Hunter 19-2 vs Hunter 36-2
How do the Hunter 19-2 and Hunter 36-2 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 19-2 
Hunter 36-2 | Hunter 19-2 | Hunter 36-2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 19.0 ft5.79 m | 35.5 ft10.82 m |
| Waterline length | 15.9 ft4.85 m | 31.3 ft9.53 m |
| Beam | 7.8 ft2.36 m | 12.0 ft3.66 m |
| Draft | 4.7 ft1.42 m | 6.4 ft1.96 m |
| Displacement | 2,000 lb907 kg | 13,900 lb6,305 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 5,023 lb2,278 kg |
| Sail area | 167 ft²15.5 m² | 632 ft²58.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.83 | 17.49 |
| Displacement / Length | 221 | 203 |
| Comfort ratio | 12.0 | 24.1 |
| Capsize screening | 2.46 | 2.00 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.3 | 7.5 |
Hunter 19-2 vs Hunter 36-2: the short version
- The Hunter 36-2 is the larger boat at 35.5 ft10.82 m LOA versus 19.0 ft5.79 m for the Hunter 19-2.
- The Hunter 36-2 is heavier, displacing about 595% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 36-2 carries the more powerful rig (17.5 vs 16.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 36-2 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 36-2 rates better for offshore work (2.00 vs 2.46).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.