Why does Hunter have a bad name?

[Crazy Dave Condon]

I concur with Judy on loosening the topping lift when sailing on small boats as I nearly represented most over the years. However, I think I know the issue. Remember Hunter with the B and R rig with no backstay. Many daysailors do not have backstays but the mainsail is designed to a standard factor. However, it could be the Hunter 170 daysailor is larger using the method of the larger boats calling for more power in the main.. If the batten sticks out too far, it can be shortened. Thus maybe I understand Bobbyfunn
Judy, I hope this helps.

 

[DrJudyB]

@BobbyFunn
You have conflated the topping lift with the backstay, I think.
Flickers are used on backstays, not topping lifts. I have never,ever seen a backstay flicker on a topping lift.
All top battens extend past the topping lift. The topping lift is never a problem when tacking. The topping lift always stays on on side of the sail, either port or starboard.

I still don’t understand the phrase “semi-circular planes”. A plane is a flat surface by definition, so I am reduced to guessing what you are talking about, that’s the same difficulty I’m having when you use terms like “plane of the boom”.

You’re using specific geometric terms incorrectly and, I am sorry to admit I just can’t make any sense of it.

 

[BobbyFunn]

	This might help. I've used sketchup to model a boom and it's extreme range of motion. I get it, normal booms don't move this full range.​
	The Boom could move in this full range of motion without a sail or rigging. From resting on the deck to being almost straight up, to full outboard and then to centerline. The shape is a cone with a spherical end.
	If we take a cross section at the gooseneck the range is familiar. This is the range used for angle of attack. This shows the full range from lifting the boom off the deck to attaching the topping lift or adding a sail. The boom transits the arc, section, semi-circle. The boom sits on a plane (the cross-section), iif the vang is on and the topping lift or leech is tight, or there is a rigid vang or GNAV. This view represent the full range of motion with just a vang or mainsheet (no leech or topping lift). The vang prevents the boom from going up higher than the gooseneck here. Happens often during setup actually. Now copy this shape, flip it upside down, and attach it to the gooseneck. This is the normal range of the boom as the sail or topping lift raises the boom and the vang and mainsheet is let loose. Using just a mainsheet and the leech doesn't keep the boom on the AOA plane. If I want the leech to twist off the topping lift needs to be tight so that the boom is fixed in a new plane.

 

[Crazy Dave Condon]

Have to scratch my head with all this here too technical stuff. Just sail and have fun! As Bugs Bunny would say, That’s all folks!

 

[Valerio]

with the wang you can determine how do you want the flow of the air thru you mainsail, you will need some tell tales to see how is the flow, downwind pulling the vang will help to close and open the leech of your sail, upwind you can use it so in a big puff you can easy the main sheet and the boom will not go up so the main will not be flapping, over that that you really need to go with sail shape etc. The wang that is designed to be the support of the boom is because the full batten main are very wide and sometimes a boom hyliard is impossible to fit. That is my 5 c.

 

[jssailem]

@fullbore could it have been the way you tried to sail the boat.

All boats I have sailed have their own proclivities. The astute sailor finds the style of the boat a makes that his/her advantage.

All this talk of different manufacturer’s of boats reminds me of car owners. This one is better than that one. BS.One boat has this and another has that. If it will take V me out on the water and bring me safely to harbor it is a great boat in my book.

If I’m racing then the fastest is the best. Does not mean it cannot be beat. No. Just means you really need to be the best sailor.

 

[sailme88]

I once caught up to and passed a Hunter 40 while sailing my O'28. We were on a beam reach. The captain of the Hunter kept looking at me and up, at me and up... Best I could tell, because of the B&G rig he was limited in easing the boom and main out as far as mine.. Of course there are other variables to consider....But in general isn't it always sweet to pass a bigger boat... 'specially seeing they aren't properly trimmed....

 

[kappykaplan]

But in general isn't it always sweet to pass a bigger boat...

