Ericson 29 vs Hunter 290
How do the Ericson 29 and Hunter 290 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Ericson 29 
Hunter 290 | Ericson 29 | Hunter 290 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 28.6 ft8.71 m | 28.6 ft8.71 m |
| Waterline length | 22.0 ft6.71 m | 26.9 ft8.21 m |
| Beam | 9.3 ft2.82 m | 10.8 ft3.28 m |
| Draft | 4.3 ft1.32 m | 5.3 ft1.62 m |
| Displacement | 8,500 lb3,856 kg | 7,400 lb3,357 kg |
| Ballast | 3,900 lb1,769 kg | 2,550 lb1,157 kg |
| Sail area | 407 ft²37.8 m² | 350 ft²32.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.64 | 14.75 |
| Displacement / Length | 356 | 169 |
| Comfort ratio | 28.3 | 17.6 |
| Capsize screening | 1.81 | 2.21 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.3 | 7.0 |
Ericson 29 vs Hunter 290: the short version
- The Ericson 29 and Hunter 290 are close in length (28.6 ft8.71 m vs 28.6 ft8.71 m ).
- The Ericson 29 is heavier, displacing about 15% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Ericson 29 carries the more powerful rig (15.6 vs 14.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Ericson 29 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Ericson 29 rates better for offshore work (1.81 vs 2.21).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.