go Here http://members.sailnet.com/email_lists/index.cfm and Join the C350-list

 

[Fred Ficarra]

To address Jacks' bewilderment

IMHO you are not seeing a knock down, drag out argument because the people on this web site are mature, intelligent sailors,(that's redundant) that, for the most part, understand personal preference. How's that?

 

[Jack Tyler]

Jack wasn't bewildered...

...so much as underhwhelmed by the content of the replies. Thanks to both T and John for offering some resources that fill out to some extent the superficial knowledge I had. As I looked at some of those 350/356 references, what struck me was the opportunity for a wide-ranging discussion on many distinct differences of the two manufacturer's products. (I was hardly looking for a cat fight...).Another impression I gained is that both boats are designed, built, marketed and sold with the expectation the primary use will be to serve as a resort/residence/floating condo, with daysailing a distant second. (I notice this is the same theme discussed in Practical Sailor's recent review of the C350, and echoed by several 350 owners who used to race). That's probably a wise choice by both builders, as that's how most boats end up being used. However, Tom's and Jim's comments about their C36's remind me of meeting and periodically rendezvousing with a C36 owner when in the islands three years ago. Despite the inevitable compromises, NONSTOP (he was a Delta pilot, his wife a FA...) was being worked hard on occasion, navigated multiple days offshore, and suffered the normal amount of abuse from marginal docks, occasional unsheltered anchorages and such. Except for the vestigal aft cabin (which no guest liked and the owners avoided), the boat seemed to work well as a true cruising boats used in near-shore waters. (They sold it when beginning to plan a Trans-Atlantic). It would be interesting to hear some similar reports from folks using either the 350 or 356/36 in a similar vein, to better understand the seakeeping qualities and long-term cruising suitability of these boats. Or at least that would be interesting to me...Jack

 

[Mike S]

Website Gives Comparisons

Check out http://image-ination.com/sailcalc.html It allows you to select 2 boats and then it generates a comparison of each.Everything from LWL to Displacements ratios etc.