 

[sail sfbay]

The three Hunters i sailed all sucked. Couldn’t point, slid more sideways than forward.........

I guess it depends on how you sail them as none of my Hunter sailboats (31, 386 and 46) had these issues.

 

[rgranger]

I guess it depends on how you sail them as none of my Hunter sailboats (31, 386 and 46) had these issues.

I've owned a lot of different sailboats and I have sailed in even more. My H26 points suprisingly high.

When I first got her, she was a dog and heeled to much and had bad weather helm... but a new mainsail fixed all of that. My guess with these Hunters is that they are more sensitive to a blown main than other rig types. With the swept back spreader, the Hunter uses a larger main relative to the head sail than other rig types.

 

[DArcy]

I guess it depends on how you sail them as none of my Hunter sailboats (31, 386 and 46) had these issues.

I'm sure that is true with all sailboats, not a peculiarity of Hunters. I'm sure some Hunters sail better than others, just as some Beneteaus will be better than others. I'd love to sail an HC50, certainly more than a Beneteau 1 Ton.

 

[Kings Gambit]

They are not the most well constructed. Cheap components. Cheap hardware. Poor construction in many ways. There are lots of threads in here about these issues. With that said, they are inexpensive to purchase and that makes them a good value. I would not try to cross an ocean with my H34 but for sailing SF Bay she's great.

In the late ‘80s, early ‘90’s at the boat shows I attended in St Petersburg, FL, the new model Hunters were generally not well received among the folks I knew. Of course then there were more new and recent models, and builders, before the recession of the early ‘90’s and the Congress’s “luxury” tax nearly wiped out US boat production. Compared to the other models Hunters appeared cheaply built, almost tacky. Showed poorly. I heard many negative comments on the docks. When stuff like that gets started and catches on, it lasts a long time. Consequently, forgive, buyers of those models were viewed as unsophisticated, newbie-type buyers; effectively “slip sailors” looking for dock condos. (This was in the time of the explosive rise of condominium ownership, and attendant sales ads, in the US, so was a natural comparison.) Things are different now with Hunter Yachts in the mainstream with Catalina Yachts and to a certain degree Beneteau Yachts, b/c yachts offering condo-like features are the “mainstream” now. The Florida home market then included new or recent models of Morgan, Island Packet, Cabo Rico, Gulfstar, Irwin, Endeavor, Nimble, and Seaward, etc., by comparison. But Hunter has survived whereas those other builders have not, so how bad can they be?

 

[Kings Gambit]

Yes. Thinking more about it, the yachts the folks owned with which we cruised (cruising club) in FL in the ‘90’s included: Morgan, Pearson, Island Packet, Irwin, Endeavor, Fuji, Caliber, Islander, Catalina, Tartan, Gulfstar, Whitby, Jeanneau, Hunter (including a ‘70’s model), Cal, & Watkins. J-boats were the most common in racing, esp., J-24, but also Tartan 37, various C&C’s, Ranger, and occasional Soverel, etc. So, one has to evaluate the later Hunter models of that day relative to their contemporaries above to appreciate how it (Hunter) might have acquired a “reputation.” Today, any comparison would be against only Catalina, Beneteau, Dufour, and Bavaria. You wouldn’t find much difference overall, except maybe in trim and options.

 

[Secret sail]

Im a professional delivery charter skipper in the méditerranéen. I get to sail lots of new and nearly new sail boats. Bavaria, Beneteau, Oceanis, Dufour, Sun Odyssey, Lagoon, Bali, Catana, Nautitech....
I chose my 356 for its outstanding features: arch, B R rig, kevlar crashbox and the huge cockpit!!! I could go on and add: through hull backing plates, bronze through bulls, cO2 détecteurs, direct steering linkage, lead keel, non yellowing gel coat....
Construction standards are pretty good compared to most européen brands. Im not ready to buy another boat yet.

 

[Steve_Catalina]

Do you like how it sails?

 

[Red_Dog]

What can I say about my 1986 28.5?

