1988 C&C 32 vs Hunter 27 — Comparison

1988 C&C 32 1988 C&C 32
VS
Hunter 27 Hunter 27

Specifications Side by Side

Specification 1988 C&C 32 Hunter 27
General
Manufacturer C&C Yachts Hunter
Year 1988–1993 1992–1998
Type Sloop Sloop
Country Canada USA
Designer Cuthbertson & Cassian Hunter Design Team
Dimensions
LOA 9.75 m (32.0 ft) 8.23 m (27.0 ft)
LWL 8.23 m (27.0 ft) 7.32 m (24.0 ft)
Beam 3.28 m (10.8 ft) 2.79 m (9.2 ft)
Draft 1.83 m (6.0 ft) 1.52 m (5.0 ft)
Weight
Displacement 4,536 kg (10,000 lbs) 2,495 kg (5,501 lbs)
Ballast 1,996 kg (4,400 lbs) 907 kg (2,000 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area 45.8 m² (493 ft²) 33.0 m² (355 ft²)
Hull Material Fiberglass Fiberglass
Keel Type Fin Fin
Engine & Tanks
Engine 18 HP 12 HP
Fuel Capacity 68 L (18.0 gal) 45 L (11.9 gal)
Water Capacity 114 L (30.1 gal) 68 L (18.0 gal)
Accommodation
Berths 6 5
Cabins 2 1

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
1988 C&C 32
16.98
Hunter 27
18.23
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
1988 C&C 32
44.00
Hunter 27
36.35
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
1988 C&C 32
0.79
Hunter 27
0.82
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
1988 C&C 32
18.99
Hunter 27
16.96

Detailed Comparison

The 1988 C&C 32 and Hunter 27 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1988 C&C 32 is a 1980s design by C&C Yachts from Canada, while the Hunter 27 is a 1990s offering from Hunter from USA. The 1988 C&C 32 was penned by Cuthbertson & Cassian. The Hunter 27 was designed by Hunter Design Team.

In terms of size, the 1988 C&C 32 measures 9.75m (32.0ft) overall with a beam of 3.28m, compared to the Hunter 27 at 8.23m (27.0ft) with a 2.79m beam. The 1988 C&C 32 is 1.52m longer than the Hunter 27. The 1988 C&C 32 displaces approximately 82% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.

Looking at performance, the 1988 C&C 32 has moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising with an SA/D ratio of 16.98 and 45.8 m² of sail area. The Hunter 27, with an SA/D of 18.23 and 33.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 27 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.

For comfort and safety, the 1988 C&C 32 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 19.0) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.79). The Hunter 27 has a comfort ratio of 17.0 and a capsize screening value of 0.82. The ballast ratios are 44.0% for the 1988 C&C 32 and 36.4% for the Hunter 27, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.

Below deck, the 1988 C&C 32 provides 6 berths in 2 cabins with 114L of water capacity and 68L of fuel. The Hunter 27 offers 5 berths in 1 cabin with 68L water and 45L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The 1988 C&C 32 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 27 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.

For liveaboard: The 1988 C&C 32 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

VS