Hunter 36 vs Hunter 36 Vision
How do the Hunter 36 and Hunter 36 Vision compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 36 | Hunter 36 | Hunter 36 Vision | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 35.9 ft10.95 m | 36.0 ft10.97 m |
| Waterline length | 29.5 ft8.99 m | 31.0 ft9.45 m |
| Beam | 11.1 ft3.38 m | 12.8 ft3.89 m |
| Draft | 4.9 ft1.50 m | 4.7 ft1.42 m |
| Displacement | 13,500 lb6,123 kg | 15,500 lb7,031 kg |
| Ballast | 6,000 lb2,722 kg | 5,900 lb2,676 kg |
| Sail area | 604 ft²56.1 m² | 677 ft²62.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.05 | 17.42 |
| Displacement / Length | 235 | 232 |
| Comfort ratio | 27.0 | 24.8 |
| Capsize screening | 1.86 | 2.05 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.3 | 7.5 |
Hunter 36 vs Hunter 36 Vision: the short version
- The Hunter 36 and Hunter 36 Vision are close in length (35.9 ft10.95 m vs 36.0 ft10.97 m ).
- The Hunter 36 Vision is heavier, displacing about 15% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 36 Vision carries the more powerful rig (17.4 vs 17.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 36 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 36 rates better for offshore work (1.86 vs 2.05).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.