Hunter 36 vs 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 — Comparison
Hunter 36
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | Hunter 36 | 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Hunter | Pacific Seacraft |
| Year | 1996–2001 | 1982–2005 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | Glenn Henderson | William Crealock |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 10.82 m (35.5 ft) | 8.23 m (27.0 ft) |
| LWL | 9.45 m (31.0 ft) | 6.55 m (21.5 ft) |
| Beam | 3.56 m (11.7 ft) | 2.64 m (8.7 ft) |
| Draft | 1.83 m (6.0 ft) | 1.14 m (3.7 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 5,897 kg (13,001 lbs) | 3,175 kg (7,000 lbs) |
| Ballast | 2,313 kg (5,099 lbs) | 1,361 kg (3,000 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 56.0 m² (603 ft²) | 30.5 m² (328 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Full |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 27 HP | 15 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 95 L (25.1 gal) | 45 L (11.9 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 170 L (44.9 gal) | 76 L (20.1 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 6 | 4 |
| Cabins | 2 | 1 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The Hunter 36 and 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The Hunter 36 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 is a 1980s offering from Pacific Seacraft from USA. The Hunter 36 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 was designed by William Crealock.
In terms of size, the Hunter 36 measures 10.82m (35.5ft) overall with a beam of 3.56m, compared to the 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 at 8.23m (27.0ft) with a 2.64m beam. The Hunter 36 is 2.59m longer than the 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27. The Hunter 36 displaces approximately 86% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.
Looking at performance, the Hunter 36 has good sail power for versatile performance with an SA/D ratio of 17.43 and 56.0 m² of sail area. The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27, with an SA/D of 14.35 and 30.5 m² of canvas, offers modest sail power for its displacement. The Hunter 36 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.
For comfort and safety, the Hunter 36 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 17.2) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.79). The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 has a comfort ratio of 26.9 and a capsize screening value of 0.72. The ballast ratios are 39.2% for the Hunter 36 and 42.9% for the 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.
Below deck, the Hunter 36 provides 6 berths in 2 cabins with 170L of water capacity and 95L of fuel. The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 offers 4 berths in 1 cabin with 76L water and 45L fuel capacity.
Verdict
For cruising: The 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27 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 36 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.
For liveaboard: The Hunter 36 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: Hunter 36 · 1982 Pacific Seacraft 27