HUNTER 54 Detailed Review
If you are a boat enthusiast looking to get more information on specs, built, make, etc. of different boats, then here is a complete review of HUNTER 54. Built by Hunter Marine (USA) and designed by John Cherubini, the boat was first built in 1980. It has a hull type of Fin w/spade rudder and LOA is 16.71. Its sail area/displacement ratio 19.45. Its auxiliary power tank, manufactured by undefined, runs on Diesel.
HUNTER 54 has retained its value as a result of superior building, a solid reputation, and a devoted owner base. Read on to find out more about HUNTER 54 and decide if it is a fit for your boating needs.
Boat Information
Boat specifications, sail boat calculation, rig and sail specs, auxillary power tank, accomodations, contributions, who designed the hunter 54.
HUNTER 54 was designed by John Cherubini.
Who builds HUNTER 54?
HUNTER 54 is built by Hunter Marine (USA).
When was HUNTER 54 first built?
HUNTER 54 was first built in 1980.
How long is HUNTER 54?
HUNTER 54 is 13.26 m in length.
What is mast height on HUNTER 54?
HUNTER 54 has a mast height of 14.87 m.
Member Boats at HarborMoor
Review of Hunter 54
Basic specs..
The hull is made of fibreglass. Generally, a hull made of fibreglass requires only a minimum of maintenance during the sailing season.
The Hunter 54 has been built with different keel alternatives.
Unknown keel type
The boat can only enter major marinas as the draft is about 2.04 - 2.14 meter (6.69 - 6.99 ft) dependent on the load.
The Hunter 54 is equipped with a fin keel. The fin keel is the most common keel and provides splendid manoeuvrability. The downside is that it has less directional stability than a long keel.
The boat can only enter major marinas as the draft is about 1.83 - 1.93 meter (6.00 - 6.30 ft) dependent on the load.
Sailing characteristics
This section covers widely used rules of thumb to describe the sailing characteristics. Please note that even though the calculations are correct, the interpretation of the results might not be valid for extreme boats.
Sorry, we have no sailing characteristics available for this boat.
Sailing statistics
This section is statistical comparison with similar boats of the same category. The basis of the following statistical computations is our unique database with more than 26,000 different boat types and 350,000 data points.
Sorry, we do not have sufficient statistical information available for this boat to provide a significant reliable analysis.
Maintenance
Are your sails worn out? You might find your next sail here: Sails for Sale
If you need to renew parts of your running rig and is not quite sure of the dimensions, you may find the estimates computed below useful.
| Usage | Length | Diameter | ||
| Mainsail halyard | 38.5 m | (126.2 feet) | 14 mm | (0.55 inch) |
| Jib/genoa halyard | 38.5 m | (126.2 feet) | 14 mm | (0.55 inch) |
| Spinnaker halyard | 38.5 m | (126.2 feet) | 14 mm | (0.55 inch) |
| Jib sheet | 16.5 m | (54.0 feet) | 16 mm | (5/8 inch) |
| Genoa sheet | 16.5 m | (54.0 feet) | 16 mm | (5/8 inch) |
| Mainsheet | 41.2 m | (135.0 feet) | 16 mm | (5/8 inch) |
| Spinnaker sheet | 36.2 m | (118.8 feet) | 16 mm | (5/8 inch) |
| Cunningham | 4.9 m | (16.0 feet) | 14 mm | (0.55 inch) |
| Kickingstrap | 9.8 m | (32.0 feet) | 14 mm | (0.55 inch) |
| Clew-outhaul | 9.8 m | (32.0 feet) | 14 mm | (0.55 inch) |
This section is reserved boat owner's modifications, improvements, etc. Here you might find (or contribute with) inspiration for your boat.
Do you have changes/improvements you would like to share? Upload a photo and describe what you have done.
We are always looking for new photos. If you can contribute with photos for Hunter 54 it would be a great help.
If you have any comments to the review, improvement suggestions, or the like, feel free to contact us . Criticism helps us to improve.
- Forums New posts Unanswered threads Register Top Posts Email
- What's new New posts New Posts (legacy) Latest activity New media
- Media New media New comments
- Boat Info Downloads Weekly Quiz Topic FAQ 10000boatnames.com
- Classifieds Sell Your Boat Used Gear for Sale
- Parts General Marine Parts Hunter Beneteau Catalina MacGregor Oday
- Help Terms of Use Monday Mail Subscribe Monday Mail Unsubscribe
Hunter 54 history
- Thread starter Alan
- Start date Apr 14, 2003
- Hunter Owner Forums
I am trying to find any information on the Hunter 54 that Warren Luhrs raced around the world. Was it a prototype that was more heavily built than the production Hunter 54's? Where is the boat now? I would appreciate any information anyone can provide. Thanks.
Thursdays Child perhaps? Are you thinking of Thursdays Child that raced in the 94-95 BOC? I believe it was originally raced around the world in the early 80's (perhaps by Warren)? I think this boat is 60' but I'm not certain. I have numerous racing photos of her. The owner during the BOC race was Arnold Taylor of Portsmouth NH. I've attached a link to the organization that now operates Thursdays Child. She is being used to raise money for charities directed at saving marine mammals. [email protected]
Peggie Hall/HeadMistress
Or maybe Hunter's Child... Hunter's Child was built in the early 90s and also raced in a BOC, sailed by Steve Pettingill. Hunter's Child was on display, either right before or right after that race, at Sail Expo in Atlantic City in '93 or '94. She was built specifically to race in the BOC...I don't remember how well she did, or what became of her afterward.
Some history. I like your question. I hope we see lots of answers. I tried a Google search("Hunter's Child Sailboat") and found a few things. One is in the Related Link. I was fortunate just to get aboard the HC50 once at Annapolis.
It seems odd but the boat you describe... was in an e-Bay auction about a month ago. I tried to get a fellow skipper to pursue it. If I remember right (this is becoming more difficult as I get older) but the minimum bid was like $37K. The boat was located in the LA area. Terry
newly anonymous
Open 60 Thursdays Child is an Open 60 built by Bergstrom & Ridder. It was this boat that was skippered by Luhrs, and Hunter's Child was skippered by Pettingill. Thursdays Child, if I recall correctly, was the prototype for the B&R rig. I saw it about three years ago when it was being restored in the KKMI yard in Richmond. It was DEFINATELY not a Hunter 54.
