Hunter 356 vs Tartan 34-2
How do the Hunter 356 and Tartan 34-2 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 356 
Tartan 34-2 | Hunter 356 | Tartan 34-2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 34.5 ft10.52 m | 34.4 ft10.49 m |
| Waterline length | 30.6 ft9.32 m | 28.8 ft8.79 m |
| Beam | 12.0 ft3.66 m | 11.0 ft3.34 m |
| Draft | 6.4 ft1.96 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Displacement | 13,900 lb6,305 kg | 11,000 lb4,990 kg |
| Ballast | 4,000 lb1,814 kg | 4,400 lb1,996 kg |
| Sail area | 632 ft²58.7 m² | 538 ft²50.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.49 | 17.40 |
| Displacement / Length | 217 | 205 |
| Comfort ratio | 24.7 | 23.0 |
| Capsize screening | 2.00 | 1.97 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.4 | 7.2 |
Hunter 356 vs Tartan 34-2: the short version
- The Hunter 356 and Tartan 34-2 are close in length (34.5 ft10.52 m vs 34.4 ft10.49 m ).
- The Hunter 356 is heavier, displacing about 26% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 356 carries the more powerful rig (17.5 vs 17.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 356 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Tartan 34-2 rates better for offshore work (1.97 vs 2.00).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.