I am looking into buying a large boat for extened sailing and like the looks of the larger hunters but i have heard it all so i ask you is it a blue water boat?
- Status
Can Be
I guess the short answer is that there are plenty of them out there doing just that. I would suggest you would want to outfit it with additional equipment that you would want to have in any offshore cruising boat. Things like solar panels, watermaker, big battery banks and the right stuff to charge them, upgraded sails with triple reef in the main (or battened furling) extra headsail and storm sail, extra anchoring gear, SSB, maybe a small genset, etc. That's assuming you want to take advantage of all the comfy stuff these large production boats have. So I guess the point is that the base boat is just the starting place for extended cruising, and while you really don't need all that stuff, it is what most of the extended cruisers wind up with these days. The boats are rated offshore, as are its major competitors, but the market is focused on what most people want and that doesn't typically involve long term cruising. So, you have to do some work to get there. Just consider your use, interview people, establish a budget, shop the market and you'll know what you want. Rick D.
I guess the short answer is that there are plenty of them out there doing just that. I would suggest you would want to outfit it with additional equipment that you would want to have in any offshore cruising boat. Things like solar panels, watermaker, big battery banks and the right stuff to charge them, upgraded sails with triple reef in the main (or battened furling) extra headsail and storm sail, extra anchoring gear, SSB, maybe a small genset, etc. That's assuming you want to take advantage of all the comfy stuff these large production boats have. So I guess the point is that the base boat is just the starting place for extended cruising, and while you really don't need all that stuff, it is what most of the extended cruisers wind up with these days. The boats are rated offshore, as are its major competitors, but the market is focused on what most people want and that doesn't typically involve long term cruising. So, you have to do some work to get there. Just consider your use, interview people, establish a budget, shop the market and you'll know what you want. Rick D.
Hunter Bashing
It seems that "blue water" boat people enjoy bashing Hunters. This is clearly evident in an exchange between Cruising World Magazine and Jim Bohart of Hunter (see related link). The related link answers most of your questions. I love our 430 and what is more important is my wife loves it. She called our Catalina a cave. Now we spend much more time on the boat because she enjoys being on the boat.
It seems that "blue water" boat people enjoy bashing Hunters. This is clearly evident in an exchange between Cruising World Magazine and Jim Bohart of Hunter (see related link). The related link answers most of your questions. I love our 430 and what is more important is my wife loves it. She called our Catalina a cave. Now we spend much more time on the boat because she enjoys being on the boat.
Yes....
Karen Thorndike sailed around the world in a 36 foot cutter rigged sloop with a 42 gallon fresh water tank, no water maker, no solar panels, but she did have a steering vane. Like Rick said it all depends upon your budget and your comfort needs. Karen did back all her through hulls with SS plates for added strength. Her propulsion engine was her genset. She had very low DC power consumption requirements. Although she had jack lines, she preferred direct clip in points. These become some of the equipment additions that do not come with most any boat, including what some would refer to as blue water designed boats. Lee clothes, PFDs with built in harness, tethers, jack lines, a way to climb the stick while at sea, life raft, etc. There are several good books written by veteran skippers that inform you on what they found necessary for their needs. Check out WM for them. Terry
Karen Thorndike sailed around the world in a 36 foot cutter rigged sloop with a 42 gallon fresh water tank, no water maker, no solar panels, but she did have a steering vane. Like Rick said it all depends upon your budget and your comfort needs. Karen did back all her through hulls with SS plates for added strength. Her propulsion engine was her genset. She had very low DC power consumption requirements. Although she had jack lines, she preferred direct clip in points. These become some of the equipment additions that do not come with most any boat, including what some would refer to as blue water designed boats. Lee clothes, PFDs with built in harness, tethers, jack lines, a way to climb the stick while at sea, life raft, etc. There are several good books written by veteran skippers that inform you on what they found necessary for their needs. Check out WM for them. Terry
I have to ask
What do YOU think a bluewater boat is? If you're ready to buy a boat and you're asking because you don't know, then I'd suggest that the opinions of others will be a dangerous substitute for the knowledge to go offshore safely. Asking to compare notes is one thing but do you already have a good idea of the onboard systems you need and how they should be configured? Do you know the tankages you need? Do you have an idea of the scantlings you'd want in the boat that's being pounded endlessly? If you can answer those questions comprehensively then I'll wager that you will already know whether a particular Hunter model is a bluewater boat for YOU and that the opinions of the Hunter bashers and faithful alike won't affect your decision making process one way or another. The most heavily built boat in the world won't help you unless you have the skill set to make good decisions in heavy weather conditions or when stuff breaks. Please know that I post this respectfully. If I've misunderstood then I apologize in advance. I'm also not preaching from any pulpit because although I've logged many thousands of miles in the past several years I don't consider myself a bluewater cruiser. For that perspective maybe we need to hear from Henk or Fred. In any case, fair winds and good luck.
