Hunter 140 vs Hunter 36 Vision
How do the Hunter 140 and Hunter 36 Vision 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 36 Vision | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.0 ft4.27 m | 36.0 ft10.97 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 31.0 ft9.45 m |
| Beam | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 12.8 ft3.89 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 4.7 ft1.42 m |
| Displacement | 225 lb102 kg | 15,500 lb7,031 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 5,900 lb2,676 kg |
| Sail area | 102 ft²9.5 m² | 677 ft²62.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 44.12 | 17.42 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 232 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 24.8 |
| Capsize screening | 3.83 | 2.05 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 7.5 |
Hunter 140 vs Hunter 36 Vision: the short version
- The Hunter 36 Vision is the larger boat at 36.0 ft10.97 m LOA versus 14.0 ft4.27 m for the Hunter 140.
- The Hunter 36 Vision is heavier, displacing about 6789% 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 17.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 36 Vision rates better for offshore work (2.05 vs 3.83).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.