Hunter 376 vs Hunter 380
How do the Hunter 376 and Hunter 380 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 376 | Hunter 376 | Hunter 380 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.3 ft11.35 m | 37.3 ft11.35 m |
| Waterline length | 32.0 ft9.75 m | 32.0 ft9.75 m |
| Beam | 12.6 ft3.83 m | 12.6 ft3.83 m |
| Draft | 5.0 ft1.52 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 15,000 lb6,804 kg | 16,000 lb7,257 kg |
| Ballast | 5,400 lb2,449 kg | 5,900 lb2,676 kg |
| Sail area | 684 ft²63.5 m² | 740 ft²68.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.99 | 18.65 |
| Displacement / Length | 204 | 218 |
| Comfort ratio | 23.7 | 25.3 |
| Capsize screening | 2.04 | 2.00 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.6 | 7.6 |
Hunter 376 vs Hunter 380: the short version
- The Hunter 376 and Hunter 380 are close in length (37.3 ft11.35 m vs 37.3 ft11.35 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter 380 carries the more powerful rig (18.6 vs 18.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 380 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 380 rates better for offshore work (2.00 vs 2.04).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.