What do YOU think a bluewater boat is? If you're ready to buy a boat and you're asking because you don't know, then I'd suggest that the opinions of others will be a dangerous substitute for the knowledge to go offshore safely. Asking to compare notes is one thing but do you already have a good idea of the onboard systems you need and how they should be configured? Do you know the tankages you need? Do you have an idea of the scantlings you'd want in the boat that's being pounded endlessly? If you can answer those questions comprehensively then I'll wager that you will already know whether a particular Hunter model is a bluewater boat for YOU and that the opinions of the Hunter bashers and faithful alike won't affect your decision making process one way or another. The most heavily built boat in the world won't help you unless you have the skill set to make good decisions in heavy weather conditions or when stuff breaks. Please know that I post this respectfully. If I've misunderstood then I apologize in advance. I'm also not preaching from any pulpit because although I've logged many thousands of miles in the past several years I don't consider myself a bluewater cruiser. For that perspective maybe we need to hear from Henk or Fred. In any case, fair winds and good luck.
CWBB article
What a great write up, thanks for providing the link Rob. I don't believe I had ever heard of that article, although I've been on this website well back into the mid/late 90's when Jim Bohart was a regular on HOW. Some great info. on how our Hunters are built, tested, designed, etc.
What a great write up, thanks for providing the link Rob. I don't believe I had ever heard of that article, although I've been on this website well back into the mid/late 90's when Jim Bohart was a regular on HOW. Some great info. on how our Hunters are built, tested, designed, etc.
Very Interesting Exchange
I agree, great link to that Cruising World article Rob. Thanks, although I spent way too much time here at work reading through it! I don't count my wife and I as potential "blue water" sailors or cruisers. We will likely never go more than 7 days without seeing land of some kind, and I will take great pains to avoid any kind of Force 8 winds and 25' seas! The point is, I don't even count myself as a target of this discussion. That being said, I do weary of these questions being put to Hunter, Catalina, Beneteau, (insert your "production" boat name here) time and time again. What exactly is it that all Hunters are supposed to be able to "take" that other "blue-water" boats supposedly can take? In other words, THE QUESTION IS FLAWED. This question reminds me of the old fiberglass naysayers, who felt FRP built hulls would never be strong enough for ocean going boats. The reality is this: if I am in conditions that are harsh enough for me to be concerned about dismasting, a knockdown, or a rudder falling off, then there are about a thousand other things on ANY boat that have nothing to do with the builder that will likely fail FIRST and have much more dire consequences to me as the crew. For instance, a $20 through hull valve, or a $10 vent hose. And I am worrying about those more than I am the fact that the arch doesn't look good! Why is the boat itself so often blamed for the errors or just plain bad luck of the human crew? I think a good dose of fear might be a good thing. Think Titanic here, and pardon the obvious cliche. Hunter knows its market and builds its boats to satisfy that market. Why are they constantly criticized for that? It's like criticizing Toyota for building the Camry without roll bars and 5 point seat belts. Take care, Ron
I agree, great link to that Cruising World article Rob. Thanks, although I spent way too much time here at work reading through it! I don't count my wife and I as potential "blue water" sailors or cruisers. We will likely never go more than 7 days without seeing land of some kind, and I will take great pains to avoid any kind of Force 8 winds and 25' seas! The point is, I don't even count myself as a target of this discussion. That being said, I do weary of these questions being put to Hunter, Catalina, Beneteau, (insert your "production" boat name here) time and time again. What exactly is it that all Hunters are supposed to be able to "take" that other "blue-water" boats supposedly can take? In other words, THE QUESTION IS FLAWED. This question reminds me of the old fiberglass naysayers, who felt FRP built hulls would never be strong enough for ocean going boats. The reality is this: if I am in conditions that are harsh enough for me to be concerned about dismasting, a knockdown, or a rudder falling off, then there are about a thousand other things on ANY boat that have nothing to do with the builder that will likely fail FIRST and have much more dire consequences to me as the crew. For instance, a $20 through hull valve, or a $10 vent hose. And I am worrying about those more than I am the fact that the arch doesn't look good! Why is the boat itself so often blamed for the errors or just plain bad luck of the human crew? I think a good dose of fear might be a good thing. Think Titanic here, and pardon the obvious cliche. Hunter knows its market and builds its boats to satisfy that market. Why are they constantly criticized for that? It's like criticizing Toyota for building the Camry without roll bars and 5 point seat belts. Take care, Ron
Yeah Ron (and Rick)!!!
