Herreshoff 31 vs Hunter 310
How do the Herreshoff 31 and Hunter 310 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Herreshoff 31 
Hunter 310 | Herreshoff 31 | Hunter 310 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 30.8 ft9.40 m | 30.8 ft9.40 m |
| Waterline length | 28.0 ft8.53 m | 28.0 ft8.53 m |
| Beam | 10.3 ft3.15 m | 10.8 ft3.30 m |
| Draft | 4.0 ft1.22 m | 5.5 ft1.68 m |
| Displacement | 7,560 lb3,429 kg | 8,500 lb3,856 kg |
| Ballast | 3,350 lb1,520 kg | 3,000 lb1,361 kg |
| Sail area | 641 ft²59.6 m² | 464 ft²43.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 26.63 | 17.82 |
| Displacement / Length | 154 | 173 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.1 | 19.1 |
| Capsize screening | 2.11 | 2.12 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.1 | 7.1 |
Herreshoff 31 vs Hunter 310: the short version
- The Herreshoff 31 and Hunter 310 are close in length (30.8 ft9.40 m vs 30.8 ft9.40 m ).
- The Hunter 310 is heavier, displacing about 12% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Herreshoff 31 carries the more powerful rig (26.6 vs 17.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 310 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Herreshoff 31 rates better for offshore work (2.11 vs 2.12).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.