Hunter 140 vs Hunter Xcite
How do the Hunter 140 and Hunter Xcite 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 Xcite | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.0 ft4.27 m | 9.9 ft3.02 m |
| Waterline length | —— | —— |
| Beam | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 4.4 ft1.35 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 3.2 ft0.97 m |
| Displacement | 225 lb102 kg | 95 lb43 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | 102 ft²9.5 m² | 46 ft²4.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 44.12 | 35.35 |
| Displacement / Length | — | — |
| Comfort ratio | — | — |
| Capsize screening | 3.83 | 3.88 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | — |
Hunter 140 vs Hunter Xcite: the short version
- The Hunter 140 is the larger boat at 14.0 ft4.27 m LOA versus 9.9 ft3.02 m for the Hunter Xcite.
- The Hunter 140 is heavier, displacing about 137% 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 35.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 140 rates better for offshore work (3.83 vs 3.88).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.