So many times, people from other forums and/or with their own agendas get on here and try to stir things up. Who knows or who cares why? I really believe most of them don't even own a boat, if they do, they own something they bought because of something they read somewhere in an old article or an old sailing book that said "THIS" is the only seaworthy boat design known to man and they are too stupid to open their eyes to PROGRESS,(oh, and by the way, they are STUCK with this tub and can't get rid of it!!!). I thought the best part of the Bohart article was about the 3%... YES 3%... of people who actually go "blue water cruising". What company in their right mind would design their boats for 3% of potential buyers? It has been pointed out in many places other than here that in the long run, "coastal cruising" is a much more demanding arena than offshore until you factor in Cape Horn, Cape of Good Hope, the roaring 40's, etc. I'm with you Ron and Rick, I wish these people would stay on their little POS website that does NOTHING to further our hobby, passion, whatever it is to most of us and GET A LIFE!!!
So many times, people from other forums and/or with their own agendas get on here and try to stir things up. Who knows or who cares why? I really believe most of them don't even own a boat, if they do, they own something they bought because of something they read somewhere in an old article or an old sailing book that said "THIS" is the only seaworthy boat design known to man and they are too stupid to open their eyes to PROGRESS,(oh, and by the way, they are STUCK with this tub and can't get rid of it!!!). I thought the best part of the Bohart article was about the 3%... YES 3%... of people who actually go "blue water cruising". What company in their right mind would design their boats for 3% of potential buyers? It has been pointed out in many places other than here that in the long run, "coastal cruising" is a much more demanding arena than offshore until you factor in Cape Horn, Cape of Good Hope, the roaring 40's, etc. I'm with you Ron and Rick, I wish these people would stay on their little POS website that does NOTHING to further our hobby, passion, whatever it is to most of us and GET A LIFE!!!
See Henk Meuzelaar in Archives
Henk has logged many a blue water mile in the Pacific on his modern 40+ Hunter. And he has shared a lot of his experiences and ideas on this site. Search the archives for his posts - that's surely the best info for you. David Lady Lillie
Henk has logged many a blue water mile in the Pacific on his modern 40+ Hunter. And he has shared a lot of his experiences and ideas on this site. Search the archives for his posts - that's surely the best info for you. David Lady Lillie
Agree with -Ron,Rick, Honeyman - When
When I took delivery of my H356, the dealer provided a paid Captain to bring me and the boat to home port. We were in the Chesapeake Bay in 30kt wind and 6ft steep waves. We took every third wave over the bow. Now this Captain delivers boats all over the Atlantic and told my wife that was about the worse conditions he has been in. He thought the boat was great and would be able to handle just about anything -within reason of course. Jim S/V Java
When I took delivery of my H356, the dealer provided a paid Captain to bring me and the boat to home port. We were in the Chesapeake Bay in 30kt wind and 6ft steep waves. We took every third wave over the bow. Now this Captain delivers boats all over the Atlantic and told my wife that was about the worse conditions he has been in. He thought the boat was great and would be able to handle just about anything -within reason of course. Jim S/V Java
With in reason changes
Some of the offshore things you hope to avoid can come upon you anyway. We sailed part of the thorny path to the ABCs and found 10-12 swells that were not rough or forecasted, but they happened. You and your boat need to sure that you are ready for most of the possiblities. We are a catamaran and generally outrun and dodge weather if caught out. Mostly we just stay put until we get our window. On the bright side. Since we have cruiser in the Caribe we have met few Hunter and Catalina owners who have sailed from the US to Bonaire and Venezuela
Some of the offshore things you hope to avoid can come upon you anyway. We sailed part of the thorny path to the ABCs and found 10-12 swells that were not rough or forecasted, but they happened. You and your boat need to sure that you are ready for most of the possiblities. We are a catamaran and generally outrun and dodge weather if caught out. Mostly we just stay put until we get our window. On the bright side. Since we have cruiser in the Caribe we have met few Hunter and Catalina owners who have sailed from the US to Bonaire and Venezuela
A question of seaworthiness
Some recognized experets in offshore sailing have neverf experienced life threatening conditions at sea, and indeed, the chances of being caught in violent weather is rare at best if you plan accordingly and are conservative. this is the opinion of most experts that I have read...and reading a lot in prep for my own offshore adventures. The issue here is what can you do to prepare the boat you end up with. Watertight bulkheads fore and aft, which can be a modification rather than a design, upgraded rigging, re-sealing ports and beefed up washboards will all help you be more comfortable. Some boats by design are more stable than others, and there are books that score the designs.."twenty boats to take you around the world" is an excellent resource. Bottom line in my humble opinion is if you are happy with the stbility of your boat, you can prepare it for sea, and be conservative in your plannning.
