Hunter 146 vs Hunter Passage 450
How do the Hunter 146 and Hunter Passage 450 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 Passage 450 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 14.5 ft4.42 m | 44.3 ft13.49 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 38.6 ft11.76 m |
| Beam | 6.5 ft1.98 m | 14.0 ft4.27 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.91 m | 5.5 ft1.68 m |
| Displacement | 340 lb154 kg | 26,180 lb11,875 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 9,680 lb4,391 kg |
| Sail area | 92 ft²8.5 m² | 884 ft²82.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 30.22 | 16.04 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 204 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 29.9 |
| Capsize screening | 3.73 | 1.89 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 8.3 |
Hunter 146 vs Hunter Passage 450: the short version
- The Hunter Passage 450 is the larger boat at 44.3 ft13.49 m LOA versus 14.5 ft4.42 m for the Hunter 146.
- The Hunter Passage 450 is heavier, displacing about 7600% 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 16.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter Passage 450 rates better for offshore work (1.89 vs 3.73).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.