Hunter 36 Vision vs Portman 36
How do the Hunter 36 Vision and Portman 36 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 36 Vision | Hunter 36 Vision | Portman 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 36.0 ft10.97 m | 36.0 ft10.97 m |
| Waterline length | 31.0 ft9.45 m | 29.3 ft8.94 m |
| Beam | 12.8 ft3.89 m | 10.5 ft3.20 m |
| Draft | 4.7 ft1.42 m | 4.5 ft1.37 m |
| Displacement | 15,500 lb7,031 kg | 16,000 lb7,257 kg |
| Ballast | 5,900 lb2,676 kg | 6,000 lb2,722 kg |
| Sail area | 677 ft²62.9 m² | 545 ft²50.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.42 | 13.73 |
| Displacement / Length | 232 | 283 |
| Comfort ratio | 24.8 | 34.4 |
| Capsize screening | 2.05 | 1.67 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.5 | 7.3 |
Hunter 36 Vision vs Portman 36: the short version
- The Hunter 36 Vision and Portman 36 are close in length (36.0 ft10.97 m vs 36.0 ft10.97 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 36 Vision carries the more powerful rig (17.4 vs 13.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Portman 36 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Portman 36 rates better for offshore work (1.67 vs 2.05).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.