Take a look on yachtworld.com Alittle off subject but go to yachtworld.com for hunter 54's for sale. A few months ago someone sailed from the west coast to hawaii on one and gave day to day acount of their trip. Too bad a 54 wont fit on the river. craig
Stirling Hasen
Quoted text from the Hunter 54 Brochure When I bought my 1982 Hunter 54, I was lucky enough to obtain an original brochure of the Hunter 54. Below is quoted text from the brochure and I'm attaching a picture of the full brochure (All 4 Pages, Enjoy!) Note that since I can only upload a 80k photo, please email me ([email protected]) if you desire a high resolution image of this brochure. Quoted from Hunter Brochure "After three years of research and 15,000 miles at sea and four transatlantic crossings - the Hunter 54 is ready. There's never been anything like her. Our goal was to create a production yacht which combined the style and performance of the finest custom grand prix boats with the comfort, stability and ease-of-handling of a true world-class cruiser. The result is the Hunter 54, a product of three years of development and thousands of offshore miles (including four transatlantic passages) in all kinds of conditions. The 54 is not only a sophisticated combination of the best of current technology, but also launches several innovative new design concepts. One of the most unique features is a gracefully reversed transom that is not only stepped to provide a convenient boarding platform, but also opens to revel a water-tight compartment housing the dinghy! This feature provides an extremely easy method of boarding from the water, and also eliminates the towing of a tender. Another remarkable feature is a solar charging system which keeps the batteries on charge when the auxiliary is not in use. There are very few custom yachts that can compare with the Hunter 54 in beauty, comfort or performance. The 54 is an extremely fast yacht, un-compromised by any racing rule, yet designed and rigged to be stable and easy to handle under all conditions. Perhaps the most important aspect of the new 54 is that it is a Hunter - a true production yacht complete with Cruise Pac, the most complete standard equipment list available. This also means that the cost of a fully equipped Hunter 54 is substantially below similar boats with no standard equipment. Standards include roller furling; on deck anchor well and anchor roller; pedestal steering; and self tailing winches. Below decks is an inviting entertainment area, comprised of a spacious main salon with twin dining tables, a complete galley, and private staterooms fore and aft with individual heads and showers. There are two companionways with wet lockers for each, and unusually easy engine access via a removable galley unit. Special design features make the Hunter 54 particularly strong and safe. An internal, unidirectional glass frame stiffens the hull and carries all major hull and rig loads, thus relieving the hull itself from major stresses. A special A-frame carries mast compression and also takes shroud loads via stainless steel tie rods, and a special keel receiver is designed to absorb the shock of running aground. Auxiliary power comes from a 48hp diesel. The Hunter 54 is truly a breakthrough in high-performance, offshore cruising. And its Hunter heritage means quality and completeness with exceptional affordability."
2nd Try At Brochure Photo Here is my 2nd try at posting the photo of the Hunter 54 Brochure email me for a high resolution version of this. ([email protected])
Attachments
- This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register. By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. Accept Learn more…
Boat Reviews
- Boats Specs
- Marine Pros
- Boat Insurance
- Boat Warranties
- Boat Transport
- Boat Towing
- Marine Forecasts
Your Ultimate Boating Resource
1983 Hunter 54 SL
1983 hunter 54 sl specs.
- Boat Type : Monohull Sailboats
- Quantity: 1
- Horse Power: 50
- Type: Diesel
- Hull Material : Fiberglass
- Beam : 11'4"
- Length : 54'
- Net Weight : 20500 lbs
- Looking for the Boat Manual? 1983 Hunter Boats 54 SL Request Boat Manual Now
Related Boats
- 1981 Hunter 54 SL
- 1982 Hunter 54 SL
- 1984 Hunter 54 SL
Overview of the 2024 Sea-Doo RXP-X 325
Overview of the 2024 parker offshore 2900 cc, what your boat’s beam is and why it matters, power cats of 2024: ultimate guide to the top power catamarans this year, navigating the heat: 10 safety tips for a safe boat ride in the summer heat, what type of wood is used for pier pilings, what is the difference between a dock and a floating pier, what is the proper technique for pulling a beginner wakeboarder, what does ‘no wake’ mean on a lake, what is the difference between wash and wake, highs, lows, and tidal know-how: a deep dive into ocean currents, 10 essential tips for fishing near private property, the benefits of using a drift sock: guidance for anglers, lure fishing: secrets for imitating live bait and attracting fish, explore the untapped depths of america’s best bass fishing spots, outboard motor maintenance: tips for keeping your engine in top shape, the essential boat tool kit: tools every boater needs, diy boat building: 8 tips and tricks for building your own vessel, the art of miniature maritime craftsmanship: ship in a bottle, antifouling paints: a guide to keeping your boat shipshape, beginner’s guide to standup paddle boarding: tips and techniques, boating for fitness: how to stay active on the water, kayak safety: how to stay safe on the water, anchoring in a kayak or canoe: how to secure your small boat, overview of the 2024 yamaha 252sd, overview of the 2024 tiara yachts 48 le, overview of the 2024 bass cat jaguar sts, 2024 pursuit os 445: an overview, 2024 aquila 47 molokai review, 2024 sea-doo switch 13 sport review, gear reviews, megabass oneten max lbo jerkbait review, fortress anchors fx-7 anchoring system review, fortress anchors fx-11 anchoring system review, fortress anchors commando anchor kit review, fortress anchors aluminum anchors review, stay in touch.
To be updated with all the latest news, offers and special announcements.
- Privacy Policy
- New Sailboats
- Sailboats 21-30ft
- Sailboats 31-35ft
- Sailboats 36-40ft
- Sailboats Over 40ft
- Sailboats Under 21feet
- used_sailboats
- Apps and Computer Programs
- Communications
- Fishfinders
- Handheld Electronics
- Plotters MFDS Rradar
- Wind, Speed & Depth Instruments
- Anchoring Mooring
- Running Rigging
- Sails Canvas
- Standing Rigging
- Diesel Engines
- Off Grid Energy
- Cleaning Waxing
- DIY Projects
- Repair, Tools & Materials
- Spare Parts
- Tools & Gadgets
- Cabin Comfort
- Ventilation
- Footwear Apparel
- Foul Weather Gear
- Mailport & PS Advisor
- Inside Practical Sailor Blog
- Activate My Web Access
- Reset Password
- Customer Service
- Free Newsletter
Mason 33 Used Boat Review
Beneteau 311, Catalina 310 and Hunter 326 Used Boat Comparison
Maine Cat 41 Used Boat Review
Cheoy Lee Clipper 36 & 42 Used Boat Review
Tips From A First “Sail” on the ICW
Tillerpilot Tips and Safety Cautions
Best Crimpers and Strippers for Fixing Marine Electrical Connectors
Thinking Through a Solar Power Installation
Stopping Mainsheet Twist
Working with High-Tech Ropes
Getting a Clue for the Blown-Out Clew
Monel Seizing Wire is Worth the Extra Cost
Fuel Lift Pump: Easy DIY Diesel Fuel System Diagnostic and Repair
Ensuring Safe Shorepower
Sinking? Check Your Stuffing Box
The Rain Catcher’s Guide
Boat Maintenance for the Technically Illiterate: Part 1
Whats the Best Way to Restore Clear Plastic Windows?
