It appears as though the Cherubini models went through a change of construction and materials over the years, ie: molded fiberglass hull thickness, gelcoat durability, integral strength, use of teak, and general structural changes. It seems apparent that the models 75-78 were the best built, 79-81 were lightened up a bit, and in 82-84 the mix was even less. Likely this is attributable to the oil crunch in 79-80, when the factory was forced to cut corners for economic reasons, and chemistry changed. The gelcoat on the earlier models seems to hold up beautifully over the years, the newer models seem to loose the finish ( and the gel) sooner. The 75-78 models were built heavier, the FG hull is heavier, and the epoxies used were stronger. Although they look the same (except for ports and cockpit coaming), the earlier and the later models of the same size are almost two different boats, and they will perform differently. This is my observation.........
- Status
Cherubini structure
Disagree. Have an 81 h25 that has probably never seenthe indoors since the year it was built. I was worried when I put the 4 stroke kicker on that the transom would not take the additionalweight/torque, so I made up alumenium plates 1/4"thick to beef it up. Transom was 1 5/8" thick including ply and glass. Used the plates anyway, but had to buy longer bolts to grab the motor mounts. My take on that era of hunters is "not to worry, the engineers didn't know what overbuilt was yet for a glass boat. egar
Disagree. Have an 81 h25 that has probably never seenthe indoors since the year it was built. I was worried when I put the 4 stroke kicker on that the transom would not take the additionalweight/torque, so I made up alumenium plates 1/4"thick to beef it up. Transom was 1 5/8" thick including ply and glass. Used the plates anyway, but had to buy longer bolts to grab the motor mounts. My take on that era of hunters is "not to worry, the engineers didn't know what overbuilt was yet for a glass boat. egar
Cherubini structure
Disagree. Have an 81 h25 that has probably never seenthe indoors since the year it was built. I was worried when I put the 4 stroke kicker on that the transom would not take the additionalweight/torque, so I made up alumenium plates 1/4"thick to beef it up. Transom was 1 5/8" thick including ply and glass. Used the plates anyway, but had to buy longer bolts to grab the motor mounts. My take on that era of hunters is "not to worry, the engineers didn't know what overbuilt was yet for a glass boat. egar
Disagree. Have an 81 h25 that has probably never seenthe indoors since the year it was built. I was worried when I put the 4 stroke kicker on that the transom would not take the additionalweight/torque, so I made up alumenium plates 1/4"thick to beef it up. Transom was 1 5/8" thick including ply and glass. Used the plates anyway, but had to buy longer bolts to grab the motor mounts. My take on that era of hunters is "not to worry, the engineers didn't know what overbuilt was yet for a glass boat. egar
Invalid arguement
The 25 models were built as an OB aux, the transom was engineered to bear the weight of a transom mounted OB on a bracket. You can be sure the IB larger models do not have a transom that thick. In the mid to late 60s and the early 70s over engineering was typical, by 1979 mfgs knew they could lighten up, and they did.
The 25 models were built as an OB aux, the transom was engineered to bear the weight of a transom mounted OB on a bracket. You can be sure the IB larger models do not have a transom that thick. In the mid to late 60s and the early 70s over engineering was typical, by 1979 mfgs knew they could lighten up, and they did.
Older Hunter construction
Most reputable production sailboats of the late '60s to mid '70s were very sturdily built. Coring came into Hunter decks early (my '74 has it) and is always a question mark but the hulls were always solid 'glass. I agree also that the gelcoat holds up well. Mine has nicks that need patching, from hard use, not blisters. The overall finish is 30 years old and just needs Penetrol and a good buffing job. But I'll comment on this statement of Jim's-- The 75-78 models were built heavier, the FG hull is heavier, and the epoxies used were stronger. I have YET to see ANY epoxy used on my 1974 boat! There's plenty of raw white pine, untreated endgrain and edges, and failed adhesion of polyester-resin 'glass to plywood, but NO epoxy in 1974-75. (Hunter really did not get into WEST-system epoxy till my dad did during the construction of the Cherubini 44 plug and mold.) All I can say is that the next owner will see PLENTY of it--
JC 2
Most reputable production sailboats of the late '60s to mid '70s were very sturdily built. Coring came into Hunter decks early (my '74 has it) and is always a question mark but the hulls were always solid 'glass. I agree also that the gelcoat holds up well. Mine has nicks that need patching, from hard use, not blisters. The overall finish is 30 years old and just needs Penetrol and a good buffing job. But I'll comment on this statement of Jim's-- The 75-78 models were built heavier, the FG hull is heavier, and the epoxies used were stronger. I have YET to see ANY epoxy used on my 1974 boat! There's plenty of raw white pine, untreated endgrain and edges, and failed adhesion of polyester-resin 'glass to plywood, but NO epoxy in 1974-75. (Hunter really did not get into WEST-system epoxy till my dad did during the construction of the Cherubini 44 plug and mold.) All I can say is that the next owner will see PLENTY of it--
JC 2JC II, Penetrol?
There has been some discussion on the site from time to time on the use of Penetrol to restore gelcoat. It seems very mixed from hate to 'it's maybe OK'. What has been your experience with it? I, of course, would respect your opinion above others as you have the wisdom to have selected one of the finest sailing vessels designed (I own a 1975 H25). Thanks
There has been some discussion on the site from time to time on the use of Penetrol to restore gelcoat. It seems very mixed from hate to 'it's maybe OK'. What has been your experience with it? I, of course, would respect your opinion above others as you have the wisdom to have selected one of the finest sailing vessels designed (I own a 1975 H25). Thanks
- Status