Hunter 260 vs 1984 Pearson 34 — Comparison
Hunter 260
1984 Pearson 34
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | Hunter 260 | 1984 Pearson 34 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Hunter | Pearson |
| Year | 1998–2004 | 1984–1990 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | Glenn Henderson | William Shaw |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 7.85 m (25.8 ft) | 10.36 m (34.0 ft) |
| LWL | 6.86 m (22.5 ft) | 8.53 m (28.0 ft) |
| Beam | 2.74 m (9.0 ft) | 3.35 m (11.0 ft) |
| Draft | 1.37 m (4.5 ft) | 1.60 m (5.2 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 2,041 kg (4,500 lbs) | 5,443 kg (12,000 lbs) |
| Ballast | 771 kg (1,700 lbs) | 2,268 kg (5,000 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 27.5 m² (296 ft²) | 46.0 m² (495 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Fin |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 10 HP | 20 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 38 L (10.0 gal) | 76 L (20.1 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 57 L (15.1 gal) | 152 L (40.2 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 5 | 6 |
| Cabins | 1 | 2 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The Hunter 260 and 1984 Pearson 34 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The Hunter 260 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the 1984 Pearson 34 is a 1980s offering from Pearson from USA. The Hunter 260 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The 1984 Pearson 34 was designed by William Shaw.
In terms of size, the Hunter 260 measures 7.85m (25.8ft) overall with a beam of 2.74m, compared to the 1984 Pearson 34 at 10.36m (34.0ft) with a 3.35m beam. The 1984 Pearson 34 is 2.51m longer than the Hunter 260. The 1984 Pearson 34 displaces approximately 167% 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 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 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 1984 Pearson 34 has a comfort ratio of 20.3 and a capsize screening value of 0.76. The ballast ratios are 37.8% for the Hunter 260 and 41.7% for the 1984 Pearson 34, 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 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 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 1984 Pearson 34 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 260 · 1984 Pearson 34