Mastering Precision Drilling: How to Use Drill Guides
Giving Bugs the Big Goodbye
Galley Gadgets for the Cruising Sailor
Those Extras you Don’t Need But Love to Have
UV Clothing: Is It Worth the Hype?
Preparing Yourself for Solo Sailing
How to Select Crew for a Passage or Delivery
Preparing A Boat to Sail Solo
On Watch: This 60-Year-Old Hinckley Pilot 35 is Also a Working…
On Watch: America’s Cup
On Watch: All Eyes on Europe Sail Racing
Dear Readers
Chafe Protection for Dock Lines
- Sailboat Reviews
Like other Hunters, the 34 bears the stamp of a mass-produced boat--but she's better than older Hunters.
When the Hunter 34 was introduced in late 1982, it was the second of the “modern” generation of Hunters, the first being the rather remarkable Hunter 54. The Hunter company has been strongly identified with the long-distance singlehanded racing of its president, Warren Luhrs. Although Luhrs has not been particularly successful in his racing, his own boats have been innovative, and the concepts of innovation and high-tech have to some degree rubbed off on Hunter’s production boats.
Hunter has always gone after the entry-level cruising boat owner, and has traditionally pushed its “Cruise Pac” concept—a boat delivered equipped down to the life jackets, and ready to go. This certainly reduces the amount of decision making required by inexperienced boat owners, and has been a successful marketing strategy. For more experienced sailors who would rather choose their own gear, the Cruise Pac idea is not necessarily a plus.
In just over three years, over 800 Hunter 34s were built. For the 1986 model year, the 34 was phased out in favor of the even more Eurostyled Legend 35.
A number of Hunter 34 owners responding to our survey moved up from smaller boats in the Hunter line—exactly what every builder would like to see happen. All reported that the Hunter 34 was lightyears ahead in both design and workmanship compared to earlier models.
Because the Hunter 34 was only in production for a few years, few changes were made between model years. You are therefore less likely to find major upgrades on older boats than you would find on a boat that has been in production for a long time.
Sailing Performance
The Hunter 34 is a fast boat, particularly in light air. This is due almost entirely to her huge rig, which towers over 51′ above the waterline. Owners report that in winds of from seven to 12 knots, the boat is practically unbeatable in club racing. The typical PHRF rating of 135 for the deep keel boat is faster than most other cruiser/racers of her size.
There is a price to be paid for that speed, however. A number of owners responding to our survey report that the original Hunter 34 is a very tippy boat, in either the deep keel or shoal draft version. In winds of 15 knots true or more, it’s time to reef the main when going upwind. In fact, the boat’s lack of stability is the single most commonly criticized aspect of the Hunter 34’s performance in our survey. One owner was considering cutting several feet off his mast. Others have stepped down from 150% headsails to 135% or smaller overlaps.
Normally, you would expect a boat with a 42% ballast/displacement ratio to be stiff. The keel of the deep-draft Hunter 34, however, has most of its weight and volume up high, while the shoal draft keel, even with its extra 220 pounds of ballast, still has a fairly high vertical center of gravity. This just goes to show that you can’t judge a boat’s stability by its ballast/ displacement ratio—you’ve got to know how far down that weight is, too.
Models late in the production run had more ballast. The 1985 Hunter 34 brochure shows about 450 pounds more ballast than in the 1983 model. For cruising, the additional ballast would be a real plus. For club racing with a full crew, the lighter boats could be sailed faster.
Using headsails smaller than 150% on the Hunter 34 would be a good idea, particularly if you couple them with a modern roller furling system. A 135% jib can more effectively be reduced to 110% than a 150% genoa can be reefed to 120%. Since the boat is sensitive to sail area, a good headsail roller furling system is a must, in our opinion.
According to several owners, the Hunter 34 carries substantial weather helm in anything more than very light air. This may in part be due to the boat’s tenderness. As boats with wide sterns and narrow bows heel, the waterplane becomes substantially asymmetrical, which can give the boat a pronounced tendency to head up.
This weather helm may be exacerbated by an original rudder design that some owners report was both too small and too weak for the boat. Several owners reported cracking of the original rudders, which Hunter replaced with a larger, stronger, “high performance” rudder. Unfortunately, in some cases Hunter only paid part of the replacement costs; owners were stuck with the rest. We wouldn’t want a Hunter 34 without the high performance rudder. The better rudder was standard equipment on 1984 and 1985 models.
The complex B&R rig, with its swept-back spreaders and diamond shrouds, is also a headache for some owners. There’s a lot of rigging for a novice to adjust, and according to our survey, the dealers who commissioned the boats were not necessarily more capable of adjusting the rig than the owners.
One problem with the B&R rig is that, on any point of sail freer than a broad reach, the mainsail will fetch up on the spreaders and shrouds. You can apply patches to keep the spreaders from poking holes in the mainsail, but we think the shrouds are likely to chafe on the sail almost from head to foot when running, no matter what you do.
In addition, the lack of either forward lower shrouds, baby stay, or inner forestay means that if the headstay goes, the rig may follow before you can do anything to prevent it. One owner in our survey reported losing his rig when the roller furling headstay failed. Most new sailors have enough trouble tuning a simple, single spreader rig with double lower shrouds. The multi-spreader, multi-shroud B&R rig may seem incomprehensible to them, and they may never be able to tune the rig for good performance.
The boat is very fast upwind, but only average in speed off the wind. With a spinnaker, downwind performance would be greatly improved. The high aspect ratio mainsail simply doesn’t project enough area for efficient downwind sailing, particularly since you can’t square the boom to the mast due to the swept-back spreaders.
Most Hunter 34s are equipped with the Yanmar 3GMF, a three-cylinder, fresh water cooled diesel that puts out about 22.5 hp. This is an excellent engine, although early versions, according to some owners in our survey, were plagued by vibration.
Some of the first Hunter 34s were equipped with the Westerbeke 21 diesel. In our opinion, the Yanmar is a much more desirable engine. For boats to be used in salt water, check to make sure that the engine is fresh water cooled, rather than raw water cooled.
Some early versions of this engine lacked fresh water cooling, and they will not last as long when used in salt water.
Access to the engine for service is good. The Yanmar is more than adequate power for the boat, and she should cruise under power at 5 1/2 knots or more without any trouble. The fuel capacity of 25 gallons should give a range of about 275 miles.
Construction
Hunters are mass-produced boats at the low end of the price scale. The Hunter 34 was the first “small” Hunter to be built with a molded hull liner. A molded liner can add considerable strength to a single-skin boat, and the use of integral molded furniture components can greatly speed assembly. Assembly is the right word, too: these boats are assembled, rather than built.
The original tooling for a hull liner is quite expensive. It is therefore only practical on a boat that is expected to have a fairly large production run.
Not everything about the Hunter 34’s hull liner is a plus, however. According to several owners, any leakage from the stuffing box can be trapped between the liner and the hull, never draining to the bilge. This could not only smell bad after a while, but could possibly cause problems in a cold climate if trapped water freezes without room to expand. The preassembly technique common with liners also means that many systems are installed in ways that can make them difficult to service after the hull, deck, and liner are put together.
