Hunter 140 vs Hunter 25-2
How do the Hunter 140 and Hunter 25-2 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 140 
Hunter 25-2 | Hunter 140 | Hunter 25-2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.0 ft4.27 m | 24.5 ft7.47 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 22.1 ft6.73 m |
| Beam | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 8.5 ft2.58 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 2.0 ft0.61 m |
| Displacement | 225 lb102 kg | 3,700 lb1,678 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 1,309 lb594 kg |
| Sail area | 102 ft²9.5 m² | 218 ft²20.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 44.12 | 14.58 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 153 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 14.6 |
| Capsize screening | 3.83 | 2.19 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 6.3 |
Hunter 140 vs Hunter 25-2: the short version
- The Hunter 25-2 is the larger boat at 24.5 ft7.47 m LOA versus 14.0 ft4.27 m for the Hunter 140.
- The Hunter 25-2 is heavier, displacing about 1544% 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 14.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 25-2 rates better for offshore work (2.19 vs 3.83).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.