1963 Cal 40 vs Hunter 380 — Comparison
1963 Cal 40
Hunter 380
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | 1963 Cal 40 | Hunter 380 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Cal | Hunter |
| Year | 1963–1972 | 2001–2005 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | Bill Lapworth | Glenn Henderson |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 12.19 m (40.0 ft) | 11.58 m (38.0 ft) |
| LWL | 9.14 m (30.0 ft) | 10.06 m (33.0 ft) |
| Beam | 3.35 m (11.0 ft) | 3.76 m (12.3 ft) |
| Draft | 1.83 m (6.0 ft) | 1.83 m (6.0 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 7,030 kg (15,498 lbs) | 7,257 kg (15,999 lbs) |
| Ballast | 2,722 kg (6,001 lbs) | 2,722 kg (6,001 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 61.3 m² (660 ft²) | 64.0 m² (689 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Fin |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 22 HP | 35 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 76 L (20.1 gal) | 114 L (30.1 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 114 L (30.1 gal) | 227 L (60.0 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 6 | 7 |
| Cabins | 2 | 2 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The 1963 Cal 40 and Hunter 380 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1963 Cal 40 is a classic design by Cal from USA, while the Hunter 380 is a 2000s offering from Hunter from USA. The 1963 Cal 40 was penned by Bill Lapworth. The Hunter 380 was designed by Glenn Henderson.
In terms of size, the 1963 Cal 40 measures 12.19m (40.0ft) overall with a beam of 3.35m, compared to the Hunter 380 at 11.58m (38.0ft) with a 3.76m beam. The 1963 Cal 40 is 0.61m longer than the Hunter 380. The Hunter 380 displaces approximately 3% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.
Looking at performance, the 1963 Cal 40 has moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising with an SA/D ratio of 16.97 and 61.3 m² of sail area. The Hunter 380, with an SA/D of 17.35 and 64.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 380 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.
For comfort and safety, the 1963 Cal 40 offers a moderate motion comfort level (comfort ratio: 21.4) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.70). The Hunter 380 has a comfort ratio of 17.3 and a capsize screening value of 0.78. The ballast ratios are 38.7% for the 1963 Cal 40 and 37.5% for the Hunter 380, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.
Below deck, the 1963 Cal 40 provides 6 berths in 2 cabins with 114L of water capacity and 76L of fuel. The Hunter 380 offers 7 berths in 2 cabins with 227L water and 114L fuel capacity.
Verdict
For cruising: The 1963 Cal 40 is the better choice for comfortable cruising thanks to its higher comfort ratio, offering a gentler motion at sea that crews will appreciate on longer passages.
For racing: The Hunter 380 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.
For liveaboard: The Hunter 380 offers more sleeping accommodation, making it better suited for extended living aboard. Consider water and fuel capacity for extended stays away from marinas.