Hunter quality control is criticized by some owners in our survey. Complaints include chafed hoses, raw edges, systems hooked up improperly, and leaking ports and hatches. In our opinion, that’s a quality control problem, pure and simple, and it can be a maintenance headache for owners. One owner reported a leaking hull-to-deck joint. When he checked it, he found that many of the bolts had apparently never been torqued down when the hull and deck were joined. We don’t think the boat should have left the factory in that condition.
On the positive side, owners of Hunter 34s who had owned older Hunters report that in general the construction details of the 34 are superior to those of older boats.
Do not expect to find a lot of fancy teak joinerwork on the Hunter 34. Some owners complain that both the interior and exterior teak trim is poorly fitted and poorly finished. Obviously, you could do a lot to improve this if you wanted to—as some owners have—but don’t expect a dramatic increase in the value of the boat for your efforts.
The iron keels of the Hunter 34s can also be a maintenance headache. Some owners say the keels did not come from the factory with adequate protection to avoid rusting—which is almost impossible to prevent with an iron keel. Other owners report that the keel-to-hull seam cracks open, allowing salt water into the joint—which results in more rust. This is a cosmetic problem now, but we think it could over time become a structural problem.
The deck molding has been a source of trouble on some boats. The molded non skid isn’t very nonskid when it gets wet. There are also a number of reports of gelcoat flaws in the deck, including voids and blistering. At least one owner reports that the outer deck laminate in his cockpit has separated from the wood core.
Several owners complain that some molded deck components—cockpit locker covers, anchor well covers—are simply too light, and tend to crack.
The Hunter 34 was one of the first boats under 35′ to offer a tri-cabin layout, and this interior design is frequently cited as a primary reason for buying the boat. Now, of course, it is common for boats this size to have three cabins.
The only real complaint voiced about the interior of the Hunter 34 is the narrowness of the foot of the forward V-berth. Despite being pushed far forward in the hull, the forward cabin feels big due to the long cabin trunk, which extends clear to the anchor well, giving extra headroom over the berth. Standing headroom in the forward cabin drops off to less than 6′ due to the sloping cabin trunk.
Just aft of the forward cabin is a full-width head. This makes a lot of sense in a boat this size, since the combination of head and passageway would make for both a cramped head and a narrow passageway. According to some owner surveys, the plumbing for the toilet leaves a lot to be desired. They report that the holding tank system smells, apparently due to porous hoses and a poor vent design.
Instead of the more common U-shaped dinette, the Hunter 34 has a rather old fashioned dinette with athwartships seating. This certainly makes it easier to convert the dinette to a double berth, but it means that you can seat a maximum of four at the table for dinner. On the port side, the head of the settee berth is used as the seat for the chart table—a design compromise, since that settee is one of only two potential sea berths on the boat.
Original specifications call for a two-burner kerosene stove. Kerosene never caught on as a cooking fuel in this country, partly because it is so difficult to get high-grade kerosene here. Propane or CNG would be far better choices for cooking fuel, since low-grade kerosene is a dirty fuel, and alcohol is expensive, inefficient, and in our opinion, dangerous.
As you would expect on a boat this size, the aft cabin is pretty small, with limited standing area. Despite the fact that the double berth is mostly under the cockpit, there is adequate headroom over it due to the fact that the cockpit is quite shallow.
The privacy of the tri-cabin layout is very important for a family with children, or owners that like to cruise with another couple. The single fixed berth in the main cabin means that the boat will sleep only five without making up the dinette. “Only” five is a pretty good number in a boat this size, and the most important thing is that it sleeps five in a reasonable level of comfort. All in all, the interior of the Hunter 34 is well thought out and livable.
Conclusions
The general design and finish of the Hunter 34 are far ahead of older boats by the company. The Eurostyling of the deck and interior were pretty unusual when the boat first came out, but fairly typical of boats built five years after the Hunter 34 was introduced.
Nevertheless, this is still a mass-produced boat with what some owners consider mediocre quality control and finishing details. It is a fast sailer, but may be so tippy that it discourages some novices. You should definitely sail the boat before you buy it. The B&R rig may also scare off some new sailors. Because of the problems with the deck molding, a used Hunter 34 should be carefully and professionally surveyed before purchase.
If you want a fast, modern small coastal cruiser with maximum room at minimum cost, a Hunter 34 would be a good choice. But remember that you’re buying a mass-produced boat, and it’s not realisitic to expect custom quality at this price.
RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR
Thank you for the comprehensive report. It is very practical and enlightening allowing a potential buyer to make an educated decisiion
I have a deep keel version of the 1999 Hunter 340 – Trinity. She has excellent pointing characteristics allowing her to sail up to 15 degrees off the apparent, and we win races as a result. However, it takes a bit of wind to move her with our 110% headsail. She’s best around 15 knots apparent; above that reefing is advised going to windward. I don’t consider her tippy, but certainly if you push her, you’ll get lots of helm and the rail in the water. I’ve raced her single handed in Georgian Bay in 35-42 knots apparent, winning the Meaburywood Trophy in 2021, an inter-club race of 15 boats. I like her a lot but being on the cusp of retiring, I am looking for a bigger boat to allow longer range cruising.
LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply
Log in to leave a comment
Latest Videos
The Perfect Family Sailboat! Hunter 27-2 – Boat Review
Pettit EZ-Poxy – How to Paint a Boat
The Boat From True Spirit – Sparkman & Stephens
Top 5 Boat Hacks – Boat Maintenance Tips and Tricks
Latest sailboat review.
- Privacy Policy
- Do Not Sell My Personal Information
- Online Account Activation
- Privacy Manager
- Forum Listing
- Marketplace
- Advanced Search
- About The Boat
- Boat Builders Row
- SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!
Bet You Didn't Know This About Hunters!
- Add to quote
So why did you use 3M 4200 instead of 3M 5200 for re-bedding the keel?
On the advice of people far more experienced that I. We considered 5200 but there is ever another problem with the keel, getting it off is as bad, if not worse, than an epoxy bed. 5200 gives the flex but is still a cast-iron bastard to get off if something goes wrong. Since the bolts are there to provide the mechanical attachment to the boat and the bolts on the 340 are 4 1 1/4" and 1 1", they had plenty of strength. 3M 4200 is an adhesive and is still insanely strong. So we accepted it as a compromise to retain a lot of the original bond, allow the keel to flex like it is supposed to and make it actually possible to drop the keel in the event damage is done. And not at the cost of two solid days in the slings and damage to the keel stub in getting it off. 4200 will actually separate. They were recommending a straight bedding compound like they do on race boats. 4200 was the middle ground from a 5200/epoxy bed. Matt
Is that the super shallow draft version? I hear that is an expensive option! To me it does seem to be strong, but only if there are no air gaps. But of course it is not exactly making for easy maintenance. Seems to me to be a more of a budget cutting measure as I am sure the epoxy that they buy by the tanker full is cheaper than 3M 5200, but is not made for any kind of repairs or maintenance. Kind of like the new "sealed for life" transmissions. Sure fine for the first owner, but not so much so for the second who has to have it rebuilt because they made it so you could not have the fluid changed as part of the scheduled maintenance.
