I will not buy another Hunter
or any other boat and it will be a sad day for for my wife and I when this one is gone.
or any other boat and it will be a sad day for for my wife and I when this one is gone.
Hunter Reputation
- Thread starter Sailor Joe20804
- Start date
- Status
Good Value for the Money
You know, we would ALL love to have the PERFECT boat, but reality dictates that we buy what we can best afford to actually sail! We have looked around and almost sold our Hunter 40 (1986) last summer. We kept it and are happy... bottom line: Great value for the money. AND we can get out there to enjoy the boat as much as possible! Don't complain, go sailing!
You know, we would ALL love to have the PERFECT boat, but reality dictates that we buy what we can best afford to actually sail! We have looked around and almost sold our Hunter 40 (1986) last summer. We kept it and are happy... bottom line: Great value for the money. AND we can get out there to enjoy the boat as much as possible! Don't complain, go sailing!
Daryl, Thank you for your answers.
I do appreciate your comments about Hunters and I truly are sorry you are having problems with your boat (leaking mast, no cleat, etc.) I had a Pearson that way once and it is troublesome. When it comes to the sale of used sailboats and the value of resale of Hunters, that is a tough bit of data to compute. I tend to think that some of the higher priced boats may indeed have more accessories and of course, the owner wants to get as much of his boat price back. On the other hand, I know from experience it is easier to re-sell a Hunter (I done this three times) because the price is lower and therefore more people have the money to buy in that category. I'm still having problems with your statement in both of your e-mails about "better built" boats. Does that mean the thickness of the fibreglass or the strenth of the fibreglass. Some of the new types of fibreglass are stronger than equivalent thickness of older boats. For example, Hunter is now putting kevlar in areas that might hit the docks or rocks. I don't know of any other maker that is doing that although they may well be some. I've had a certified marine electrician do some work on my boat and he states that Hunter electrical work is the top in the industry. Evan Swans do not come up to YABA standards. If by better built you mean the woodwork, I have to agree with you, although, more wood equates to more weight and more weight equates to bigger sails and gear. I like what Hunter did in my boat (H380) with the wood. It is also easy to take care of. I would like to see a modern day sailboat with no wood inside (or outside). I still remember some S&S boats on Long Island just after WWII that were painted all white. It was cool looking. Again, I appreciate your candid answers. If you have the inclination, talk to us as to what you mean by "better built." Thanks again. Les
I do appreciate your comments about Hunters and I truly are sorry you are having problems with your boat (leaking mast, no cleat, etc.) I had a Pearson that way once and it is troublesome. When it comes to the sale of used sailboats and the value of resale of Hunters, that is a tough bit of data to compute. I tend to think that some of the higher priced boats may indeed have more accessories and of course, the owner wants to get as much of his boat price back. On the other hand, I know from experience it is easier to re-sell a Hunter (I done this three times) because the price is lower and therefore more people have the money to buy in that category. I'm still having problems with your statement in both of your e-mails about "better built" boats. Does that mean the thickness of the fibreglass or the strenth of the fibreglass. Some of the new types of fibreglass are stronger than equivalent thickness of older boats. For example, Hunter is now putting kevlar in areas that might hit the docks or rocks. I don't know of any other maker that is doing that although they may well be some. I've had a certified marine electrician do some work on my boat and he states that Hunter electrical work is the top in the industry. Evan Swans do not come up to YABA standards. If by better built you mean the woodwork, I have to agree with you, although, more wood equates to more weight and more weight equates to bigger sails and gear. I like what Hunter did in my boat (H380) with the wood. It is also easy to take care of. I would like to see a modern day sailboat with no wood inside (or outside). I still remember some S&S boats on Long Island just after WWII that were painted all white. It was cool looking. Again, I appreciate your candid answers. If you have the inclination, talk to us as to what you mean by "better built." Thanks again. Les
What's great abou this discussion
is that posters with 21 year old boats, and apparently their only Hunter, can make general statements about Hunter quality, design changes etc. Can you imagine what comments people with a 20 yo RV would have, a 20 year old airplane, and heaven only knows what goes wrong with a house in 20 years? I've had 3 Hunters, some issues with all of them but obviously I'm pleased with the product and most likely will buy another. Btw, friend has a 45 Island Packet, bought brand new, for more money that most of us paid for our boats all put together. The factory has refinished the wood work for free each of for the past 3 years because of problems stemming from the factory. And before any of you make snide comments, I don't know the issues with the woodwork and don't want to. These are just the facts, ma'm. Go buy a Hunter or whatever you want, and be happy for pete's sake.
