1988 C&C 32 vs Hunter 356 — Comparison

1988 C&C 32 1988 C&C 32
VS
Hunter 356 Hunter 356

Specifications Side by Side

Specification 1988 C&C 32 Hunter 356
General
Manufacturer C&C Yachts Hunter
Year 1988–1993 2000–2005
Type Sloop Sloop
Country Canada USA
Designer Cuthbertson & Cassian Glenn Henderson
Dimensions
LOA 9.75 m (32.0 ft) 10.82 m (35.5 ft)
LWL 8.23 m (27.0 ft) 9.30 m (30.5 ft)
Beam 3.28 m (10.8 ft) 3.53 m (11.6 ft)
Draft 1.83 m (6.0 ft) 1.80 m (5.9 ft)
Weight
Displacement 4,536 kg (10,000 lbs) 5,443 kg (12,000 lbs)
Ballast 1,996 kg (4,400 lbs) 2,177 kg (4,799 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area 45.8 m² (493 ft²) 53.0 m² (571 ft²)
Hull Material Fiberglass Fiberglass
Keel Type Fin Fin
Engine & Tanks
Engine 18 HP 21 HP
Fuel Capacity 68 L (18.0 gal) 76 L (20.1 gal)
Water Capacity 114 L (30.1 gal) 151 L (39.9 gal)
Accommodation
Berths 6 6
Cabins 2 2

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
1988 C&C 32
16.98
Hunter 356
17.40
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
1988 C&C 32
44.00
Hunter 356
40.00
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
1988 C&C 32
0.79
Hunter 356
0.80
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
1988 C&C 32
18.99
Hunter 356
16.38

Detailed Comparison

The 1988 C&C 32 and Hunter 356 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 356 is a 2000s offering from Hunter from USA. The 1988 C&C 32 was penned by Cuthbertson & Cassian. The Hunter 356 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 356 at 10.82m (35.5ft) with a 3.53m beam. The Hunter 356 is 1.07m longer than the 1988 C&C 32. The Hunter 356 displaces approximately 20% 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 356, with an SA/D of 17.40 and 53.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 356 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 356 has a comfort ratio of 16.4 and a capsize screening value of 0.80. The ballast ratios are 44.0% for the 1988 C&C 32 and 40.0% for the Hunter 356, 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 356 offers 6 berths in 2 cabins with 151L water and 76L 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 356 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

VS