So, in all this, I'm still wondering what caused the damage in the first place. If it was cracked and leaking toward the aft end of the keel - that sounds like a pretty good grounding.
We exposed the joint and it appeared to be a hairline crack towards the aft on the port side. Barely visible. There is no evidence of the boat ever having gone aground, we've never been aground since we bought it and the boat has spent its entire life on the Chesapeake Bay. Not impossible to ground and do damage but one of the safest places in the world to do it. I've seen keels with grounding damage. No scrapes, no dents, no chunks removed, nothing on ours. Only evidence of an issue on the keel was the cracking fairing compound and that is a common problem on externally ballasted boats. Inspection found no evidence of any keel damage at all. Our best speculation is given the thinness of the keel profile at the aft is more prone to flex and there isn't a lot of surface area there to bond to. And after putting the keel back on the long keel studs made it hard to get good torque on the nuts. Probably a combination of the long bolts, thin keel and perhaps a light amount of epoxy contributed. We sailed the boat in heavy conditions during a day race and we think that it started the crack to open just enough as the keel flexed in 30 knots of wind and short 4-6 foot chop. The amount of water was negligible. Perhaps a paper towel's worth a day after we splashed following our two weeks on the hard for inspection. I checked the boat twice a day for the six weeks leading up to the repair date. Even the surveyor said it was a long term problem and recommended against repair unless we planned to keep the boat a long time (more than 5 years). Just live with it, sell it and make it someone else's problem. This we obvious did not do. There was no corrosion on the studs and virtually no delamination in the glass in rearmost stud tunnels. So we caught it very early before it had a chance to damage the studs or wreck the rear sump laminate. Crevice corrosion on the bottom of the #4 backing plate but that is not uncommon given the shape of the sump in this area. As I said, speculation at best. Since the repair, the boat is back to being bone dry in the bilge. Matt
Matt- FWIW "Hunter" went out of business about a year ago. The new owners, who bought the assets, may or may not be building the same way. 5200 requires no mixing but requires a fairly long cure time, days. Eventually it does get quite hard but I suspect it still is more flexible than many epoxies. Epoxy has to be mixed properly and typically cures in hours, or overnight. So besides price, there could be good reasons to use one or the other in the larger manufacturing process.
hellosailor said: ...FWIW "Hunter" went out of business about a year ago. The new owners, who bought the assets, may or may not be building the same way... Click to expand...
Five, then I've been mislead. A member of one of the ofrums said they went by the Hunter yard and it was padlocked and closed. This was followed by news that they had filed for bankruptcy and subsequently, the new owners bought the assets of the company and were re-opening it again, with no mention that they were also buying the liabilities, specifically, no mention that they would honor existing contracts or warranties. If that's incorrect, then that's incorrect. As you say you've actually spoken to the new owner, it would seem that you've got better information. Have you seen any specific citation that the new company IS honoring past liabilities, including purchase contracts for existing hulls, and warranty expenses? It would seem that they should have been very proud to announce that, if that were the case. I missed the memo?
hellosailor said: Five, then I've been mislead. A member of one of the ofrums said they went by the Hunter yard and it was padlocked and closed. This was followed by news that they had filed for bankruptcy and subsequently, the new owners bought the assets of the company and were re-opening it again, with no mention that they were also buying the liabilities, specifically, no mention that they would honor existing contracts or warranties. If that's incorrect, then that's incorrect. As you say you've actually spoken to the new owner, it would seem that you've got better information. Have you seen any specific citation that the new company IS honoring past liabilities, including purchase contracts for existing hulls, and warranty expenses? It would seem that they should have been very proud to announce that, if that were the case. I missed the memo? Click to expand...
"perhaps your friend visited them " I never mentioned a friend . or an acquaintance . I said someone on another forum. A friend is someone who will bring you bail money, or any other unlikely request, and ask questions later. An acquaintance is someone you'd be reluctant to call for the same reason as your friend. Some guy online? Could be a dog (old joke) for all you know on the internet. As you say, things change during a bankruptcy sale. The old company and the old ways didn't make a sufficient profit. The new company will make changes to ensure profits. And typically, that means, yes, they will do things differently. If the old company riveted on the wings (like Boeing) or welded on the wings, the new one might glue the wings on. As they are on some modern combat aircraft, even if those are also from Boeing. And with some stuff today, I see glue used in big plants and multiple expensive screws used in smaller plants, where they don't know what glue is. Yet. Slave labor is cheaper than glue. No way to tell unless you call Mr. Marlow and ask, huh?
"They pretty much told him every single Hunter keel was put on with epoxy. " Heheh. Cheeki Rafiki? Maybe you didn't hear about, what was it, Thursday's Child? A boat custom built for the head of Hunter back around the late 80's, that lost its keel very soon after launching. One might suspect that event inspired someone to use epoxy on the later boats. Ya'think? As to 4300/vs/5200 and peeling off laminates, that sounds like someone doesn't quite have it right. If 4200 and 5200 have "almost the same" bond strength, they will remain bonded to a laminate, or not, in the same way. Given that the strength of laminates will also vary quite a bit, there would have to be a significant difference between the bond strength (4200/5200) and the 4200 would have to be significantly weaker in order to ensure it failed to bond, and released from the laminate. I don't know, I'm not looking those up. Just saying, the (non)numbers don't add up unless there is some significant difference. If you have, say, a six by 36 inch area to bond, that's only 216 square inches, but if the bond strength is 700# per square inch, that's still enough to keep a seventy-five ton keel attached. Assuming the laminate can hold up to that.(G)
The notion that the keel was held in place by epoxy, and that the keel bolts are essentially superfluous, is very misleading. The epoxy is there to keep the water out, period. Epoxy is very strong stuff, but it is also prone to crack propagation (as you have apparently found out). Therefore, the material tensile strength (e.g., the value given in an earlier post in this thread) may seem pretty impressive, but that is determined using a very small homogeneous specimen under optimal conditions. One little flaw (and there are always flaws under real world conditions) and catastrophic failure is inevitable. Steel, bronze, and iron are much more forgiving, which is one reason they are used in applications with high tensile loads (like keel bolts). I can pretty much guarantee that without bolts your keel would have fallen off a long time ago.
