1996 Hunter 290 vs Hunter 240 — Comparison
1996 Hunter 290
Hunter 240
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | 1996 Hunter 290 | Hunter 240 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Hunter | Hunter |
| Year | 1996–2000 | 1999–2004 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | Glenn Henderson | Glenn Henderson |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 8.84 m (29.0 ft) | 7.32 m (24.0 ft) |
| LWL | 7.47 m (24.5 ft) | 6.17 m (20.2 ft) |
| Beam | 2.97 m (9.7 ft) | 2.44 m (8.0 ft) |
| Draft | 1.52 m (5.0 ft) | 1.22 m (4.0 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 3,493 kg (7,701 lbs) | 1,361 kg (3,000 lbs) |
| Ballast | 1,361 kg (3,000 lbs) | 476 kg (1,049 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 38.9 m² (419 ft²) | 22.5 m² (242 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Fin |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 15 HP | 8 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 57 L (15.1 gal) | 19 L (5.0 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 76 L (20.1 gal) | 30 L (7.9 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 6 | 4 |
| Cabins | 1 | 1 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The 1996 Hunter 290 and Hunter 240 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1996 Hunter 290 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the Hunter 240 is a 1990s offering from Hunter from USA. The 1996 Hunter 290 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The Hunter 240 was designed by Glenn Henderson.
In terms of size, the 1996 Hunter 290 measures 8.84m (29.0ft) overall with a beam of 2.97m, compared to the Hunter 240 at 7.32m (24.0ft) with a 2.44m beam. The 1996 Hunter 290 is 1.52m longer than the Hunter 240. The 1996 Hunter 290 displaces approximately 157% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.
Looking at performance, the 1996 Hunter 290 has good sail power for versatile performance with an SA/D ratio of 17.17 and 38.9 m² of sail area. The Hunter 240, with an SA/D of 18.62 and 22.5 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 240 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.
For comfort and safety, the 1996 Hunter 290 offers a moderate motion comfort level (comfort ratio: 20.3) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.78). The Hunter 240 has a comfort ratio of 15.0 and a capsize screening value of 0.88. The ballast ratios are 39.0% for the 1996 Hunter 290 and 35.0% for the Hunter 240, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.
Below deck, the 1996 Hunter 290 provides 6 berths in 1 cabin with 76L of water capacity and 57L of fuel. The Hunter 240 offers 4 berths in 1 cabin with 30L water and 19L fuel capacity.
Verdict
For cruising: The 1996 Hunter 290 is the better choice for comfortable cruising thanks to its higher comfort ratio, offering a gentler motion at sea that crews will appreciate on longer passages.
For racing: The Hunter 240 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.
For liveaboard: The 1996 Hunter 290 offers more sleeping accommodation, making it better suited for extended living aboard. Consider water and fuel capacity for extended stays away from marinas.
Compare Different Boats
Looking for a different matchup? Browse All Boats
Or view individual specs: 1996 Hunter 290 · Hunter 240