First, my Hunter is a first generation B&R: I have a backstay.

I enjoy Red Dog. She sails well and in a wind of 10 to 12 knts, head up, shes sails like an ape with his hair on fire. When I've mention that I own a 1986 Hunter the usual reply is "That's when Hunter knew how to design boats." Usually, odd timers, think, in their 70's or 80's. Everyone whose been aboard has commented on her roominess and open cabin, favoritely.

Back in high school (and I'm dating myself) in the late 70's when I first started reading Sail magazine, I came to the conclusion that Hunters were Chevrolets, Catatlinas were Buicks and Ericsssons were the bee's knees. Of course, I was thinking in terms "affordable" boats.

 

[rgranger]

...Usually, odd timers....

Aren’t we all? :-?

 

[YoursTruly83]

It’s funny that, I recall as a teenager my friend and I used to look at hunters with disdain because they looked like Tupperware to us. We at the time had dreams of blue water cruising and so looked at the likes of Pacific Seacraft, Valiant, Hans Christian, WestSail with high reverence while we were on our old Cal20. I think what I didn’t like the look of the most was the fibreglass arch over the cockpit for the traveller. It looked to foreign to me. But since growing up more or less, I look at hunters as designed to be extremely comfortable cruisers, I’ve only sailed on one for 3 hours in 5 knots of wind so I really can’t comment on its performance. it was a free standing mast which was interesting to me, as the only experience I had with one was on a Nonsuch 30. The interior was lovely! Well appointed, layout and ergonomics was excellent, finishes were excellent. The cockpit was spacious and all the hardware was top notch. So I immediately have learned that looks from afar are quite deceiving.

my Wife and I are considering a Hunter in our future although we’re looking for a blue water cruiser down the road so we’ll see what comes.

Anyway, do your research and ask owners not just people who have no experience with them.

 

[dLj]

It’s funny that, I recall as a teenager my friend and I used to look at hunters with disdain because they looked like Tupperware to us. We at the time had dreams of blue water cruising and so looked at the likes of Pacific Seacraft, Valiant, Hans Christian, WestSail with high reverence while we were on our old Cal20. I think what I didn’t like the look of the most was the fibreglass arch over the cockpit for the traveller. It looked to foreign to me. But since growing up more or less, I look at hunters as designed to be extremely comfortable cruisers, I’ve only sailed on one for 3 hours in 5 knots of wind so I really can’t comment on its performance. it was a free standing mast which was interesting to me, as the only experience I had with one was on a Nonsuch 30. The interior was lovely! Well appointed, layout and ergonomics was excellent, finishes were excellent. The cockpit was spacious and all the hardware was top notch. So I immediately have learned that looks from afar are quite deceiving.

my Wife and I are considering a Hunter in our future although we’re looking for a blue water cruiser down the road so we’ll see what comes.

Anyway, do your research and ask owners not just people who have no experience with them.

There are some Hunters that are very nice blue water boats.

dj

 

[Crazy Dave Condon]

As a former dealer, I heard all the comments knocking lines represented at one point beneteau, Hunter, Precision, Catalina/Capri, NACRA, MacGregor and ComPac. All were good boats and you paid for what was bought A lot depended on proper commissioning, taking care of warranty/servicing, teaching systems and sailing, etc.

Furthermore, We never spoke negatively about other brands. Customers were satisfied. However there were moments particularly one. A 44 footer was sold claiming servicing was poor and badly built.
Made 15 trips in 11 months under warranty which was a six hour trip one way to the boat claiming I am suppose to have the holding tank emptied out, remove fishing tackle out of the rigging, reprogram tv, clean boat and so on. Returning from the Islands, radar fell off at which time boat needed to be hauled. Found rebarb, concrete and coral embedded in hull. Third of keel pulled away from hull, 1/3 rudder missing, ribs cracked. My response. Claim and remaining warrant period denied. Never went back to that boat. Attorney called me. I shared report to mfg with the attorney. He concurred with my findings