Some recognized experets in offshore sailing have neverf experienced life threatening conditions at sea, and indeed, the chances of being caught in violent weather is rare at best if you plan accordingly and are conservative. this is the opinion of most experts that I have read...and reading a lot in prep for my own offshore adventures. The issue here is what can you do to prepare the boat you end up with. Watertight bulkheads fore and aft, which can be a modification rather than a design, upgraded rigging, re-sealing ports and beefed up washboards will all help you be more comfortable. Some boats by design are more stable than others, and there are books that score the designs.."twenty boats to take you around the world" is an excellent resource. Bottom line in my humble opinion is if you are happy with the stbility of your boat, you can prepare it for sea, and be conservative in your plannning.
Okay, here's the deal...
...at least a dozen times a year, somebody gets on this site and asks whether a Hunter is a blue-water boat. It's your basic wrong question, because the real question is whether you're a blue-water sailor. If you are, you realize that every boat is a compromise. EVERY boat. The compromise that Hunter makes is to optimize the boat for comfort, liveability, and afordability. Does that make it unsafe offshore? No. It just means that sea berths, storage space, et cetera were sacrificed in favor of other considerations. Considerations? Bottom line: I bought my Hunter because my wife fell in love with it. I would have prefered to purchase a twenty-year-old Swann to a new Hunter, the money would have been about the same, but she found the Swann to be too dark and smelly. She loves the Hunter, and a month never goes by, not even in the dead of Winter, when we don't spend at least one weekend out on the hook. Why? The wife loves being on the boat. I'm sleeping on the boat tonight. It's February 3rd, for goodness sake! The wife is sleeping with me. (Actually, she's already asleep, and I'll soon be joining her.) I wouldn't trade one minute of this for a "blue water boat," not if it meant my wife found it too cramped and dark to enjoy. And when I take this Hunter out into the blue, the wife is willing to sail with me. I love that. Blue water boat? Wrong question.
...at least a dozen times a year, somebody gets on this site and asks whether a Hunter is a blue-water boat. It's your basic wrong question, because the real question is whether you're a blue-water sailor. If you are, you realize that every boat is a compromise. EVERY boat. The compromise that Hunter makes is to optimize the boat for comfort, liveability, and afordability. Does that make it unsafe offshore? No. It just means that sea berths, storage space, et cetera were sacrificed in favor of other considerations. Considerations? Bottom line: I bought my Hunter because my wife fell in love with it. I would have prefered to purchase a twenty-year-old Swann to a new Hunter, the money would have been about the same, but she found the Swann to be too dark and smelly. She loves the Hunter, and a month never goes by, not even in the dead of Winter, when we don't spend at least one weekend out on the hook. Why? The wife loves being on the boat. I'm sleeping on the boat tonight. It's February 3rd, for goodness sake! The wife is sleeping with me. (Actually, she's already asleep, and I'll soon be joining her.) I wouldn't trade one minute of this for a "blue water boat," not if it meant my wife found it too cramped and dark to enjoy. And when I take this Hunter out into the blue, the wife is willing to sail with me. I love that. Blue water boat? Wrong question.
Well said, John!
