Dione 98 vs Hunter 32 Vision
How do the Dione 98 and Hunter 32 Vision compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Dione 98 
Hunter 32 Vision | Dione 98 | Hunter 32 Vision | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.0 ft9.75 m | 32.0 ft9.75 m |
| Waterline length | 23.8 ft7.26 m | 27.0 ft8.23 m |
| Beam | 10.3 ft3.13 m | 11.3 ft3.45 m |
| Draft | 5.6 ft1.70 m | 4.3 ft1.30 m |
| Displacement | 6,834 lb3,100 kg | 11,400 lb5,171 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 4,500 lb2,041 kg |
| Sail area | 394 ft²36.6 m² | 486 ft²45.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.51 | 15.35 |
| Displacement / Length | 226 | 259 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.1 | 24.4 |
| Capsize screening | 2.16 | 2.01 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 7.0 |
Dione 98 vs Hunter 32 Vision: the short version
- The Dione 98 and Hunter 32 Vision are close in length (32.0 ft9.75 m vs 32.0 ft9.75 m ).
- The Hunter 32 Vision is heavier, displacing about 67% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Dione 98 carries the more powerful rig (17.5 vs 15.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 32 Vision scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 32 Vision rates better for offshore work (2.01 vs 2.16).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.