On a quality-built boat, a hull-keel attachment should be seen as a permanent bond, unlike deck fittings, stanchions, thru-hulls and other fittings that may need to be rebedded, and might be more appropriately sealed with butyl tape or silicone. The two places where 3M 5200 is the ideal adhesive are the hull-keel attachment and the hull-deck attachment. The problem with epoxy in the hull-keel joint is not lack of strength, it is that epoxy cracks. Cracks allow water ingress. Hence, we come to the problem at hand: a leaking keel. Some of you need to pay attention to terminology. There is a difference between "epoxy" and an epoxy putty or mix. Mixing epoxy with another substance lessens its tensile strength and may give it different material properties. "Such improvements are usually achieved at the sacrifice of tensile, flexural, and impact strength (when granular fillers are used). Most fillers reduce the coefficient of thermal expansion and shrinkage in proportion to the amount of filler rather than the type of filler used." from "Dow Liquid Epoxy Resins". http://msdssearch.dow.com/PublishedLiteratureDOWCOM/dh_0030/0901b8038003041c.pdf?filepath=/296-00224.pdf&fromPage=GetDoc I want the strongest, most flexible adhesive on my hull-keel joint. That is not pure epoxy by any stretch of the imagination. There is an Latin expression used in law: "res ipsa loquitur": "the thing speaks for itself". When you keel leaks and/or falls off, without any apparent, abnormal, impact - that speaks for itself. You can argue against reality all you want without changing it.
jameswilson29 said: On a quality-built boat, a hull-keel attachment should be seen as a permanent bond, unlike deck fittings, stanchions, thru-hulls and other fittings that may need to be rebedded, and might be more appropriately sealed with butyl tape or silicone. The two places where 3M 5200 is the ideal adhesive are the hull-keel attachment and the hull-deck attachment. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: The problem with epoxy in the hull-keel joint is not lack of strength, it is that epoxy cracks. Cracks allow water ingress. Hence, we come to the problem at hand: a leaking keel. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: Some of you need to pay attention to terminology. There is a difference between "epoxy" and an epoxy putty or mix. Mixing epoxy with another substance lessens its tensile strength and may give it different material properties. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: I want the strongest, most flexible adhesive on my hull-keel joint. That is not pure epoxy by any stretch of the imagination. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: There is an Latin expression used in law: "res ipsa loquitur": "the thing speaks for itself". When you keel leaks and/or falls off, without any apparent, abnormal, impact - that speaks for itself. You can argue against reality all you want without changing it. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: I want the strongest, most flexible adhesive on my hull-keel joint. Click to expand...
Read the initial post. The OP refers repeatedly to Hunter's use of "epoxy", not epoxy putty or an epoxy mixture. My 37 year old Pearson keel does not leak and the bolts look great considering their age; my bilge is usually dry. I don't know what Pearson used in 1977 and I don't know when 3M 5200 came into widespread use. Pearson did do a good job with the basics. Just because many manufacturers do the same thing, does not make it right. Sometimes they use something or do something because it is easiest and/or most economical, or because everyone else is doing it that way. There have been many class-action lawsuits against the participants in particular industries who were all doing something wrong. It might, however, provide a legal defense to someone who follows the herd and uses the same methods and materials. No one is infallible. Every one should do his or her own research. No one should assume someone is always correct because he or she is an "expert" or a "professional". I know you do not like 3M 5200. I know you sell butyl tape and are an advocate for its use. I use butyl tape for the appropriate application. I also use silicone, polyester resin, epoxy resin, thickened epoxy putty, and 5200 for the appropriate application. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. I applaud the OP for paying attention to his hull-keel joint. As someone who just repaired his rudder, I share his concern for the basics. Too many boaters are concerned about the latest and greatest gadgets and ignore the basics. Any one who follows the boating news knows that boats are having rudder and keel problems that did not exist, or were not reported, 40 years ago. There is a serious builder and/or industry problem to be addressed when keels start leaking and/or falling off relatively-new boats during normal usage.
jameswilson29 said: Read the initial post. The OP refers repeatedly to Hunter's use of "epoxy", not epoxy putty or an epoxy mixture. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: My 37 year old Pearson keel does not leak and the bolts look great considering their age; my bilge is usually dry. I don't know what Pearson used in 1977 and I don't know when 3M 5200 came into widespread use. Pearson did do a good job with the basics. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: Just because many manufacturers do the same thing, does not make it right. Sometimes they use something or do something because it is easiest and/or most economical, or because everyone else is doing it that way. There have been many class-action lawsuits against the participants in particular industries who were all doing something wrong. It might, however, provide a legal defense to someone who follows the herd and uses the same methods and materials. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: No one is infallible. Every one should do his or her own research. No one should assume someone is always correct because he or she is an "expert" or a "professional". Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: I know you do not like 3M 5200. I know you sell butyl tape and are an advocate for its use. I use butyl tape for the appropriate application. I also use silicone, polyester resin, epoxy resin, thickened epoxy putty, and 5200 for the appropriate application. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. Click to expand...
jameswilson29 said: There is a serious builder and/or industry problem to be addressed when keels start leaking and/or falling off relatively-new boats during normal usage. Click to expand...
Threads like this always make me appreciate the encapsulated keel on my old Cal. Not that encapsulated keels are completely problem free (e.g., the hull/keel lamination can flex if not built thick enough)...but the issues in this thread are pretty much irrelevant to a boat like mine.
MaineSail for the win. As usual.
Not really in it for a win just to let folks now that there is more than one way to set a keel, none of them being wrong, just different approaches... Some very, very experienced builders choose epoxy set keels.....
I love how that trawler mast looks on your boat E! There's been allot of dooms dayers here lately. Sigh.
Wow, I did not know there were winners and losers in discussions! So, who "won" the SDR thread with the professional delivery boat captain against some douchebag?
Heh-heh. The douchebag! Obviously! As you well know, counselor, winners and losers are always decided by the preponderance of evidence (see above). I'm just sayin'.
Oh boy, you asked for it Maine. It's the new FightClub: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/vessels-lost-missing-danger/105421-rallies-gone-wrong.html
Maine, presumably that green fallen keel was lead. Anyone who has worked with lead for a while would know that lead forms a thin layer of oxide, exactly the same way that aluminum forms a molecular skin and raw iron develops a rust blemish. And that lead oxide layer will prevent any type of adhesive bond to the lead itself. So all it takes is casting the keel on Monday and not cleaning it off when bonding it on Tuesday, and the bond will only be to the oxide layer. And it will fail relatively easily. Which is not to blame everything on the worker or the metal. I've used 5200 on properly cleaned stainless and seen it peel off like silly putty after it cured. No idea why--but it has me convinced that I can't trust 5200 on stainless. On wood or FRP, I trust it just fine. The greatest advantage to keel bolts, is that you can LOOK at them and get some idea about whether they are doing their job. At least most of the time. Looking at a glued joint, you can't tell a damned thing about how well it is working. So you have to trust the builder, who of course always has used the finest skilled labor and has the highest quality product in mind.
