Hunter 27 vs Hunter 27-3
How do the Hunter 27 and Hunter 27-3 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 27 
Hunter 27-3 | Hunter 27 | Hunter 27-3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 27.2 ft8.28 m | 27.3 ft8.33 m |
| Waterline length | 22.0 ft6.71 m | 23.6 ft7.18 m |
| Beam | 9.3 ft2.82 m | 9.9 ft3.02 m |
| Draft | 4.3 ft1.30 m | 3.4 ft1.05 m |
| Displacement | 7,000 lb3,175 kg | 7,663 lb3,476 kg |
| Ballast | 3,000 lb1,361 kg | 3,400 lb1,542 kg |
| Sail area | 343 ft²31.9 m² | 297 ft²27.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.00 | 12.23 |
| Displacement / Length | 293 | 262 |
| Comfort ratio | 23.7 | 22.6 |
| Capsize screening | 1.93 | 2.01 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.3 | 6.5 |
Hunter 27 vs Hunter 27-3: the short version
- The Hunter 27 and Hunter 27-3 are close in length (27.2 ft8.28 m vs 27.3 ft8.33 m ).
- The Hunter 27-3 is heavier, displacing about 9% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 27 carries the more powerful rig (15.0 vs 12.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 27 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 27 rates better for offshore work (1.93 vs 2.01).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.