1967 Pearson 35 vs Hunter 280 — Comparison
Hunter 280
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | 1967 Pearson 35 | Hunter 280 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Pearson | Hunter |
| Year | 1967–1973 | 1998–2003 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | William Shaw | Glenn Henderson |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 10.67 m (35.0 ft) | 8.53 m (28.0 ft) |
| LWL | 7.62 m (25.0 ft) | 7.47 m (24.5 ft) |
| Beam | 3.05 m (10.0 ft) | 2.82 m (9.3 ft) |
| Draft | 1.52 m (5.0 ft) | 1.52 m (5.0 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 5,443 kg (12,000 lbs) | 2,585 kg (5,699 lbs) |
| Ballast | 2,268 kg (5,000 lbs) | 998 kg (2,200 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 48.6 m² (523 ft²) | 34.0 m² (366 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Full | Fin |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 18 HP | 15 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 57 L (15.1 gal) | 45 L (11.9 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 114 L (30.1 gal) | 76 L (20.1 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 6 | 5 |
| Cabins | 2 | 1 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The 1967 Pearson 35 and Hunter 280 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1967 Pearson 35 is a classic design by Pearson from USA, while the Hunter 280 is a 1990s offering from Hunter from USA. The 1967 Pearson 35 was penned by William Shaw. The Hunter 280 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 280 at 8.53m (28.0ft) with a 2.82m beam. The 1967 Pearson 35 is 2.14m longer than the Hunter 280. The 1967 Pearson 35 displaces approximately 111% 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 280, with an SA/D of 18.35 and 34.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 280 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 280 has a comfort ratio of 16.5 and a capsize screening value of 0.82. The ballast ratios are 41.7% for the 1967 Pearson 35 and 38.6% for the Hunter 280, 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 280 offers 5 berths in 1 cabin with 76L water and 45L 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 280 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 280