Aloha, we are planning on taking out our Hunter Passage 45 and re-bedding the keel. We have one bolt that is leaking and the last time they took her out and painted her, they just tightened the bolts, after seeing about a cm of gap all around. They placed the boats full weight on the keel and tightened the bolts. Does that sound right? Now 4 years later she is leaking a bit again. Could you please place the pictures of your keel being re-bedded. Thank you
so you can get it apart if you need to unlike true love 5200 is for ever
on fiberglass
Matt Not sure you are still monitoring this forum. I just saw your post today (May 5, 2016) and was curious to learn more and to see photos. Ours is a 2006 H36 with keel issue. First noticed a crack at the hull to keel sump joint on the leading edge and also on the sump to keel flange. This was repaired by sanding down to show no crack and to then epoxy and glass air. Can't recall how we did the keel to sump crack, but definitely did not drop the keel. After repairing from the outside, saw a hairline crack in the bottom of the inside of the sump at the leading edge. Proceeded to gouge out the gelcoat to repair to find water come out. Would like to chat with you on my dime if it is ok with you. regards, Peter
mpickering said: Trouble-free when it works and beyond incredibly strong. The keel bolts are an afterthought. You don't need them. I have 5 keel bolts, 4 of them 1 1/4" monsters and in an epoxy joint, they are superfluous. Click to expand...
Does this need any special repair unlike the ones mentioned in this thread? Hunter 33 broke loose and grounded. Boat yard sales it needs its inner liner repaired?
Attachments
Best bet for you would be to start a new thread, as this one is 4+ years old. Based on what I see in your thumbnails, yes it does need to have the keel dropped, the stub and liner and any stringers fixed, and then have the keel properly reattached.
always good to see a main sail, smacky, and wilson thread dredge though. Ah the good ole days.
mpickering said: My wife and I are the happy owners of a 2000 Hunter 340. Boat surveyed almost flawlessly a year ago. Had a good season, saw a little rough weather on the Chesapeake and spent the winter in the water. Come the spring, we noticed water kept appearing in the bilge. We'd dry it out, it would come back. Over a couple months, we progressively eliminated sources until we finally began to realize the water was coming from the #4 and #5 aft most keel bolts. Out of an abundance of caution, we hauled the boat, brought the surveyor out and revealed that we likely had a crack in the keel bedding that was letting water in via the keel joint. Recommended repairs was to expose the joint and fill it. Most yards stated the only sure way to repair such an issue was to drop and rebed the keel. After much hand-wringing, the need for safety won out. We contracted for a yard in Annapolis to do the work and got the boat in the keel stand. They pulled the keel nuts and backing plates and we saw water in the tunnels. That cinched it. Hunter owners out there, do you ever wonder why you rarely hear about issues with Hunter keels? Here's the reason: View attachment 35265 That's air. Air from the gap from the saw required to cut away the keel joint to drop the keel. Air across 90% of the joint save for the first 3 keel bolt holes. That is all that is holding 4600+ pounds of lead in the air still attached to the boat. All courtesy of Hunter's preferred bedding compound for keels: Epoxy . I learned a lot that day. The main thing being that Hunters don't have keel issues because the bond is so strong it takes a very hard grounding to damage them. Even the factory was surprised to hear a 340 was getting the keel done. For some reason, lots of builders are putting keels on with epoxy nowadays. It makes sense from a maintenance standpoint. Trouble-free when it works and beyond incredibly strong. The keel bolts are an afterthought. You don't need them. I have 5 keel bolts, 4 of them 1 1/4" monsters and in an epoxy joint, they are superfluous. All five nuts were off and the keel was hanging on the boat from three plugs of epoxy that had formed around the forward 3 keel bolt studs. But epoxy creates stiffness along a joint of dissimilar materials that can and does flex. Hence why you're supposed to bed with something flexible to allow for that motion. As long as it holds up it will be fine. But, as my experience shows, once a little fatigue happens or the joint flexes beyond the tensile strength of the epoxy, it doesn't bend; it cracks. That's what we think happened in our boat. That probably combined with a day at the factory where not enough epoxy was put on the day my keel was bedded on. And when you need to fix it, here's where you wind up: View attachment 35273 Enjoy that view (or cringe in horror) and see what happens when epoxy as a joint compound fails you. The end result, though, was a keel rebed that was better than new. The keel stub was repaired to perfection, the keel was rebedded with 3M 4200 and allowed the keel bolts to be actual bolts to hold the keel on and faired so beautifully you can't find the joint even if you knew where to look. Hunter has apparently been doing this forever. And with few problems to their credit. Until you have one like mine. And so are a lot of other makers which leads me to wonder where they will be once sailing stresses take their toll on what is a butt joint to the bottom of their hulls rather than against a dedicated sump like on my boat. But feel free to share this little tidbit with friends and fellow surveyors. Even our surveyor never knew this about Hunters. I have plenty of pictures of this experience if anyone is curious about the process of dropping an epoxy bedded keel and putting it back on. The end result for us is peace of mind. Matt Click to expand...
15Knots said: Hi Matt, I am faced with what seems to be a similar problem on a 1985 Hunter 28. We are hauling it out in May 2023, so we'll be able to see what's really going on. For right now, it seems to be keel bolt leaks. But I'm not convinced. Anyway, I would love to see more photos and, hopefully, be able to pick your brain on this. Can you reach out to me at [email protected] ? Click to expand...
- ?
- 176K members
Top Contributors this Month
Visit our Popular Forums
- Monohull Sailboats
- Multihull Sailboats
- Powered Boats
- General Sailing
- Antares Yachts
- Fountaine Pajot
- Lagoon Catamarans
Cruising Business
- Boat Classifieds
- General Classifieds
- Crew Positions
- Commercial Posts
- Vendor Spotlight
Life Aboard a Boat
- Provisioning: Food & Drink
- Families, Kids, & Pets Afloat
- Recreation, Entertainment, & Fun
- Boat Ownership & Making a Living
- Liveaboard's Forum
Seamanship, Navigation & Boat Handling
- Seamanship & Boat Handling
- Training, Licensing, & Certification
- Health, Safety, & Related Gear
- Rules of the Road, Regulations, & Red Tape
Engineering & Systems
- Const. / Maint. / Refit
- Product / Service Reviews
- Electronics: Comms / AV
- Electrical: Batts / Gen / Solar
- Lithium Power Systems
- Engines & Propulsion
- Propellers & Drive Systems
- Plumbing / Fixtures
- Deck Hdw: Rigging / Sails
- Aux. Equipment & Dinghy
- Anchoring & Mooring
Photo Categories
- Member Galleries
- Life Onboard
- Sailing in the Wind
- Power Boats
- Cruising Destinations
- Maint. & Boat Building
- Marine Life
- Scuba Diving & Divers
- General Photos
Recent Photos
Listing Categories
- African Cats
- view more »
- Crew Wanted
- Crew Available
- Enhance Your Account
- Meet the Mods
- Meet the Advisors
- Signup for The Daily Cruiser Email
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IMAGES
COMMENTS
Boat Review Forum. SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, ... Some friends have suggested looking at a 30-35 foot boat but the Hunter 54 seems to tick so many boxes and for its length actually has a smallish sail plan. They are about 100k and I consider ...