That is exactly how we found Rivendel II, our Legend 43. Nelleke loved the interior and still picks that same type of boat at the occasional boatshow we happen to visit (after 15 years of coastal and offshore sailing). After checking every detail and crawling into every corner, I was impressed with the quality of the finish and the hardware (we were comparing with a new Catalina 42 sitting right next to it and also with the Moorings version (Moorings 433), found enough references to convince me that the hull was soundly built and figured that the rest could be brought up to par with elbow grease and boat dollars. Of course, it took a lot more of both (grease & $$) than I ever expected. However, whenever the subject of perhaps trading her in for a heavier-built vessel would come up between Nelleke and me we both could not let her go. More importantly, by that time we had started to make trips down the Mexican West Coast and into the sea of Cortez. There we met lots of cruizers who had once decided for the heavy, full-keeled "bluewater boats" and now were sitting for weeks and months in harbors such as Puerto Vallarta and La Paz, waiting for the occasional weather window when the wind was strong enough AND blowing from the right direction, as most of them could neither move in light winds nor sail very close to the wind. I have described these experiences in earlier posts on this board. Although many of my older posts have now sailed off the edge of Phil's archive world, there are still a few around. Just a few days ago it occurred to me that it might be helpful to show two pictures of Rivendel II highlighting all the (exterior) upgrades we did over the course of the years to prepare Rivendel II for her offshore tasks. By using the Photoforum format there would be room for more than one photo. That expectation was indeed fulfilled but I never realized that the photoforum does not allow for any questions and discussion. So, let me attach a link to that photoforum post here and invite people to comment whether they are mostly reassured by the demonstrated feasibility of making such upgrades or mostly put off and intimidated by the large number and cost of it all. Finally, let me point out that the years have taught me that not all larger Hunters are equally well suited for bluewater upgrading. For instance, on some of the newer versions of the Hunter Passage family the anchor lockers are soooo small as to make it next to impossible to fix the problem without rebuilding large parts of the bow section. Then there are the disappearing toerails (across the whole spectrum of factory-built production boat brands) and the absence of suitable places to make reasonable seaberths. Add to that the ever-returning allegations against rudder construction and the sad spectacle of ripped-out chainplates on a few models and/or production runs and it may be understandable that our desire for ever trading Rivendel II in for a newer Hunter is nil. It would never be trading up but always be trading down. So we made the decision several years ago to never let go voluntarily of her. Besides, I think she still looks as the prettiest girl at the ball, even after all those years. The same can be said of co-captain Nelleke (see photo link) who, into her sixties now, would surely not be accompanying us on the often challenging South Pacific expeditions for Project MARC, if she had not fallen in love with Rivendel II from day one...... Fair Winds! Flying Dutchman
That is exactly how we found Rivendel II, our Legend 43. Nelleke loved the interior and still picks that same type of boat at the occasional boatshow we happen to visit (after 15 years of coastal and offshore sailing). After checking every detail and crawling into every corner, I was impressed with the quality of the finish and the hardware (we were comparing with a new Catalina 42 sitting right next to it and also with the Moorings version (Moorings 433), found enough references to convince me that the hull was soundly built and figured that the rest could be brought up to par with elbow grease and boat dollars. Of course, it took a lot more of both (grease & $$) than I ever expected. However, whenever the subject of perhaps trading her in for a heavier-built vessel would come up between Nelleke and me we both could not let her go. More importantly, by that time we had started to make trips down the Mexican West Coast and into the sea of Cortez. There we met lots of cruizers who had once decided for the heavy, full-keeled "bluewater boats" and now were sitting for weeks and months in harbors such as Puerto Vallarta and La Paz, waiting for the occasional weather window when the wind was strong enough AND blowing from the right direction, as most of them could neither move in light winds nor sail very close to the wind. I have described these experiences in earlier posts on this board. Although many of my older posts have now sailed off the edge of Phil's archive world, there are still a few around. Just a few days ago it occurred to me that it might be helpful to show two pictures of Rivendel II highlighting all the (exterior) upgrades we did over the course of the years to prepare Rivendel II for her offshore tasks. By using the Photoforum format there would be room for more than one photo. That expectation was indeed fulfilled but I never realized that the photoforum does not allow for any questions and discussion. So, let me attach a link to that photoforum post here and invite people to comment whether they are mostly reassured by the demonstrated feasibility of making such upgrades or mostly put off and intimidated by the large number and cost of it all. Finally, let me point out that the years have taught me that not all larger Hunters are equally well suited for bluewater upgrading. For instance, on some of the newer versions of the Hunter Passage family the anchor lockers are soooo small as to make it next to impossible to fix the problem without rebuilding large parts of the bow section. Then there are the disappearing toerails (across the whole spectrum of factory-built production boat brands) and the absence of suitable places to make reasonable seaberths. Add to that the ever-returning allegations against rudder construction and the sad spectacle of ripped-out chainplates on a few models and/or production runs and it may be understandable that our desire for ever trading Rivendel II in for a newer Hunter is nil. It would never be trading up but always be trading down. So we made the decision several years ago to never let go voluntarily of her. Besides, I think she still looks as the prettiest girl at the ball, even after all those years. The same can be said of co-captain Nelleke (see photo link) who, into her sixties now, would surely not be accompanying us on the often challenging South Pacific expeditions for Project MARC, if she had not fallen in love with Rivendel II from day one...... Fair Winds! Flying Dutchman
Can't add much, but . . .
