Hunter 19-2 vs Marlow-Hunter 31
How do the Hunter 19-2 and Marlow-Hunter 31 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 | Marlow-Hunter 31 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 19.0 ft5.79 m | 32.4 ft9.86 m |
| Waterline length | 15.9 ft4.85 m | 29.7 ft9.04 m |
| Beam | 7.8 ft2.36 m | 11.8 ft3.61 m |
| Draft | 4.7 ft1.42 m | 5.4 ft1.65 m |
| Displacement | 2,000 lb907 kg | 11,854 lb5,377 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 3,380 lb1,533 kg |
| Sail area | 167 ft²15.5 m² | 581 ft²54.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.83 | 17.88 |
| Displacement / Length | 221 | 203 |
| Comfort ratio | 12.0 | 22.4 |
| Capsize screening | 2.46 | 2.08 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.3 | 7.3 |
Hunter 19-2 vs Marlow-Hunter 31: the short version
- The Marlow-Hunter 31 is the larger boat at 32.4 ft9.86 m LOA versus 19.0 ft5.79 m for the Hunter 19-2.
- The Marlow-Hunter 31 is heavier, displacing about 493% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Marlow-Hunter 31 carries the more powerful rig (17.9 vs 16.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Marlow-Hunter 31 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Marlow-Hunter 31 rates better for offshore work (2.08 vs 2.46).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.