Hunter 240 vs 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 — Comparison
Hunter 240
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | Hunter 240 | 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Hunter | Pacific Seacraft |
| Year | 1999–2004 | 1988–2007 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | Glenn Henderson | William Crealock |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 7.32 m (24.0 ft) | 9.45 m (31.0 ft) |
| LWL | 6.17 m (20.2 ft) | 7.62 m (25.0 ft) |
| Beam | 2.44 m (8.0 ft) | 3.05 m (10.0 ft) |
| Draft | 1.22 m (4.0 ft) | 1.37 m (4.5 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 1,361 kg (3,000 lbs) | 4,990 kg (11,001 lbs) |
| Ballast | 476 kg (1,049 lbs) | 2,177 kg (4,799 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 22.5 m² (242 ft²) | 40.5 m² (436 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Full |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 8 HP | 25 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 19 L (5.0 gal) | 76 L (20.1 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 30 L (7.9 gal) | 151 L (39.9 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 4 | 5 |
| Cabins | 1 | 2 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The Hunter 240 and 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The Hunter 240 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 is a 1980s offering from Pacific Seacraft from USA. The Hunter 240 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 was designed by William Crealock.
In terms of size, the Hunter 240 measures 7.32m (24.0ft) overall with a beam of 2.44m, compared to the 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 at 9.45m (31.0ft) with a 3.05m beam. The 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 is 2.13m longer than the Hunter 240. The 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 displaces approximately 267% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.
Looking at performance, the Hunter 240 has good sail power for versatile performance with an SA/D ratio of 18.62 and 22.5 m² of sail area. The 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31, with an SA/D of 14.09 and 40.5 m² of canvas, offers modest sail power for its displacement. The Hunter 240 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.
For comfort and safety, the Hunter 240 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 15.0) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.88). The 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 has a comfort ratio of 26.0 and a capsize screening value of 0.71. The ballast ratios are 35.0% for the Hunter 240 and 43.6% for the 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.
Below deck, the Hunter 240 provides 4 berths in 1 cabin with 30L of water capacity and 19L of fuel. The 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 offers 5 berths in 2 cabins with 151L water and 76L fuel capacity.
Verdict
For cruising: The 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 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 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31 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 240 · 1988 Pacific Seacraft 31