Hunter 19-2 vs Marlow-Hunter 40
How do the Hunter 19-2 and Marlow-Hunter 40 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 40 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 19.0 ft5.79 m | 41.3 ft12.57 m |
| Waterline length | 15.9 ft4.85 m | 36.0 ft10.97 m |
| Beam | 7.8 ft2.36 m | 13.2 ft4.01 m |
| Draft | 4.7 ft1.42 m | 5.2 ft1.57 m |
| Displacement | 2,000 lb907 kg | 19,700 lb8,936 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 6,027 lb2,734 kg |
| Sail area | 167 ft²15.5 m² | 1,006 ft²93.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.83 | 22.07 |
| Displacement / Length | 221 | 188 |
| Comfort ratio | 12.0 | 26.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.46 | 1.95 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.3 | 8.0 |
Hunter 19-2 vs Marlow-Hunter 40: the short version
- The Marlow-Hunter 40 is the larger boat at 41.3 ft12.57 m LOA versus 19.0 ft5.79 m for the Hunter 19-2.
- The Marlow-Hunter 40 is heavier, displacing about 885% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Marlow-Hunter 40 carries the more powerful rig (22.1 vs 16.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Marlow-Hunter 40 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Marlow-Hunter 40 rates better for offshore work (1.95 vs 2.46).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.