Hunter 146 vs Hunter 33.5
How do the Hunter 146 and Hunter 33.5 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 33.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.5 ft4.42 m | 33.3 ft10.16 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 26.8 ft8.18 m |
| Beam | 6.5 ft1.98 m | 10.9 ft3.33 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 4.5 ft1.37 m |
| Displacement | 340 lb154 kg | 11,000 lb4,990 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 4,500 lb2,041 kg |
| Sail area | 92 ft²8.5 m² | 520 ft²48.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 30.22 | 16.82 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 254 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 24.5 |
| Capsize screening | 3.73 | 1.96 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 6.9 |
Hunter 146 vs Hunter 33.5: the short version
- The Hunter 33.5 is the larger boat at 33.3 ft10.16 m LOA versus 14.5 ft4.42 m for the Hunter 146.
- The Hunter 33.5 is heavier, displacing about 3135% 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 16.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 33.5 rates better for offshore work (1.96 vs 3.73).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.