Practical-Sailor.com

[Bob 04 H260]

I have subscribed to this publication on and off over the years and found some of the information interesting, however at times they seemed to be less than objective. The exact opposite of what you expect from a publication that boasts of no advertising.

I was surfing around the other day looking at boat reviews on various sites and came across one of their pages that surprised me, they claim,

" Judging from the response of Hunter owners we've talked to, all Hunters, including the 27, are purchased for one reason: price."

It came from this page,
http://www.practical-sailor.com/issues/1_1/boatreview/1188-1.html

This really has me question their advice on any product they review. I will certainly never subscribe to the publication in the future. It is one thing if free advice is wrong but when you are paying for advice you expect it to be based on facts and objective reasoning, not personal bias. Hard to imagine they are offering to sell sailors reviews of Hunter sailboats when they start off with that premise.

Bob

 

[Ed Schenck]

Thanks for the heads up Bob. Like you I was once a subscriber. They piled up and became redundant, same tests over and over. Some of the information was valuable but there was not enough to justify the price. But to learn that their editors would permit that kind of language in a supposedly objective journal is disheartening. Even if other Hunter owners do not cancel their subscriptions I hope they will voice their disappointment.

 

[shemandr]

I'm not outraged by that. When we were looking for our current boat we looked at Freedom 36's and Hunter 356. What they had in common were small headsails - my wife post surgery could not haul in a 150% or even 135% headsail. The Freedoms were 20 years old and in need of updating. The Hunter was 2 or 3 years old and had all the stuff. They were comparible in price. I choose the Hunter because I got a newer boat with all the stuff, for the money. It was about the money.

 

[kloudie1]

Yeah, but that article was 10 years ago.. they have gotten better about that.. Also note that they are reporting on what the owners said. I bought my Hunter because I thought it the best value but not because it was the cheapest. The rest of the article about the 27 talks about good stout construction, etc.. I have had rude opinionated people who had never been on a Hunter tell me that I should save my dollars and buy a real sailboat.. I agree, Ed.. sometimes I feel like PS is not worth the price of admission, but I’ve been a subscriber since 1979.. I have thought several times about not renewing, but lately, they seem to have a more realistic slant on things.. The thing I have a problem with most, is that their reporting in non-standardized lingo is sort of confusing.. example.. They did a test on ice chests a couple of years back and noted the results in pounds of ice melted in a day, (or something like that?) which is ok to compare different ice chests.. Normal tests of insulation are reported in BTU per square foot per degree F.. if you have all the data as they did, it is easy to calculate the number.. the report didn’t have the complete dataset, so the number couldn’t be calculated.. so I couldn’t calculate an expected ice loss on a typical summer day here ..

 

[Alan]

I whole heatedly agree with Bob and Ed. I used to read Practical Sailor religiously and couldn't throw a single issue away. This was during the time when they printed in black and white and their former editor in chief, Dan Spurr was based in Rhode Island. More than a few times I picked up the phone to discuss my thoughts with him. Then they acquired the current editor, [FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Darrell Nicholson[/FONT] and 'upgraded' to color print on upgraded paper. Though the 'look' was certainly a step up, the nuts and bolts of the articles were stale and many 'observations' were highly suspect. Ultimately I canceled my subscription wishing that Dan Spurr and cheaper paper were back.

 

[Bill1565]

I'm only an amateur boat owner, and I usually ask opiniions of everyone I think can help. PS is always there and always has an opinion. I don't always agree, but then I don't always agree with anyone. I just renewed and I expect to continue renewing.

 

[Steve W]

I'm not going to apologize for PS but if you read the article the link takes you to, as Kloudie1 says, the article is 10 years old. But even at that, they explain that their statement that "we" shop for price is just the feedback they've gotten from us. Evidently most of the feedback they received from Hunter owners back then pointed to the fact that the respondees stated "price" as the determinant factor. Which is fine as far as I'm concerned.

In terms of their objectivity, I've seen them "warn" us not to purchase something due to some aspect which may have surfaced during their testing.

And speaking of testing, I realize that there are many number crunchers on the list who delight in comparing different products by drilling down into btu numbers, etc... and most of the comparison charts they'll publish do indeed show the 'numbers'. There are many times I'll be looking at specific numbers or tech data to make a comparison. Having said that, though, I just as soon compare ice chests, for example, as they did - how many pounds of ice will I use in a day at a given ambient temperature. I submit that at the end of the day, that's the information we'd like to see...

 

[Bob 04 H260]

I think in ten years they had plenty of time to correct this statement if they think it is not true.

