Hunter 140 vs Hunter 22
How do the Hunter 140 and Hunter 22 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 140 | Hunter 140 | Hunter 22 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.0 ft4.27 m | 22.2 ft6.78 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 18.3 ft5.59 m |
| Beam | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 7.9 ft2.41 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 3.2 ft0.96 m |
| Displacement | 225 lb102 kg | 3,400 lb1,542 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 1,400 lb635 kg |
| Sail area | 102 ft²9.5 m² | 219 ft²20.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 44.12 | 15.50 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 246 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 17.1 |
| Capsize screening | 3.83 | 2.11 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 5.7 |
Hunter 140 vs Hunter 22: the short version
- The Hunter 22 is the larger boat at 22.2 ft6.78 m LOA versus 14.0 ft4.27 m for the Hunter 140.
- The Hunter 22 is heavier, displacing about 1411% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 140 carries the more powerful rig (44.1 vs 15.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 22 rates better for offshore work (2.11 vs 3.83).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.