Hunter 170 vs 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 — Comparison

Hunter 170 Hunter 170
VS
1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25

Specifications Side by Side

Specification Hunter 170 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25
General
Manufacturer Hunter Pacific Seacraft
Year 1996–2009 1986–2007
Type Sloop Sloop
Country USA USA
Designer Hunter Design Team William Crealock
Dimensions
LOA 5.18 m (17.0 ft) 7.62 m (25.0 ft)
LWL 4.57 m (15.0 ft) 5.94 m (19.5 ft)
Beam 1.98 m (6.5 ft) 2.44 m (8.0 ft)
Draft 0.84 m (2.8 ft) 1.07 m (3.5 ft)
Weight
Displacement 295 kg (650 lbs) 2,268 kg (5,000 lbs)
Ballast 59 kg (130 lbs) 953 kg (2,101 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area 11.2 m² (121 ft²) 24.0 m² (258 ft²)
Hull Material Fiberglass Fiberglass
Keel Type Centerboard Full
Engine & Tanks
Engine 10 HP
Fuel Capacity 30 L (7.9 gal)
Water Capacity 57 L (15.1 gal)
Accommodation
Berths 4
Cabins 1

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
Hunter 170
25.70
1986 Pacific Seacraft 25
14.13
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
Hunter 170
20.00
1986 Pacific Seacraft 25
42.02
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
Hunter 170
1.19
1986 Pacific Seacraft 25
0.74
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
Hunter 170
8.08
1986 Pacific Seacraft 25
25.59

Detailed Comparison

The Hunter 170 and 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The Hunter 170 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 is a 1980s offering from Pacific Seacraft from USA. The Hunter 170 was penned by Hunter Design Team. The 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 was designed by William Crealock.

In terms of size, the Hunter 170 measures 5.18m (17.0ft) overall with a beam of 1.98m, compared to the 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 at 7.62m (25.0ft) with a 2.44m beam. The 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 is 2.44m longer than the Hunter 170. The 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 displaces approximately 669% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.

Looking at performance, the Hunter 170 has generous sail power for spirited sailing with an SA/D ratio of 25.70 and 11.2 m² of sail area. The 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25, with an SA/D of 14.13 and 24.0 m² of canvas, offers modest sail power for its displacement. The Hunter 170 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.

For comfort and safety, the Hunter 170 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 8.1) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 1.19). The 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 has a comfort ratio of 25.6 and a capsize screening value of 0.74. The ballast ratios are 20.0% for the Hunter 170 and 42.0% for the 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.

Below deck, the Hunter 170 provides an unspecified number of berths with unspecified water tankage and unspecified fuel capacity. The 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 offers 4 berths in 1 cabin with 57L water and 30L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The 1986 Pacific Seacraft 25 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 170 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