The point is they say the "only" reason we bought a Hunter sailboat was because of the low price.

That was certainly not the case when I bought my boat, if price was the only reason I would have bought another brand.

I think most sailors I have met regardless of what brand of boat they sail want good value for their money, particularly on bigger purchases and I suspect that was what we were were all thinking when we bought our Hunter boats. Usually we want a boat that sails well, looks pleasing to our eye and is safe to take our family out in it. I think after that price becomes a factor but I have never conducted a survey of Hunter owners as PS has done, perhaps I am wrong.

I have never talked to Hunter owners who told me the only consideration was the price. They talk about how fast it is or how much space it has inside, a bigger cockpit than another brand, brighter inside with bigger ports and on and on but no one ever said "it was the cheapest boat I could find".

Just my thoughts, we are all have a valid opinion on this and I respect yours, Bob

 

[Warren Milberg]

Perhaps llike Alan, I liked PS when Dan Spurr was editor. I, too, exchanged thoughts and info with him and, on occasion, my comments were published. While I still think highly of PS, I have not been a subsriber for a number of years. My reason for not subscribing is that they focus on too few subjects of interest to me, and in far more detail than I need. I do give them credit, however, for making a go it without advertising in a highly competitive world.

 

[Ed H]

...
I have never talked to Hunter owners who told me the only consideration was the price. They talk about how fast it is or how much space it has inside, a bigger cockpit than another brand, brighter inside with bigger ports and on and on but no one ever said "it was the cheapest boat I could find".

Just my thoughts, we are all have a valid opinion on this and I respect yours, Bob

Why don't we set up a survey to see how many of us purchased our Hunter solely because it was the least expensive boat offered?

 

[Alan]

Very thoughtful of you Ed H. Where better to conduct such a survey than on a 'Hunter Owners' forum?

I for one DIDN'T buy either of my Hunters based solely on price. In consideration of my purchases, price had a low priority. There were far many more things I considered before I nailed down the boat I would buy.

 

[Don S/V ILLusion]

I think we (Hunter owners) may be getting too defensive about that article from 2000. First, it likely is not true now. Second, I suspect many like myself bought the best boat we could afford. As we didn't like the (to be nameless) brand competitor boats of similar price, we choose the one we did. In effect, we bought based on a budget and I doubt anyone who says differently. I suspect Hinkley owners do too.

 

[soling42]

Sounds like the thing that appeals to most Hunter owners was value for the dollar. Like the words "cheapest" or "least expensive", any poll/review using "price" will be tainted by a readers interpretation of the words. Isn't every boat from a cruise ship to a dingy purchase based on price to value(excluding the uber wealthy who waste cash to be seen). PS may have their own bias no matter how subtle but maybe it was just a poor choice of words.

I often hear the innuendo of seasoned sailors who look down their nose at trailer boats or(God forbid) water ballast Hunters among others. I chose one for it's versatility, ease of transport, roominess and it sails fine too. Although I admit to the same condescending attitude with the powerboat/sailboat designs, but hey I'm biased too. If it'd been twice as expensive I wouldn't be sailing it so I look for value too.

I guess my point is that it's an individual bias toward our own decision about what fits each of us. Over and over a Hunter, whether newer or older, is still a lot of boat for the money. Is the correct term value or price? Who cares as long as you're satisfied.

In Bobs defense I too cancel subscriptions for publications I feel are overly biased but i still read Sail mag which is basically an ad rag catering to their advertisers. So I'm biased and confused.....

 

[tomgrigsby]

Interesting discussion. I bought my Hunter without looking at another boat. It was offered at $8,900. Hull was only fair cosmetically, but interior was nice (original), 3 cyl Yanmar. 1yr old Main. Good jib and jenny. I certainly felt is was worth more, though my budget at the time didn't allow much. The odd thing is, during the time my boat was new I wouldn't have considered a Hunter. I was old fashioned and didn't like the reverse transom. Amazing what 30 years will do to a view point. Now I can't imagine why any other boat would be better for me. Unless, perhaps, a 37 cutter........

 

[Rick486]

For whatever my opinion is worth, for what I paid for my 44DS new I could have bought just about any 40-45 ft boat out there but chose the Hunter. Why? Well, I liked the layout below, the quality of the plumbing and wiring, quality of the rig and deck gear, accessibility of all the systems and the main engine and genset, large cockpit, davits, and so on. I looked at everything from Hinckleys, Island Packets, Benes, and so forth and I found nothing at any price is that size range that met my needs as well as the 44DS. The price never really came into it until it came time to negotiate the final deal. I believe the boat is very well built and three years of sailing have reinforced that.