Hunter 19-2 vs Hunter 36
How do the Hunter 19-2 and Hunter 36 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 19-2 | Hunter 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 19.0 ft5.79 m | 35.9 ft10.95 m |
| Waterline length | 15.9 ft4.85 m | 29.5 ft8.99 m |
| Beam | 7.8 ft2.36 m | 11.1 ft3.38 m |
| Draft | 4.7 ft1.42 m | 4.9 ft1.50 m |
| Displacement | 2,000 lb907 kg | 13,500 lb6,123 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 6,000 lb2,722 kg |
| Sail area | 167 ft²15.5 m² | 604 ft²56.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.83 | 17.05 |
| Displacement / Length | 221 | 235 |
| Comfort ratio | 12.0 | 27.0 |
| Capsize screening | 2.46 | 1.86 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.3 | 7.3 |
Hunter 19-2 vs Hunter 36: the short version
- The Hunter 36 is the larger boat at 35.9 ft10.95 m LOA versus 19.0 ft5.79 m for the Hunter 19-2.
- The Hunter 36 is heavier, displacing about 575% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 36 carries the more powerful rig (17.0 vs 16.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 36 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 36 rates better for offshore work (1.86 vs 2.46).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.