Biggles Wader
Well-known member
Me too, especially if they were all the same price.
Quick vote…
- Thread starter Anna Caston
- Start date
Tranona
Well-known member
That was much less true in 1992 than it is today. It is only in the last 15 years or so that they have moved in the direction of more automated production, particularly interiors. Partly driven by the adoption of better production techniques by mass producers which reduced the gap in quality that in the past was used to justify the higher price. No doubt high operating costs, particularly labour and appreciation of the value of the Krona also had an impact. This came home to me when I bought my Bavaria in 2015. An HR310 was on the initial list because the basic price premium was reasonable and justified by the higher quality of much of the interior and the higher spec of some equipment (although mostly the same make). However once specced up to the same level of equipment the gap more than doubled. Not in any way suggesting the HR is not "better" just not sufficiently better to justify the price difference.
The same dilemma is faced by a used boat buyer as illustrated perfectly by the OP. You get more for your money with a newer more mass market boat than an older "quality" boat. There are pros and cons for each, and it is a personal choice as each boat on the list will do what is proposed.
michael_w
Well-known member
Having owned 3 Scandinavian built boats out of 6, the only difference between them and their rivals from other countries is the Scandinavian worker's wages are so much higher, So the increased cost leads to an impression of quality in the eye of the purchaser.
You pays your money ...
You pays your money ...
[3889]
...
Me too, mostly because I don't like centre cockpits.
pvb
Well-known member
My last boat was a 1990 Hallberg-Rassy 352. The interior joinery was quite good, although there were some rough edges around once you started delving into lockers. If the teak deck hadn't been a few years away from needing replacement, I wouldn't have sold it. I owned it for 19 years and loved it. Is the price premium justified? Well, there's a massive pride of ownership involved with a Hallberg-Rassy, and a great camaraderie. The boats tend to be over-specified in engineering and equipment terms, and are very durable if cared for. HR operate a brilliant spare parts service, with bits for a 25/30 year old boat readily available. And general support is excellent too, ask a question by email and you'll get a detailed answer quickly. As a result of all this, HR resale values are quite high, so this helps to overcome the initial price premium.
When I decided to sell the HR352, I seriously considered a new HR372 as a replacement. But it was very expensive. In the end, for less than half the price, I ordered a new Bavaria Cruiser 37 with a high spec. The Bavaria is very well built, almost to automotive quality, but even so the interior joinery lacks the finesse and design of current HR interiors. Sure, HR use CNC machining now to build their interiors, but they also add lots of nice features. But nice features aren't really worth a six-figure sum in my mind. In exactly the same way that you did, I too decided that the HR price premium was difficult for me to justify.
But if I suddenly received a lot of money, I'd order a new HR straight away!
chrishscorp
Well-known member
The HR if its in a good condition as at that age it should be fairly solidly built.
pvb
Well-known member
Another urban myth comment!
The 1992 HR36 weighed 7.5 tons, including the 3.4 tons of lead keel, so the actual boat weighed 4.1 tons.
The 2006 Dufour 365 weighed 6.2 tons, including the 1.5 tons of keel, so the actual boat weighed 4.7 tons.
So which hull might be more "solidly built"?
Stemar
Well-known member
Heavier may mean stronger, but not necessarily. What I like in those figures is 3.4 tons of lead in the keel of the HR as against 1.5 tons in the Dufour, which suggests that the Dufour is reliant on form stability rather than ballast. In any conditions I want to be out in, that doesn't matter, but if I were passing Longships right now, I know which I'd prefer to be in. Well, TBH, I'd far rather be in a nice cosy pub, but if I had to...
Having sailed a fair bit on a Dufour 385 from about 2010, I have to say I wasn't impressed. It sailed well, and had loads of space; all mod cons, but wide open down below, with a paucity of hand holds. Oh, and no grill for my breakfast toast, though TBF, I've no idea if the HR would have one. Great for marina hopping, but not what I'd choose for my round the world cruise. And the damn thing slammed in a 1 foot chop in Chichester Harbour! The final negative point for me was that the boat had, AFAIK, never been run aground hard enough give cause to suspect keel damage, but a pre-sale survey revealed £15K's worth of damage to the keel mounting. A deep, skinny keel puts a lot of load on the hull it you do hit anything. I'd expect the HR to be a lot more forgiving of such escapades.
Ian_Rob
Well-known member
We have the three cabin version of the Dufour 365 GL with a 1.82m keel but I don’t know the other boats and can‘t comment on how she compares. At the time of purchasing she seemed to be rather better built than the Jenneau & Beneteau equivalents though perhaps missing some of their design flair on some of the miscellaneous items (eg the companionway hatch, gas locker lid, cockpit table, cockpit locker lid arrangement).
We like the long linear galley down the port side and that there is thus a route to the fore cabin that doesn’t interfere with the salon table. There was some comment at the time that the arrangement doesn’t give you anything to brace against whilst at sea but we have never found that to be a particular problem.