Everything has already been said, but I thought I'd add my two bits. We've sailed our 1990 Hunter Passage 42 (Sabina) about 30,000 to 35,000 miles. Once down from California to Mexico and through the Coconut Milk Run, and back from New Zealand to the States via Hawaii. Then again from California to Hawaii and down via Palmyra and Samoa to NZ and bounced around the islands for another few years. It's done great in all conditions. It was particularly nice to be able to point upwind so high during the windward trip from NZ to Hawaii. It heaves to quite well, and also lays to a sea anchor (albeit uncomfortably). Enjoy.
Everything has already been said, but I thought I'd add my two bits. We've sailed our 1990 Hunter Passage 42 (Sabina) about 30,000 to 35,000 miles. Once down from California to Mexico and through the Coconut Milk Run, and back from New Zealand to the States via Hawaii. Then again from California to Hawaii and down via Palmyra and Samoa to NZ and bounced around the islands for another few years. It's done great in all conditions. It was particularly nice to be able to point upwind so high during the windward trip from NZ to Hawaii. It heaves to quite well, and also lays to a sea anchor (albeit uncomfortably). Enjoy.
Welcome back, Paul!
It sounds like you have completed your second big sweep of the South Pacific. If so, congratulations!! When did you return? I see you are in Alaska now and assume this means you sailed there directly from Hawaii. To make two return trips from New Zealand back to the US mainland is an amazing feat. No doubt, Sabina is the only Hunter that has ever managed to do that. Meanwhile, it would seem that the 42+ foot hull that Hunter produced in the early 90's and used for your Passage 42 as well as our Legend 43 has proven its durability. Rivendel has yet to see her first blister and our rudder has hung tough as well. What was your experience with Sabina in these critical areas? Are you planning to provide a more detailed report of your last voyage or do you have a website where we can find more details? I know you are not a man of many words but I do hope you will take time now and then to let other Hunter owners on this board profit from your unique experience. Fair winds, Flying Dutchman
It sounds like you have completed your second big sweep of the South Pacific. If so, congratulations!! When did you return? I see you are in Alaska now and assume this means you sailed there directly from Hawaii. To make two return trips from New Zealand back to the US mainland is an amazing feat. No doubt, Sabina is the only Hunter that has ever managed to do that. Meanwhile, it would seem that the 42+ foot hull that Hunter produced in the early 90's and used for your Passage 42 as well as our Legend 43 has proven its durability. Rivendel has yet to see her first blister and our rudder has hung tough as well. What was your experience with Sabina in these critical areas? Are you planning to provide a more detailed report of your last voyage or do you have a website where we can find more details? I know you are not a man of many words but I do hope you will take time now and then to let other Hunter owners on this board profit from your unique experience. Fair winds, Flying Dutchman
I cheated
I hate to get off subject on this thread, but thought I'd reply to your kind note, Henk. First, let me admit to cheating by SHIPPING Sabina back to the States from Auckland on a Dockwise float-on freighter. It was too great a deal to pass up. (They had space, offered a huge discount, and we folded). We had to get back to replenish the cruising kitty, so we shipped her to Ensenada and are now using the six months of saved time to bus around South America. Work begins in late Spring in Alaska. (If we're lucky, we'll be leaving again in a couple of years for another South Pacific trip). Anyway, we did make the passage between New Zealand and Tonga/Fiji seven times, and the windward passage to the US once, and she held up fine. Like you, never a single blister on the hull. And, despite two minor groundings on the rudder (requiring patches on the bottom leading edge of about 2 square inches each time), the rudder is still great and the rudder bearings are as tight as ever. No movement between the rudder stock and the Foss foam around it. The maneuverability of the Hunter 43.5 foot hull has proven spectacularly beneficial through all our cruising. A couple of years ago there was a Mayday when a 44 foot full-keeled cruiser sank on the reef of an uninhabited island in the Haapai Group of Tonga (Telekivava'u). A freighter stood by, but couldn't get within a mile of the shallows where the sailboat sank. Due to the maneuverability and shoalness of our Hunter, we were able to get inside a VERY small lagoon entrance and anchor in the 8 foot depth of the lagoon entrance. (The people were in