is that posters with 21 year old boats, and apparently their only Hunter, can make general statements about Hunter quality, design changes etc. Can you imagine what comments people with a 20 yo RV would have, a 20 year old airplane, and heaven only knows what goes wrong with a house in 20 years? I've had 3 Hunters, some issues with all of them but obviously I'm pleased with the product and most likely will buy another. Btw, friend has a 45 Island Packet, bought brand new, for more money that most of us paid for our boats all put together. The factory has refinished the wood work for free each of for the past 3 years because of problems stemming from the factory. And before any of you make snide comments, I don't know the issues with the woodwork and don't want to. These are just the facts, ma'm. Go buy a Hunter or whatever you want, and be happy for pete's sake.
Followup to Les
I have limited Hunter experience with a 21 year old h34. In rough seas the hull flexed way more than any vessel I have seen in this size range. The wide flat belly slamed on top of waves and I thought the boat would not hold up to prolonged sailing in rough conditions. The h37C, Tartans, Sabres and better vessels don't handle like that one. By the way, I had an early h34 that had the options deleted in later years. Clearly you agree Hunters are easy to sell because they demand less money than other production boats. I never considered buying a new one but have been to many big boat shows. It never made sense to buy a new boat that has a history of being worth less than other in the used market place. I'd consider another used Hunter only because their resale value make them a bargain. Can't figure out why anyone would buy a new one unless they have money to burn.
I have limited Hunter experience with a 21 year old h34. In rough seas the hull flexed way more than any vessel I have seen in this size range. The wide flat belly slamed on top of waves and I thought the boat would not hold up to prolonged sailing in rough conditions. The h37C, Tartans, Sabres and better vessels don't handle like that one. By the way, I had an early h34 that had the options deleted in later years. Clearly you agree Hunters are easy to sell because they demand less money than other production boats. I never considered buying a new one but have been to many big boat shows. It never made sense to buy a new boat that has a history of being worth less than other in the used market place. I'd consider another used Hunter only because their resale value make them a bargain. Can't figure out why anyone would buy a new one unless they have money to burn.
Whew!
Just logged on and right into a storm. I guess this is in lew of a partisan political debate? Geesh, this is one of the largest makers of sailboats (not including Luhr's power lines) in the world, and we're debating their merits? The marketplace has largely done that. Give them AND their competitors just a little credit for knowing what they do, who their buyers are and what they want and how to follow up to stay in business. After all, they are the survivors! My, wasn't that profound? Oh well, back to the election coverage. Rick D.
Just logged on and right into a storm. I guess this is in lew of a partisan political debate? Geesh, this is one of the largest makers of sailboats (not including Luhr's power lines) in the world, and we're debating their merits? The marketplace has largely done that. Give them AND their competitors just a little credit for knowing what they do, who their buyers are and what they want and how to follow up to stay in business. After all, they are the survivors! My, wasn't that profound? Oh well, back to the election coverage. Rick D.
Rick! Thank Gawd! A voice of sanity, reason
and knowledge. Hey Daryl, my names not Freddie. P.S. We've heard so much about your 'lemon' 34 that we know every collapsing rotten part by heart. But, you're the guy who bought it, AND kept it, for how long?,, TEN years!
and knowledge. Hey Daryl, my names not Freddie. P.S. We've heard so much about your 'lemon' 34 that we know every collapsing rotten part by heart. But, you're the guy who bought it, AND kept it, for how long?,, TEN years!
