Hunter 260 vs J/80
How do the Hunter 260 and J/80 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 260 
J/80 | Hunter 260 | J/80 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 26.3 ft8.00 m | 26.3 ft8.00 m |
| Waterline length | 23.3 ft7.09 m | 22.0 ft6.71 m |
| Beam | 9.0 ft2.73 m | 8.2 ft2.51 m |
| Draft | 6.0 ft1.83 m | 4.9 ft1.49 m |
| Displacement | 5,000 lb2,268 kg | 2,899 lb1,315 kg |
| Ballast | 2,000 lb907 kg | 1,400 lb635 kg |
| Sail area | 299 ft²27.8 m² | 337 ft²31.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.36 | 26.52 |
| Displacement / Length | 178 | 121 |
| Comfort ratio | 17.2 | 11.6 |
| Capsize screening | 2.10 | 2.31 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 6.3 |
Hunter 260 vs J/80: the short version
- The Hunter 260 and J/80 are close in length (26.3 ft8.00 m vs 26.3 ft8.00 m ).
- The Hunter 260 is heavier, displacing about 72% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the J/80 carries the more powerful rig (26.5 vs 16.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 260 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 260 rates better for offshore work (2.10 vs 2.31).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.