Hunter 140 vs Hunter 30T
How do the Hunter 140 and Hunter 30T 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 30T | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.0 ft4.27 m | 30.1 ft9.17 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 26.3 ft8.03 m |
| Beam | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 11.0 ft3.35 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 4.3 ft1.30 m |
| Displacement | 225 lb102 kg | 10,500 lb4,763 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 3,800 lb1,724 kg |
| Sail area | 102 ft²9.5 m² | 434 ft²40.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 44.12 | 14.48 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 257 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 24.2 |
| Capsize screening | 3.83 | 2.01 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 6.9 |
Hunter 140 vs Hunter 30T: the short version
- The Hunter 30T is the larger boat at 30.1 ft9.17 m LOA versus 14.0 ft4.27 m for the Hunter 140.
- The Hunter 30T is heavier, displacing about 4567% 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 14.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 30T rates better for offshore work (2.01 vs 3.83).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.