Hunter 340 or 34 or 33? & Mast Compression Beam

[Alex]

Hello! I am reviewing a 1999 Hunter 340 which seems to be a nice sailboat for my family and for handling with little help from them!.
Doing some research and a bit perplexed about a couple of things:

a) Is the right designation Hunter 340 or Hunter 34?

b) I went to the Hunter Marine site and they don't have it listed as either a current or prior model, but they do have currently a Hunter 33 and they used to produce a Hunter 33.5. Is the 340 one of these two boats?

c) I read the posts on Mast Compression Beam issues. Not a problem I would want to deal with. Is this a problem on the 1999 Hunter 340? Or only in prior models?

Well, I hope somebody out there might have some advise on this. I did call Hunter Marine but they seem to be short staffed so it is hard to reach a live person for general inquiries.

Thank you fellow sailors!
Alex

 

[Charlie13958]

340 is correct for 1999, should have a fiberglass arch, the 2000 340 has a SS arch. Previous 34 was the 336 in 1995 no arch. 33.5 was before the 336. 33 is the corresponding model now. You could check the model nos on this site at the top of the page.

 

[Alex Dare]

340

The mast step compression post problem shouldn't be an issue on the 1999 340 you're looking at. In any event, your surveyor should do a good job checking everything out. Most of the issues/repairs you read about are in connection with the older 80's vintage 34's. There were a few other models effected but not in the years you're looking at.

 

[Steve Dion]

Cherubini's 1975 - 1984 may have a problem with the compression post step in the bilge. The next generation of Hunter 1983 - 1987 (typically 31' & 34') were the group that had problems with the "compression post".

I have not heard about his issue in the late 90's and 2000 and beyond.

 

[mark_swart]

Haha, in fact we have a three page discussion going on about the wonders of the engineering in our 83-87 compression post and mast step. Probably the biggest engineering feat was the ability to channel water through the mast base not only horizontally down the post, but also vertically and out to the sides. But you're safe on the newer one : ) !

 

[Steve Dion]

Mark:

It is interesting that the early boats ('83) did not have much of a problem with the compression post. They changed the mast step and the problems occured on that generation of these boats. I personally think it was a comissioning issue as much as anything. If the dealers would have raised the deck tube AND put a "drip loop" for the wires and provided adequate caulking, I doubt that there would have been so many boats that have had this problem.

 

[mark_swart]

Steve - I'm actually tracking down my leak now, and I think it's the mast step-to-deck, not the tube. I gooped the wires entering the tube with 4200 before my last launch, but wasn't able to get the mast step off. I hoped it was the wires but it still leaks. This week I'm going to apply a thin bead of 4200 around the mast step and see if that works. There were a few other leaks having to do with the large hood and all of the screws that hold it on, so it's been a slow process of elimination.
Also the Cherubini years may have had a more sloped roof around that area, whereas the 83-87 it's almost flat.
How does a drip loop work? I have an access panel in mine and that may actually be a possibility.

 

[Ed Caldwell]

Alex, we have a 1999 H340 and are very happy with it as a weekend boat on an inland lake. If you have any specific questions, I'm in the owner's section.

The 340 designation was used on the 1998 model as well, and up to about 2002. The switch from the fiberglass arch to the stainless arch happened with the 2000 model.

 

[Steve Dion]

Mark:

There is supposed to be a tube (PVC pipe) that extends up 2-3 inches above the mast step. This should be caulked in place so there will NOT be any chance of water getting into the compression post. Then the wires for the mast would come down the mast (below the top of the tube) and then looped up and back down the tube.

Ideally there would also be something in the tube to prevent any water intrusion down the tube.