Know what your buying
I enjoy the wide range of opinions on this thread and can relate to both the good and the bad myself. Having owned two Hunters, the present one a 1986 28.5 (since new) I'd say they were somewhat of a price built boat about like Catalinas. Anyway, I shopped for used Saber 28's, used C&C 29's and looked at Tartan 28's. I bought a new Hunter and got a better equipped new boat for the same money. A 15 year loan was available for new but not used boats at the time. Over the years, the deficiencies have been: Cast Iron Keel- a continuing small but anoying maintenance issue; Gate Valves in lieu of Seacocks - Replaced in first few years; Cheap fresh water pump, cheap Sealander Head and cheap plastic hatches - all replaced as they wore out or broke. Foss Foam Rudder - constant maintenance issue. Resale Value: reasonable, to low given the lower 'new boat' price. Positive Points: Standing rigging, mast, winches, Yanmar engine, general working hardware, cleats and winches all adequately sized, still working, never any problems and in great shape. I've added upgrades for sail controls and racing performance and I keep her maintained in great shape so she sails and races extrenely well. I've kept the same boat 17 seasons. I don't see the same performance attributes in new Hunters, at least there aren't many out in front of mine on a race course. The present market for Hunter seems to be convenience 'floating condo' sailing. Maybe that's not a bad thing, it's just not my focus.
I enjoy the wide range of opinions on this thread and can relate to both the good and the bad myself. Having owned two Hunters, the present one a 1986 28.5 (since new) I'd say they were somewhat of a price built boat about like Catalinas. Anyway, I shopped for used Saber 28's, used C&C 29's and looked at Tartan 28's. I bought a new Hunter and got a better equipped new boat for the same money. A 15 year loan was available for new but not used boats at the time. Over the years, the deficiencies have been: Cast Iron Keel- a continuing small but anoying maintenance issue; Gate Valves in lieu of Seacocks - Replaced in first few years; Cheap fresh water pump, cheap Sealander Head and cheap plastic hatches - all replaced as they wore out or broke. Foss Foam Rudder - constant maintenance issue. Resale Value: reasonable, to low given the lower 'new boat' price. Positive Points: Standing rigging, mast, winches, Yanmar engine, general working hardware, cleats and winches all adequately sized, still working, never any problems and in great shape. I've added upgrades for sail controls and racing performance and I keep her maintained in great shape so she sails and races extrenely well. I've kept the same boat 17 seasons. I don't see the same performance attributes in new Hunters, at least there aren't many out in front of mine on a race course. The present market for Hunter seems to be convenience 'floating condo' sailing. Maybe that's not a bad thing, it's just not my focus.
My experience
To answer the Hunter bashers point by point. 1. The designers at Hunter are realists. Under 30' Hunters are not designed for offshore use; they are designed for how their owners are likely to use them. In general, larger Hunters are designed for more rigorous sailing. People who feel a need to take a <30' boat far off shore (all dozen or so) will just have to look elsewhere. Hunter designs boats for their market, that is why they are still around. I have never seen an over 40' Hunter that could not be taken off shore with proper preparation. My H-34 has seen the worst the Chesapeake has to offer, and never given me a second thought. Properly prepared, I would not be concerned with her off shore. She can surely take far more than the wife and I. 2. Quality control, in my experience (two early eighties Hunters, both bought new, still own the last, an '83 H-34), was questionable with our first, a Cherubini H-27. The second, the boat we still own, was just the opposite. Ours is Hull #75 and we had the rudder replaced for the "performance" rudder (free from Hunter, I paid the labor to replace). We had a hole drilled in error through the deck and not patched at the factory, and we had the bow reinforced with additional fiberglass matt to prevent ash canning in headseas - paid for by the factory. No other warranty issues. Some of these are the result of carelessness, and some the result of having an early hull number of a boat that was wildly popular and could not be produced fast enough. Through the years we have had hull blisters, the typical iron keel maintenance, and gelcoat that is not quite as well finished