Hunter 27-3 vs Orion 27-2
How do the Hunter 27-3 and Orion 27-2 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 27-3 | Hunter 27-3 | Orion 27-2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 27.3 ft8.33 m | 27.3 ft8.33 m |
| Waterline length | 23.6 ft7.18 m | 22.2 ft6.77 m |
| Beam | 9.9 ft3.02 m | 9.2 ft2.81 m |
| Draft | 3.4 ft1.05 m | 4.0 ft1.22 m |
| Displacement | 7,663 lb3,476 kg | 10,000 lb4,536 kg |
| Ballast | 3,400 lb1,542 kg | 3,300 lb1,497 kg |
| Sail area | 297 ft²27.6 m² | 443 ft²41.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 12.23 | 15.27 |
| Displacement / Length | 262 | 407 |
| Comfort ratio | 22.6 | 33.8 |
| Capsize screening | 2.01 | 1.71 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 6.3 |
Hunter 27-3 vs Orion 27-2: the short version
- The Hunter 27-3 and Orion 27-2 are close in length (27.3 ft8.33 m vs 27.3 ft8.33 m ).
- The Orion 27-2 is heavier, displacing about 30% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Orion 27-2 carries the more powerful rig (15.3 vs 12.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Orion 27-2 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Orion 27-2 rates better for offshore work (1.71 vs 2.01).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.