Hunter 140 vs Hunter 37
How do the Hunter 140 and Hunter 37 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 37 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.0 ft4.27 m | 37.0 ft11.28 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 30.0 ft9.14 m |
| Beam | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 11.8 ft3.61 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 5.1 ft1.55 m |
| Displacement | 225 lb102 kg | 17,800 lb8,074 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 6,850 lb3,107 kg |
| Sail area | 102 ft²9.5 m² | 649 ft²60.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 44.12 | 15.23 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 294 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 31.8 |
| Capsize screening | 3.83 | 1.82 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 7.3 |
Hunter 140 vs Hunter 37: the short version
- The Hunter 37 is the larger boat at 37.0 ft11.28 m LOA versus 14.0 ft4.27 m for the Hunter 140.
- The Hunter 37 is heavier, displacing about 7811% 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 15.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 37 rates better for offshore work (1.82 vs 3.83).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.