Hunter 49 vs Hunter HC 50
How do the Hunter 49 and Hunter HC 50 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Hunter 49 | Hunter 49 | Hunter HC 50 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 49.9 ft15.22 m | 50.0 ft15.24 m |
| Waterline length | 43.8 ft13.36 m | 45.0 ft13.72 m |
| Beam | 14.8 ft4.50 m | 15.0 ft4.57 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 5.8 ft1.78 m |
| Displacement | 32,813 lb14,884 kg | 18,000 lb8,165 kg |
| Ballast | 12,544 lb5,690 kg | 5,600 lb2,540 kg |
| Sail area | 1,013 ft²94.1 m² | 1,274 ft²118.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.81 | 29.68 |
| Displacement / Length | 174 | 88 |
| Comfort ratio | 30.8 | 16.2 |
| Capsize screening | 1.84 | 2.29 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 8.9 | 9.0 |
Hunter 49 vs Hunter HC 50: the short version
- The Hunter 49 and Hunter HC 50 are close in length (49.9 ft15.22 m vs 50.0 ft15.24 m ).
- The Hunter 49 is heavier, displacing about 82% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Hunter HC 50 carries the more powerful rig (29.7 vs 15.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Hunter 49 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Hunter 49 rates better for offshore work (1.84 vs 2.29).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.