as some other boats - including Hunters. Replaced five perfectly good gate valves (interesting what higher priced boats of the era also used gate valves) after about ten years of use, and replaced the original head and holding tank. Added new sails, single line reefing, and replaced rope clutches for better designed units. None of these issues are unusual, even in higher priced boats. I look at newer Hunters and think the quality has increased markedly since we purchased ours. 3. RVs with sails? Well, our interior is more closely related to Coleman than Sabre, Hinckley, or Morris. I saw that when I bought the boat, and chose to forgo the Chippendale interior. Our boat gets used hard, it would be a shame to pay for a hand crafted expensive wood interior that gets beaten up. I have replaced through the years what hasn't held up. Slow and tender on the water? Tender if you are used to short rigged crab crushers, but not slow by any standard. One of the reasons we still own our 34 is its performance, especially in Chesapeake light airs. It is really fun to sail circles around Valiant 40s in 5 to 7 knots of wind. 4. Maybe the cheapest boat you can buy, but certainly not loaded with cheap equipment. Mostly the same as the Sabre 34 (even the engine) I shopped when looking to buy our 34. Much of the equipment standard on the Hunter was optional on the Sabre (opening ports, anchor, sails, self tailing winches, 110v power). 5. Not particularly maintenance intensive in my experience. Seems people I know with big name boats spend more than I do. My H-34 has cost about $1,000 a year in depreciation. Looking at Yachtworld, I currently see 1984 Sabre 34s selling for $55k to $57k. That boat cost about 50% more than my Hunter when new - say $80k. Sounds like about $1,000 a year depreciation there too. You have to be careful to compare apples to apples when comparing a high-buck boat to a Hunter. High buck boats are mostly owned by wealthy people who lavish exceptional professional maintenance on their pride and joy at the Hinckley yard in Maine, or similar establishment in Annapolis. Hunters are often owned by mere mortals, like me, who do their own maintenance. I think one is much more likely to find a run down Hunter than a Hinckley, hence higher depreciation. Believe me, boats selling for more than their price new (with some exceptions) have had continual upgrades in equipment, and look better than new. Hunter bashers are a strange lot. I guess they have a hard time being just as cold, hot, wet, seasick, and exhausted, with the same view from the helm, for twice the cost of a Hunter. People have to somehow justify paying more. For what I do, the Hunter has been a sensational value.
To answer the Hunter bashers point by point. 1. The designers at Hunter are realists. Under 30' Hunters are not designed for offshore use; they are designed for how their owners are likely to use them. In general, larger Hunters are designed for more rigorous sailing. People who feel a need to take a <30' boat far off shore (all dozen or so) will just have to look elsewhere. Hunter designs boats for their market, that is why they are still around. I have never seen an over 40' Hunter that could not be taken off shore with proper preparation. My H-34 has seen the worst the Chesapeake has to offer, and never given me a second thought. Properly prepared, I would not be concerned with her off shore. She can surely take far more than the wife and I. 2. Quality control, in my experience (two early eighties Hunters, both bought new, still own the last, an '83 H-34), was questionable with our first, a Cherubini H-27. The second, the boat we still own, was just the opposite. Ours is Hull #75 and we had the rudder replaced for the "performance" rudder (free from Hunter, I paid the labor to replace). We had a hole drilled in error through the deck and not patched at the factory, and we had the bow reinforced with additional fiberglass matt to prevent ash canning in headseas - paid for by the factory. No other warranty issues. Some of these are the result of carelessness, and some the result of having an early hull number of a boat that was wildly popular and could not be produced fast enough. Through the years we have had hull blisters, the typical iron keel maintenance, and gelcoat that is not quite as well finished as some other boats - including Hunters. Replaced five perfectly good gate valves (interesting what higher priced boats of the era also used gate valves) after about ten years of use, and replaced the original head and holding tank. Added new sails, single line reefing, and replaced rope clutches