Hunter 146 vs Hunter 25
How do the Hunter 146 and Hunter 25 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 146 | Hunter 146 | Hunter 25 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.5 ft4.42 m | 24.8 ft7.57 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 20.2 ft6.15 m |
| Beam | 6.5 ft1.98 m | 8.0 ft2.44 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 3.9 ft1.19 m |
| Displacement | 340 lb154 kg | 3,850 lb1,746 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 1,800 lb816 kg |
| Sail area | 92 ft²8.5 m² | 257 ft²23.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 30.22 | 16.74 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 209 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 17.3 |
| Capsize screening | 3.73 | 2.04 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 6.0 |
Hunter 146 vs Hunter 25: the short version
- The Hunter 25 is the larger boat at 24.8 ft7.57 m LOA versus 14.5 ft4.42 m for the Hunter 146.
- The Hunter 25 is heavier, displacing about 1032% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 146 carries the more powerful rig (30.2 vs 16.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 25 rates better for offshore work (2.04 vs 3.73).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.