The bed in the forecabin isn’t the traditional V- shaped arrangemen but instead a double on the starboard side. This does mean that the person away from the aisle has to climb over the other which may be a disadvantage or advantage depending on your POV & age.
My biggest complaint is that contrary to a certain review that appeared at the time we bought her, there isn’t much space around the engine and I find/found her a pig to work on. This has eased somewhat as experience tells you which tool and angles of approach work best.
I have just replaced the original Genoa with a Vectron sail by Kemps and there has been a significant increase in her performance in lighter winds and in her ability to sail close to the wind.
We like the long linear galley down the port side and that there is thus a route to the fore cabin that doesn’t interfere with the salon table. There was some comment at the time that the arrangement doesn’t give you anything to brace against whilst at sea but we have never found that to be a particular problem.
The bed in the forecabin isn’t the traditional V- shaped arrangemen but instead a double on the starboard side. This does mean that the person away from the aisle has to climb over the other which may be a disadvantage or advantage depending on your POV & age.
My biggest complaint is that contrary to a certain review that appeared at the time we bought her, there isn’t much space around the engine and I find/found her a pig to work on. This has eased somewhat as experience tells you which tool and angles of approach work best.
I have just replaced the original Genoa with a Vectron sail by Kemps and there has been a significant increase in her performance in lighter winds and in her ability to sail close to the wind.
Last edited:
johnalison
Well-known member
I have been on board Rustler 36s but not sailed one, though I have sailed in company. They are very nice for what they are but from an earlier generation. As said, they are smaller inside, more comparable to my 34, and much slower than either. That doesn't mean that they are not good safe boats for those who accept these qualities.
Nina Lucia
Active member
HR36 definitely if they are all reasonably similar condition
Mark-1
Well-known member
I've sailed two and I love them, but not really a comparable size to the boats under discussion. Smaller all round plus the tiller uses up acres of cockpit space and the stern is v. narrow. (From memory the tiller doesn't even hinge up of the way when stationary because it passes through the hull.) From memory I suspect in terms of usable space and LWL a Bav 30 or 32 might be as big or bigger.
More a boat for a couple than a family of 4, say. (By modern standards - must have seemed
massive in 1970!!!)
Last edited:
Fantasie 19
Well-known member
Assuming they all equal condition mechanically/cosmetically, then HR for me..
johnalison
Well-known member
When we were in Hamble having our HR checked by the agents, a 36 arrived with its crew of three delivery lads. They had had to stop to put the owner ashore when they faced a F9 off the Dutch coast as his stomach couldn't take it but they pressed on, with no problems. That is the kind of boat I would like to be out in in that weather, more so than later designs with more freeboard.
pvb
Well-known member
The HR352 I bought had been in Spain for a few years since new, and a delivery crew brought it back to Hamble Point to be sold. They had an "interesting" trip across Biscay apparently. When I viewed the boat, which had only just arrived, it looked like a massive wave had just lifted it and dumped it on the hardstanding at Hamble Point. The interior had broken glass, smashed locker doors, even a couple of blood stains. I put in a silly offer, conditional on them tidying the boat, and it was accepted.
Blueboatman
Well-known member
The OP might want to get a surveyor type or highly experienced user or fellow model owner(s) to go through the3 choices . There will be information that the OP may not fully be seeing quite as readily as perhaps others can who have been there already . It’s the nature of the beast and all the clues will be there for someone to make a sifting assessment more clearly ?
I reckon
That’s not a pejoritative , just why you always ‘ know’ you should run emotional stuff by a ‘ head logic’ person, or ‘ sleep on it’ before committing to a choice….. Get the fuller more rounded view ( the one that ticks all the Like feelings whilst protecting the Wallet and Resale parts too ! )
Result , right choice right boat?
I reckon
That’s not a pejoritative , just why you always ‘ know’ you should run emotional stuff by a ‘ head logic’ person, or ‘ sleep on it’ before committing to a choice….. Get the fuller more rounded view ( the one that ticks all the Like feelings whilst protecting the Wallet and Resale parts too ! )
Result , right choice right boat?
Stemar
Well-known member
Do all that, then do as most of us do, buy the one that winks at you and says "Buy me"!
I'm firmly of the opinion that choosing a boat is not a logical action, any more than choosing a partner is. You try to avoid too many red flags, but then you go with the one that hooks you
Mark-1
Well-known member
This thread is the OP going through exactly that process - slowly considering the decision over time and coming to a cool headed conclusion.
Tranona
Well-known member
Agreed. Unless we are fixated on a particular design most go through exactly the same process and end up with a short list of 3 or 4. The choice old "quality" vs newer mass production in this size/price range is one many people consider. As Stemar says the final choice tends to jump out at you when you get to it. You sit in it after crawling all over it, look at each other and nod (hopefully)
pyrojames
Well-known member
Buy the one that pulls at your heart strings. Whether is be the layout, the looks, whatever. You'll fall in love with, look forward to being on board, and won't mind spending time and money on it. In my experience buying boats is never a rational decision!