Hunter 260 vs 1976 C&C 33 — Comparison

Hunter 260 Hunter 260
VS
1976 C&C 33 1976 C&C 33

Specifications Side by Side

Specification Hunter 260 1976 C&C 33
General
Manufacturer Hunter C&C Yachts
Year 1998–2004 1976–1982
Type Sloop Sloop
Country USA Canada
Designer Glenn Henderson Cuthbertson & Cassian
Dimensions
LOA 7.85 m (25.8 ft) 10.06 m (33.0 ft)
LWL 6.86 m (22.5 ft) 8.23 m (27.0 ft)
Beam 2.74 m (9.0 ft) 3.35 m (11.0 ft)
Draft 1.37 m (4.5 ft) 1.52 m (5.0 ft)
Weight
Displacement 2,041 kg (4,500 lbs) 4,536 kg (10,000 lbs)
Ballast 771 kg (1,700 lbs) 2,041 kg (4,500 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area 27.5 m² (296 ft²) 42.0 m² (452 ft²)
Hull Material Fiberglass Fiberglass
Keel Type Fin Fin
Engine & Tanks
Engine 10 HP 15 HP
Fuel Capacity 38 L (10.0 gal) 57 L (15.1 gal)
Water Capacity 57 L (15.1 gal) 95 L (25.1 gal)
Accommodation
Berths 5 6
Cabins 1 2

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
Hunter 260
17.37
1976 C&C 33
15.57
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
Hunter 260
37.78
1976 C&C 33
45.00
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
Hunter 260
0.87
1976 C&C 33
0.81
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
Hunter 260
15.99
1976 C&C 33
18.07

Detailed Comparison

The Hunter 260 and 1976 C&C 33 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The Hunter 260 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the 1976 C&C 33 is a 1970s offering from C&C Yachts from Canada. The Hunter 260 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The 1976 C&C 33 was designed by Cuthbertson & Cassian.

In terms of size, the Hunter 260 measures 7.85m (25.8ft) overall with a beam of 2.74m, compared to the 1976 C&C 33 at 10.06m (33.0ft) with a 3.35m beam. The 1976 C&C 33 is 2.21m longer than the Hunter 260. The 1976 C&C 33 displaces approximately 122% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.

Looking at performance, the Hunter 260 has good sail power for versatile performance with an SA/D ratio of 17.37 and 27.5 m² of sail area. The 1976 C&C 33, with an SA/D of 15.57 and 42.0 m² of canvas, offers moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising. The Hunter 260 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.

For comfort and safety, the Hunter 260 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 16.0) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.87). The 1976 C&C 33 has a comfort ratio of 18.1 and a capsize screening value of 0.81. The ballast ratios are 37.8% for the Hunter 260 and 45.0% for the 1976 C&C 33, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.

Below deck, the Hunter 260 provides 5 berths in 1 cabin with 57L of water capacity and 38L of fuel. The 1976 C&C 33 offers 6 berths in 2 cabins with 95L water and 57L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The 1976 C&C 33 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 260 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.

For liveaboard: The 1976 C&C 33 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

VS