Hunter 36 Vision vs Vancouver 36
How do the Hunter 36 Vision and Vancouver 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 | Vancouver 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 36.0 ft10.97 m | 36.0 ft10.97 m |
| Waterline length | 31.0 ft9.45 m | 27.9 ft8.51 m |
| Beam | 12.8 ft3.89 m | 11.0 ft3.35 m |
| Draft | 4.7 ft1.42 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 15,500 lb7,031 kg | 18,052 lb8,188 kg |
| Ballast | 5,900 lb2,676 kg | 8,000 lb3,629 kg |
| Sail area | 677 ft²62.9 m² | 685 ft²63.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.42 | 15.93 |
| Displacement / Length | 232 | 370 |
| Comfort ratio | 24.8 | 37.7 |
| Capsize screening | 2.05 | 1.68 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.5 | 7.1 |
Hunter 36 Vision vs Vancouver 36: the short version
- The Hunter 36 Vision and Vancouver 36 are close in length (36.0 ft10.97 m vs 36.0 ft10.97 m ).
- The Vancouver 36 is heavier, displacing about 16% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 36 Vision carries the more powerful rig (17.4 vs 15.9), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Vancouver 36 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Vancouver 36 rates better for offshore work (1.68 vs 2.05).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.