1967 Pearson 35 vs Hunter 260 — Comparison
Hunter 260
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | 1967 Pearson 35 | Hunter 260 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Pearson | Hunter |
| Year | 1967–1973 | 1998–2004 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | William Shaw | Glenn Henderson |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 10.67 m (35.0 ft) | 7.85 m (25.8 ft) |
| LWL | 7.62 m (25.0 ft) | 6.86 m (22.5 ft) |
| Beam | 3.05 m (10.0 ft) | 2.74 m (9.0 ft) |
| Draft | 1.52 m (5.0 ft) | 1.37 m (4.5 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 5,443 kg (12,000 lbs) | 2,041 kg (4,500 lbs) |
| Ballast | 2,268 kg (5,000 lbs) | 771 kg (1,700 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 48.6 m² (523 ft²) | 27.5 m² (296 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Full | Fin |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 18 HP | 10 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 57 L (15.1 gal) | 38 L (10.0 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 114 L (30.1 gal) | 57 L (15.1 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 6 | 5 |
| Cabins | 2 | 1 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The 1967 Pearson 35 and Hunter 260 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1967 Pearson 35 is a classic design by Pearson from USA, while the Hunter 260 is a 1990s offering from Hunter from USA. The 1967 Pearson 35 was penned by William Shaw. The Hunter 260 was designed by Glenn Henderson.
In terms of size, the 1967 Pearson 35 measures 10.67m (35.0ft) overall with a beam of 3.05m, compared to the Hunter 260 at 7.85m (25.8ft) with a 2.74m beam. The 1967 Pearson 35 is 2.82m longer than the Hunter 260. The 1967 Pearson 35 displaces approximately 167% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.
Looking at performance, the 1967 Pearson 35 has moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising with an SA/D ratio of 15.96 and 48.6 m² of sail area. The Hunter 260, with an SA/D of 17.37 and 27.5 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 260 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.
For comfort and safety, the 1967 Pearson 35 offers a moderate motion comfort level (comfort ratio: 26.0) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.69). The Hunter 260 has a comfort ratio of 16.0 and a capsize screening value of 0.87. The ballast ratios are 41.7% for the 1967 Pearson 35 and 37.8% for the Hunter 260, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.
Below deck, the 1967 Pearson 35 provides 6 berths in 2 cabins with 114L of water capacity and 57L of fuel. The Hunter 260 offers 5 berths in 1 cabin with 57L water and 38L fuel capacity.
Verdict
For cruising: The 1967 Pearson 35 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 260 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.
For liveaboard: The 1967 Pearson 35 offers more sleeping accommodation, making it better suited for extended living aboard. Consider water and fuel capacity for extended stays away from marinas.
Compare Different Boats
Looking for a different matchup? Browse All Boats
Or view individual specs: 1967 Pearson 35 · Hunter 260