for better designed units. None of these issues are unusual, even in higher priced boats. I look at newer Hunters and think the quality has increased markedly since we purchased ours. 3. RVs with sails? Well, our interior is more closely related to Coleman than Sabre, Hinckley, or Morris. I saw that when I bought the boat, and chose to forgo the Chippendale interior. Our boat gets used hard, it would be a shame to pay for a hand crafted expensive wood interior that gets beaten up. I have replaced through the years what hasn't held up. Slow and tender on the water? Tender if you are used to short rigged crab crushers, but not slow by any standard. One of the reasons we still own our 34 is its performance, especially in Chesapeake light airs. It is really fun to sail circles around Valiant 40s in 5 to 7 knots of wind. 4. Maybe the cheapest boat you can buy, but certainly not loaded with cheap equipment. Mostly the same as the Sabre 34 (even the engine) I shopped when looking to buy our 34. Much of the equipment standard on the Hunter was optional on the Sabre (opening ports, anchor, sails, self tailing winches, 110v power). 5. Not particularly maintenance intensive in my experience. Seems people I know with big name boats spend more than I do. My H-34 has cost about $1,000 a year in depreciation. Looking at Yachtworld, I currently see 1984 Sabre 34s selling for $55k to $57k. That boat cost about 50% more than my Hunter when new - say $80k. Sounds like about $1,000 a year depreciation there too. You have to be careful to compare apples to apples when comparing a high-buck boat to a Hunter. High buck boats are mostly owned by wealthy people who lavish exceptional professional maintenance on their pride and joy at the Hinckley yard in Maine, or similar establishment in Annapolis. Hunters are often owned by mere mortals, like me, who do their own maintenance. I think one is much more likely to find a run down Hunter than a Hinckley, hence higher depreciation. Believe me, boats selling for more than their price new (with some exceptions) have had continual upgrades in equipment, and look better than new. Hunter bashers are a strange lot. I guess they have a hard time being just as cold, hot, wet, seasick, and exhausted, with the same view from the helm, for twice the cost of a Hunter. People have to somehow justify paying more. For what I do, the Hunter has been a sensational value.
Comment for Rick Dinon
This type of topic seems to come up around this time of the year, maybe because people are sitting at home and don't have as much to do. Other winter topics: the "Blue Water Boat" ones what is the smallest boat I need to cross an ocean/go to the Bahamas, etc. and discussions about dimensionless numbers and factors This gets old after a while. Yawn. P.S. The 35-ft J-Boat I looked at in '88 has depreciated more than what I paid for my HL-35.
This type of topic seems to come up around this time of the year, maybe because people are sitting at home and don't have as much to do. Other winter topics: the "Blue Water Boat" ones what is the smallest boat I need to cross an ocean/go to the Bahamas, etc. and discussions about dimensionless numbers and factors This gets old after a while. Yawn. P.S. The 35-ft J-Boat I looked at in '88 has depreciated more than what I paid for my HL-35.
Absolutely right, John N....
and it will only get worse as the winter sets in, and daylight savings time ends tonight! Seeing another year of the regular issues just makes me realize that I growing older and better.....
and it will only get worse as the winter sets in, and daylight savings time ends tonight! Seeing another year of the regular issues just makes me realize that I growing older and better.....
doin' the bash
Catalinas outnumber Hunters here on the West Coast, probably as a result of Catalinas being built here in California while Hunters are built in Florida. Be that as it may, this years Baja HaHa, the cruisers' rally to Mexico, contains 8 Hunters and only 5 Catalinas. Say something, no? BTW, the trip home gets nasty, and is called the "Baja Bash." Looks like there will be a lot more Hunter bashing going on after the rally's over next week.
Catalinas outnumber Hunters here on the West Coast, probably as a result of Catalinas being built here in California while Hunters are built in Florida. Be that as it may, this years Baja HaHa, the cruisers' rally to Mexico, contains 8 Hunters and only 5 Catalinas. Say something, no? BTW, the trip home gets nasty, and is called the "Baja Bash." Looks like there will be a lot more Hunter bashing going on after the rally's over next week.
- Status