their dingy, which was then tied to the very top of the mast, which was the only part of their boat above water. They were in the surf zone and were a bit hypothermic and shaken up from being there all night in the rough weather, but ended up being all right). We could never have made those maneuvers and rescued those people if we were in a full keel 8 foot draft boat. It was so rough (even inside the lagoon) that we barely got our dingy deployed. It would have been impossible from outside the reef. Anyway, those considerations are important when looking at what type of cruising boat the originator of this thread may want, so I don't feel bad taking up the space here with the war story. As another aside, we would often run into Kiwis with their "one-off" boats who looked at the Hunter and praised the sturdiness and cruiseworthiness of her. And those guys are used to the rough stuff. We're back to land traveling now, and I hope to be able to check in once in a while (like today). We'll be taking the easy way to see Tierra del Fuego (at least for this first visit). If you have any other questions about what modifications we made to Sabina, or how specific parts of her held up, feel free to email me at paulcossman@hotmail.com. Happy cruising.
I hate to get off subject on this thread, but thought I'd reply to your kind note, Henk. First, let me admit to cheating by SHIPPING Sabina back to the States from Auckland on a Dockwise float-on freighter. It was too great a deal to pass up. (They had space, offered a huge discount, and we folded). We had to get back to replenish the cruising kitty, so we shipped her to Ensenada and are now using the six months of saved time to bus around South America. Work begins in late Spring in Alaska. (If we're lucky, we'll be leaving again in a couple of years for another South Pacific trip). Anyway, we did make the passage between New Zealand and Tonga/Fiji seven times, and the windward passage to the US once, and she held up fine. Like you, never a single blister on the hull. And, despite two minor groundings on the rudder (requiring patches on the bottom leading edge of about 2 square inches each time), the rudder is still great and the rudder bearings are as tight as ever. No movement between the rudder stock and the Foss foam around it. The maneuverability of the Hunter 43.5 foot hull has proven spectacularly beneficial through all our cruising. A couple of years ago there was a Mayday when a 44 foot full-keeled cruiser sank on the reef of an uninhabited island in the Haapai Group of Tonga (Telekivava'u). A freighter stood by, but couldn't get within a mile of the shallows where the sailboat sank. Due to the maneuverability and shoalness of our Hunter, we were able to get inside a VERY small lagoon entrance and anchor in the 8 foot depth of the lagoon entrance. (The people were in their dingy, which was then tied to the very top of the mast, which was the only part of their boat above water. They were in the surf zone and were a bit hypothermic and shaken up from being there all night in the rough weather, but ended up being all right). We could never have made those maneuvers and rescued those people if we were in a full keel 8 foot draft boat. It was so rough (even inside the lagoon) that we barely got our dingy deployed. It would have been impossible from outside the reef. Anyway, those considerations are important when looking at what type of cruising boat the originator of this thread may want, so I don't feel bad taking up the space here with the war story. As another aside, we would often run into Kiwis with their "one-off" boats who looked at the Hunter and praised the sturdiness and cruiseworthiness of her. And those guys are used to the rough stuff. We're back to land traveling now, and I hope to be able to check in once in a while (like today). We'll be taking the easy way to see Tierra del Fuego (at least for this first visit). If you have any other questions about what modifications we made to Sabina, or how specific parts of her held up, feel free to email me at paulcossman@hotmail.com. Happy cruising.
Thanks for another classic, Henk
The photo forum is another archive classic. Phil, is there some way we/you could keep some "classic" threads in the archive? (Based on number of hits , for instance.) David Lady Lillie
The photo forum is another archive classic. Phil, is there some way we/you could keep some "classic" threads in the archive? (Based on number of hits , for instance.) David Lady Lillie
Henk,, What Did You Do About The Windshield?
I am impressed with the solid feel of the P42/Legend 43 hull. However,I have looked at the large "windshield" on my P42 at the front of the salon and tried to decide if it is strong enough to handle big water coming over the bow. What have you done to strengthen that area? Or have you not felt it necessary?
