Hunter 34 vs Hunter 356
How do the Hunter 34 and Hunter 356 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 34 
Hunter 356 | Hunter 34 | Hunter 356 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 34.4 ft10.49 m | 34.5 ft10.52 m |
| Waterline length | 28.3 ft8.61 m | 30.6 ft9.32 m |
| Beam | 11.6 ft3.53 m | 12.0 ft3.66 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 6.4 ft1.96 m |
| Displacement | 11,820 lb5,361 kg | 13,900 lb6,305 kg |
| Ballast | 5,000 lb2,268 kg | 4,000 lb1,814 kg |
| Sail area | 567 ft²52.7 m² | 632 ft²58.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.48 | 17.49 |
| Displacement / Length | 234 | 217 |
| Comfort ratio | 23.2 | 24.7 |
| Capsize screening | 2.03 | 2.00 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.1 | 7.4 |
Hunter 34 vs Hunter 356: the short version
- The Hunter 34 and Hunter 356 are close in length (34.4 ft10.49 m vs 34.5 ft10.52 m ).
- The Hunter 356 is heavier, displacing about 18% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 356 carries the more powerful rig (17.5 vs 17.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 356 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 356 rates better for offshore work (2.00 vs 2.03).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.