2001 Hunter 216 vs 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 — Comparison
2001 Hunter 216
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | 2001 Hunter 216 | 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Hunter | Pacific Seacraft |
| Year | 2001–2008 | 1982–2005 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | Glenn Henderson | William Crealock |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 6.50 m (21.3 ft) | 8.23 m (27.0 ft) |
| LWL | 5.64 m (18.5 ft) | 6.55 m (21.5 ft) |
| Beam | 2.34 m (7.7 ft) | 2.64 m (8.7 ft) |
| Draft | 1.07 m (3.5 ft) | 1.14 m (3.7 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 907 kg (2,000 lbs) | 3,175 kg (7,000 lbs) |
| Ballast | 340 kg (750 lbs) | 1,361 kg (3,000 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 17.5 m² (188 ft²) | 30.5 m² (328 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Full |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 5 HP | 15 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 15 L (4.0 gal) | 45 L (11.9 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 19 L (5.0 gal) | 76 L (20.1 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 3 | 4 |
| Cabins | 1 | 1 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The 2001 Hunter 216 and 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 2001 Hunter 216 is a 2000s design by Hunter from USA, while the 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 is a 1980s offering from Pacific Seacraft from USA. The 2001 Hunter 216 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 was designed by William Crealock.
In terms of size, the 2001 Hunter 216 measures 6.50m (21.3ft) overall with a beam of 2.34m, compared to the 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 at 8.23m (27.0ft) with a 2.64m beam. The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 is 1.73m longer than the 2001 Hunter 216. The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 displaces approximately 250% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.
Looking at performance, the 2001 Hunter 216 has good sail power for versatile performance with an SA/D ratio of 18.99 and 17.5 m² of sail area. The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27, with an SA/D of 14.35 and 30.5 m² of canvas, offers modest sail power for its displacement. The 2001 Hunter 216 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.
For comfort and safety, the 2001 Hunter 216 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 12.9) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.97). The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 has a comfort ratio of 26.9 and a capsize screening value of 0.72. The ballast ratios are 37.5% for the 2001 Hunter 216 and 42.9% for the 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.
Below deck, the 2001 Hunter 216 provides 3 berths in 1 cabin with 19L of water capacity and 15L of fuel. The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 offers 4 berths in 1 cabin with 76L water and 45L fuel capacity.
Verdict
For cruising: The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 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 2001 Hunter 216 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.
For liveaboard: The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 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: 2001 Hunter 216 · 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27