I am impressed with the solid feel of the P42/Legend 43 hull. However,I have looked at the large "windshield" on my P42 at the front of the salon and tried to decide if it is strong enough to handle big water coming over the bow. What have you done to strengthen that area? Or have you not felt it necessary?
Some feedback
David, thanks for the kind words. Paul, what is the regular fare for a return trip NZ to USA aboard a dockwise float-on freighter? Rich, the P42 (center cockpit) cabin windows are a bit different from the L43 (aft cockpit) cabin windows, e.g. in that the L43 window is aft of the mast and the P42 window forward of it. So, not all of the modifications and the reasoning behind it might apply. On our L43 there was one big 1/2" thick, tinted acrylate sheet which covered two side-by-side deck openings separated by a 6" wide channel for the various halyard and sheet control lines emerging from the base of the mast and going towards the cockpit winches on each side of the companionway. The acrylic sheet was even partly slotted to accommodate these control lines which were held down by a sturdy ss pin to prevent them from rubbing against the acrylic sheet. This L43 window design was very sexy=looking but had the following problems: (1) the very large, curved acrylic sheet was subject to all sorts of static and dynamic stresses which made it nearly impossible to seal efficiently; (2) the control line depressor pin created an unnecessary additional friction point; (3) like you, I was not convinced that the 1/2" acrylic was not going to shatter under the impact of a breaking wave. Therefore, I replaced the one large polyacrylate sheet by two smaller, throughbolted 1/2" polycarbonate window panes (one for each deck opening) which have a 6x higher shatter resistance but are alas quite a bit more flexible. Therefore, each of these polycarbonate window panes is supported by two fore-and-aft oriented ss support bars mounted directly below the sheets and fastened into the window frame. The control line gutter between both windows was simply left open. At the same time, I also replaced the acrylic side windows with the same polycarbonate. After 10 years in the tropics (although usually stored under a tarp during the cyclone season), the tinted and coated polycarbonate (purchased from Cadillac Plastics) is holding up beautifully and exhibits little or no crazing. Last season our rigger dropped a cartridge gun onto the starboard window from the top of the mast (64 ft!). The cannonshot-like impact scared the hell out of everyone inside the cabin, including me, but only left a big scratch in the outer coating, without any signs of window cracking. I doubt that the old polyacrylate window would have survived. Flying Dutchman
David, thanks for the kind words. Paul, what is the regular fare for a return trip NZ to USA aboard a dockwise float-on freighter? Rich, the P42 (center cockpit) cabin windows are a bit different from the L43 (aft cockpit) cabin windows, e.g. in that the L43 window is aft of the mast and the P42 window forward of it. So, not all of the modifications and the reasoning behind it might apply. On our L43 there was one big 1/2" thick, tinted acrylate sheet which covered two side-by-side deck openings separated by a 6" wide channel for the various halyard and sheet control lines emerging from the base of the mast and going towards the cockpit winches on each side of the companionway. The acrylic sheet was even partly slotted to accommodate these control lines which were held down by a sturdy ss pin to prevent them from rubbing against the acrylic sheet. This L43 window design was very sexy=looking but had the following problems: (1) the very large, curved acrylic sheet was subject to all sorts of static and dynamic stresses which made it nearly impossible to seal efficiently; (2) the control line depressor pin created an unnecessary additional friction point; (3) like you, I was not convinced that the 1/2" acrylic was not going to shatter under the impact of a breaking wave. Therefore, I replaced the one large polyacrylate sheet by two smaller, throughbolted 1/2" polycarbonate window panes (one for each deck opening) which have a 6x higher shatter resistance but are alas quite a bit more flexible. Therefore, each of these polycarbonate window panes is supported by two fore-and-aft oriented ss support bars mounted directly below the sheets and fastened into the window frame. The control line gutter between both windows was simply left open. At the same time, I also replaced the acrylic side windows with the same polycarbonate. After 10 years in the tropics (although usually stored under a tarp during the cyclone season), the tinted and coated polycarbonate (purchased from Cadillac Plastics) is holding up beautifully and exhibits little or no crazing. Last season our rigger dropped a cartridge gun onto the starboard window from the top of the mast (64 ft!). The cannonshot-like impact scared the hell out of everyone inside the cabin, including me, but only left a big scratch in the outer coating, without any signs of window cracking. I doubt that the old polyacrylate window would have survived. Flying Dutchman
- Status