Hunter 36 vs 1984 Pearson 34 — Comparison

Hunter 36Hunter 36
VS
1984 Pearson 341984 Pearson 34

Specifications Side by Side

SpecificationHunter 361984 Pearson 34
General
ManufacturerHunterPearson
Year1996–20011984–1990
TypeSloopSloop
CountryUSAUSA
DesignerGlenn HendersonWilliam Shaw
Dimensions
LOA10.82 m (35.5 ft)10.36 m (34.0 ft)
LWL9.45 m (31.0 ft)8.53 m (28.0 ft)
Beam3.56 m (11.7 ft)3.35 m (11.0 ft)
Draft1.83 m (6.0 ft)1.60 m (5.2 ft)
Weight
Displacement5,897 kg (13,001 lbs)5,443 kg (12,000 lbs)
Ballast2,313 kg (5,099 lbs)2,268 kg (5,000 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area56.0 m² (603 ft²)46.0 m² (495 ft²)
Hull MaterialFiberglassFiberglass
Keel TypeFinFin
Engine & Tanks
Engine27 HP20 HP
Fuel Capacity95 L (25.1 gal)76 L (20.1 gal)
Water Capacity170 L (44.9 gal)152 L (40.2 gal)
Accommodation
Berths66
Cabins22

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
Hunter 36
17.43
1984 Pearson 34
15.11
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
Hunter 36
39.22
1984 Pearson 34
41.67
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
Hunter 36
0.79
1984 Pearson 34
0.76
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
Hunter 36
17.17
1984 Pearson 34
20.28

Detailed Comparison

The Hunter 36 and 1984 Pearson 34 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The Hunter 36 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the 1984 Pearson 34 is a 1980s offering from Pearson from USA. The Hunter 36 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The 1984 Pearson 34 was designed by William Shaw.

In terms of size, the Hunter 36 measures 10.82m (35.5ft) overall with a beam of 3.56m, compared to the 1984 Pearson 34 at 10.36m (34.0ft) with a 3.35m beam. The Hunter 36 is 0.46m longer than the 1984 Pearson 34. The Hunter 36 displaces approximately 8% 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 1984 Pearson 34, with an SA/D of 15.11 and 46.0 m² of canvas, offers moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising. 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 1984 Pearson 34 has a comfort ratio of 20.3 and a capsize screening value of 0.76. The ballast ratios are 39.2% for the Hunter 36 and 41.7% for the 1984 Pearson 34, 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 1984 Pearson 34 offers 6 berths in 2 cabins with 152L water and 76L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The 1984 Pearson 34 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: 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: Hunter 36 · 1984 Pearson 34