Hunter 280 vs Hunter 36 — Comparison
Hunter 280
Hunter 36
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | Hunter 280 | Hunter 36 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Hunter | Hunter |
| Year | 1998–2003 | 1996–2001 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | Glenn Henderson | Glenn Henderson |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 8.53 m (28.0 ft) | 10.82 m (35.5 ft) |
| LWL | 7.47 m (24.5 ft) | 9.45 m (31.0 ft) |
| Beam | 2.82 m (9.3 ft) | 3.56 m (11.7 ft) |
| Draft | 1.52 m (5.0 ft) | 1.83 m (6.0 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 2,585 kg (5,699 lbs) | 5,897 kg (13,001 lbs) |
| Ballast | 998 kg (2,200 lbs) | 2,313 kg (5,099 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 34.0 m² (366 ft²) | 56.0 m² (603 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Fin |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 15 HP | 27 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 45 L (11.9 gal) | 95 L (25.1 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 76 L (20.1 gal) | 170 L (44.9 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 5 | 6 |
| Cabins | 1 | 2 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The Hunter 280 and Hunter 36 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The Hunter 280 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the Hunter 36 is a 1990s offering from Hunter from USA. The Hunter 280 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The Hunter 36 was designed by Glenn Henderson.
In terms of size, the Hunter 280 measures 8.53m (28.0ft) overall with a beam of 2.82m, compared to the Hunter 36 at 10.82m (35.5ft) with a 3.56m beam. The Hunter 36 is 2.29m longer than the Hunter 280. The Hunter 36 displaces approximately 128% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.
Looking at performance, the Hunter 280 has good sail power for versatile performance with an SA/D ratio of 18.35 and 34.0 m² of sail area. The Hunter 36, with an SA/D of 17.43 and 56.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 280 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.
For comfort and safety, the Hunter 280 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 16.5) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.82). The Hunter 36 has a comfort ratio of 17.2 and a capsize screening value of 0.79. The ballast ratios are 38.6% for the Hunter 280 and 39.2% for the Hunter 36, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.
Below deck, the Hunter 280 provides 5 berths in 1 cabin with 76L of water capacity and 45L of fuel. The Hunter 36 offers 6 berths in 2 cabins with 170L water and 95L fuel capacity.
Verdict
For cruising: The Hunter 36 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 280 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.
For liveaboard: The Hunter 36 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: Hunter 280 · Hunter 36