1988 C&C 32 vs Hunter 31 — Comparison

1988 C&C 32
VS
Hunter 31Hunter 31

Specifications Side by Side

Specification1988 C&C 32Hunter 31
General
ManufacturerC&C YachtsHunter
Year1988–19932000–2005
TypeSloopSloop
CountryCanadaUSA
DesignerCuthbertson & CassianGlenn Henderson
Dimensions
LOA9.75 m (32.0 ft)9.45 m (31.0 ft)
LWL8.23 m (27.0 ft)8.23 m (27.0 ft)
Beam3.28 m (10.8 ft)3.12 m (10.2 ft)
Draft1.83 m (6.0 ft)1.68 m (5.5 ft)
Weight
Displacement4,536 kg (10,000 lbs)4,082 kg (8,999 lbs)
Ballast1,996 kg (4,400 lbs)1,588 kg (3,501 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area45.8 m² (493 ft²)44.0 m² (474 ft²)
Hull MaterialFiberglassFiberglass
Keel TypeFinFin
Engine & Tanks
Engine18 HP18 HP
Fuel Capacity68 L (18.0 gal)57 L (15.1 gal)
Water Capacity114 L (30.1 gal)114 L (30.1 gal)
Accommodation
Berths66
Cabins22

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
1988 C&C 32
16.98
Hunter 31
17.51
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
1988 C&C 32
44.00
Hunter 31
38.90
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
1988 C&C 32
0.79
Hunter 31
0.78
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
1988 C&C 32
18.99
Hunter 31
18.65

Detailed Comparison

The 1988 C&C 32 and Hunter 31 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 31 is a 2000s offering from Hunter from USA. The 1988 C&C 32 was penned by Cuthbertson & Cassian. The Hunter 31 was designed by Glenn Henderson.

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 31 at 9.45m (31.0ft) with a 3.12m beam. The 1988 C&C 32 is 0.30m longer than the Hunter 31. The 1988 C&C 32 displaces approximately 11% 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 31, with an SA/D of 17.51 and 44.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 31 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 31 has a comfort ratio of 18.7 and a capsize screening value of 0.78. The ballast ratios are 44.0% for the 1988 C&C 32 and 38.9% for the Hunter 31, 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 31 offers 6 berths in 2 cabins with 114L water and 57L 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 31 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.

For liveaboard: Both boats provide similar accommodation, making either a viable choice for 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: 1988 C&C 32 · Hunter 31