1996 Hunter 290 vs Hanse 342 — Comparison
1996 Hunter 290
Hanse 342
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | 1996 Hunter 290 | Hanse 342 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Hunter | Hanse |
| Year | 1996–2000 | 2006–2010 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | Germany |
| Designer | Glenn Henderson | judel/vrolijk & co |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 8.84 m (29.0 ft) | 10.30 m (33.8 ft) |
| LWL | 7.47 m (24.5 ft) | 9.20 m (30.2 ft) |
| Beam | 2.97 m (9.7 ft) | 3.40 m (11.2 ft) |
| Draft | 1.52 m (5.0 ft) | 1.80 m (5.9 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 3,493 kg (7,701 lbs) | 5,300 kg (11,684 lbs) |
| Ballast | 1,361 kg (3,000 lbs) | 1,650 kg (3,638 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 38.9 m² (419 ft²) | 52.0 m² (560 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Fin |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 15 HP | 21 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 57 L (15.1 gal) | 100 L (26.4 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 76 L (20.1 gal) | 180 L (47.6 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 6 | 6 |
| Cabins | 1 | 2 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The 1996 Hunter 290 and Hanse 342 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1996 Hunter 290 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the Hanse 342 is a 2000s offering from Hanse from Germany. The 1996 Hunter 290 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The Hanse 342 was designed by judel/vrolijk & co.
In terms of size, the 1996 Hunter 290 measures 8.84m (29.0ft) overall with a beam of 2.97m, compared to the Hanse 342 at 10.30m (33.8ft) with a 3.40m beam. The Hanse 342 is 1.46m longer than the 1996 Hunter 290. The Hanse 342 displaces approximately 52% 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 Hanse 342, with an SA/D of 17.38 and 52.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hanse 342 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 Hanse 342 has a comfort ratio of 17.6 and a capsize screening value of 0.78. The ballast ratios are 39.0% for the 1996 Hunter 290 and 31.1% for the Hanse 342, 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 Hanse 342 offers 6 berths in 2 cabins with 180L water and 100L 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 Hanse 342 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.
For liveaboard: Both boats provide similar accommodation, making either a viable choice for 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 · Hanse 342