Hunter 146 vs Hunter 420
How do the Hunter 146 and Hunter 420 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 420 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.5 ft4.42 m | 43.4 ft13.23 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 37.8 ft11.53 m |
| Beam | 6.5 ft1.98 m | 13.8 ft4.22 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 6.4 ft1.96 m |
| Displacement | 340 lb154 kg | 19,500 lb8,845 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 6,700 lb3,039 kg |
| Sail area | 92 ft²8.5 m² | 823 ft²76.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 30.22 | 18.18 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 161 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 23.1 |
| Capsize screening | 3.73 | 2.06 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 8.2 |
Hunter 146 vs Hunter 420: the short version
- The Hunter 420 is the larger boat at 43.4 ft13.23 m LOA versus 14.5 ft4.42 m for the Hunter 146.
- The Hunter 420 is heavier, displacing about 5635% 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 18.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 420 rates better for offshore work (2.06 vs 3.73).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.