Hunter 170 vs Moorings 295
How do the Hunter 170 and Moorings 295 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 170 | Hunter 170 | Moorings 295 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 17.1 ft5.21 m | 29.5 ft8.99 m |
| Waterline length | 12.1 ft3.68 m | 27.0 ft8.23 m |
| Beam | 7.0 ft2.13 m | 10.5 ft3.20 m |
| Draft | 4.5 ft1.37 m | 4.0 ft1.22 m |
| Displacement | 478 lb217 kg | 7,500 lb3,402 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 2,680 lb1,216 kg |
| Sail area | 134 ft²12.4 m² | 400 ft²37.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 35.07 | 16.70 |
| Displacement / Length | 121 | 170 |
| Comfort ratio | 4.1 | 18.2 |
| Capsize screening | 3.58 | 2.15 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 4.7 | 7.0 |
Hunter 170 vs Moorings 295: the short version
- The Moorings 295 is the larger boat at 29.5 ft8.99 m LOA versus 17.1 ft5.21 m for the Hunter 170.
- The Moorings 295 is heavier, displacing about 1469% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 170 carries the more powerful rig (35.1 vs 16.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Moorings 295 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Moorings 295 rates better for offshore work (2.15 vs 3.58).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.