The Hunter 54 is not something I would want to sail offshore unless it was beefed up. Even then it is extremely narrow, and will pound like an SOB in any sort of seas. The rudder is very vulnerable, the sails are massive, and the interior is not what I would call a sea boat's interior. There are so many better choices.
1. Charlestown, RI. Nov 12, 2008. #2. My wife and I (along with two small kids) are considering a larger boat. Can anyone provide pros/cons; personal experience with a Hunter 54 Built 1981-1984. Supposedly it's a cruiser/racer with long legs for ocean racing. Narrow beam 11' for it's length 54'.
It takes into consideration "reported" sail area, displacement and length at waterline. The higher the number the faster speed prediction for the boat. A cat with a number 0.6 is likely to sail 6kts in 10kts wind, a cat with a number of 0.7 is likely to sail at 7kts in 10kts wind. KSP = (Lwl*SA÷D)^0.5*0.5
While searching the Internet (go figure), for more information concerning the 54, I stumbled across Sailnet and Scuttlebutt with similar questions asked back in 2008. Here are a few posts from owners and the resulting decision made by an OP'er. A. "As the owner of a Hunter 54 I can answer your questions.
If you are a boat enthusiast looking to get more information on specs, built, make, etc. of different boats, then here is a complete review of HUNTER 54. Built by Hunter Marine (USA) and designed by John Cherubini, the boat was first built in 1980. It has a hull type of Fin w/spade rudder and LOA is 16.71. Its sail area/displacement ratio 19.45.
After some research, I have come to the conclusion that the H-54 I sailed in the early 80's was indeed the same vessel the OP was asking about.So, I'm trying to give the OP an honest idea of a boat I have sailed, no more, no less. As for older boats, I'm sailing a 1981 Pearson. For six years (1978-1984) I sailed many week long charters in the Virgin Islands aboard the most popular production ...
Hunter 54 is a 54′ 9″ / 16.7 m monohull sailboat designed by John Cherubini and Cortland Steck and built by Hunter Marine between 1980 and 1983. ... The lower a boat's ratio is, the less power it takes to drive the boat to its nominal hull speed or beyond. Read more. Formula. D/L = (D ÷ 2240) ÷ (0.01 x LWL)³ D: Displacement of the boat ...
The Hunter 54 is equipped with a finn keel. The finn keel is the most common keel and provides splendid manoeuvrability. The downside is that it has less directional stability than a long keel. The boat can only enter major marinas as the draft is about 2.04 - 2.14 meter (6.69 - 6.99 ft) dependent on the load.
After owning a Hunter 54, I can tell you that while not being a swan, its a reasonably well built boat for a very affordable price. It looks great, has a great interior, sails nicely and is easlily handeled by two. I have owned two race boats and two crusing boats and currently race on a Farr 52. I have been racing for 17 years and have been on ...
The 54 is an extremely fast yacht, un-compromised by any u000bracing rule, yet designed and rigged to be stable and easy to handle under all conditions. u000bPerhaps the most important aspect of the new 54 is that it is a Hunter - a trueu000bproduction yacht complete with Cruise Pac, the most complete standard equipment list u000bavailable.
Boat Review Forum. 1982 Hunter '54. Jump to Latest SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, ... The Hunter 54 is a boat that has always caught my attention. The orignal design was based on one Warren Luhrs first trans-oceanic racers.
Get the latest 1982 Hunter 54 SL boat specs, boat tests and reviews featuring specifications, available features, engine information, fuel consumption, price, msrp and information resources. ... Boat Reviews. Boat Reviews Overview of the 2024 Sea-Doo RXP-X 325. Boat Reviews Overview of the 2024 Parker Offshore 2900 CC. Boat Reviews
Hunters are a production boat with all the good and bad that entails. I'm not a huge fan but they are not all junk. Hunter was among the earliest builders to adopt a structural grid to carry rigging loads through the deck and into the hull. Deck loads are minimal with that system. Here's a site that is devoted to the restoration of a Hunter 54 ...
Get the latest 1983 Hunter 54 SL boat specs, boat tests and reviews featuring specifications, available features, engine information, fuel consumption, price, msrp and information resources. ... Boat Reviews. Boat Reviews 2024 Pursuit OS 445: An Overview. Aquila Boat Reviews 2024 Aquila 47 Molokai Review. Boat Reviews 2024 Sea-Doo Switch 13 ...
Sailboat Reviews; Sailboats 31-35ft; used_sailboats; Hunter 34 Like other Hunters, the 34 bears the stamp of a mass-produced boat--but she's better than older Hunters. ... the first being the rather remarkable Hunter 54. The Hunter company has been strongly identified with the long-distance singlehanded racing of its president, Warren Luhrs ...
546.00 sq ft (50.725 m 2) Total sail area. 907.12 sq ft (84.274 m 2) Racing. PHRF. 54 (average) [ edit on Wikidata] The Hunter 54 is an American sailboat that was designed by Warren Luhrs, John Cherubini and Cortland Steck as a cruiser and first built in 1980. The design was based upon three years of off-shore racing experience.
PS - I personally would not get an 80s Hunter 54, but that is because it isn't the type of boat layout and design I like. But it doesn't mean I judge all Hunters by it. If I was the OP and read through the reviews of biased owners on HunterOwners.com I would stay away.
6 posts · Joined 2008. #7 · Aug 29, 2008. I've had a 34 foot '83 Hunter for two years without any real complaint. Most of my issues have been with PO "upgrades". Like some of the other posters have said get a good survey. Like the birds say the nice thing with Hunters is they are cheap, cheap, cheap.
Join Date: Sep 2014. Location: Fiji Airways/ Lake Ontario. Boat: Legend 37.5, 1968 Alcort Sunfish, Avon 310. Posts: 2,750. Images: 11. Re: Hunter Sailboat. Quote: Originally Posted by Rasselas36. I'm tired of reading all the negative comments from people who have never sailed or owned a Hunter.
Air from the gap from the saw required to cut away the keel joint to drop the keel. Air across 90% of the joint save for the first 3 keel bolt holes. That is all that is holding 4600+ pounds of lead in the air still attached to the boat. All courtesy of Hunter's preferred bedding compound for keels: Epoxy.
Location: West Indies. Boat: Burger 74' motor yacht, 65 foot 12 metre, Flicka and sailing dinghy. Posts: 648. Seriously misleading ad for Hunter 54. To say that a Hunter 54 is "designed for transatlantic crossings" and call it a "transatlantic racer/cruiser" borders on fraud. Don't get me wrong, its a fast and fun coastal boat.