1998 Hunter 340 vs 1988 Moody 36 — Comparison

1998 Hunter 3401998 Hunter 340
VS
1988 Moody 361988 Moody 36

Specifications Side by Side

Specification1998 Hunter 3401988 Moody 36
General
ManufacturerHunterMoody
Year1998–20031988–1993
TypeSloopSloop
CountryUSAUK
DesignerGlenn HendersonBill Dixon
Dimensions
LOA10.36 m (34.0 ft)10.97 m (36.0 ft)
LWL9.02 m (29.6 ft)9.14 m (30.0 ft)
Beam3.51 m (11.5 ft)3.51 m (11.5 ft)
Draft1.52 m (5.0 ft)1.52 m (5.0 ft)
Weight
Displacement5,443 kg (12,000 lbs)6,800 kg (14,991 lbs)
Ballast2,041 kg (4,500 lbs)2,700 kg (5,952 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area51.1 m² (550 ft²)54.0 m² (581 ft²)
Hull MaterialFiberglassFiberglass
Keel TypeFinFin
Engine & Tanks
Engine22 HP28 HP
Fuel Capacity95 L (25.1 gal)120 L (31.7 gal)
Water Capacity152 L (40.2 gal)200 L (52.8 gal)
Accommodation
Berths77
Cabins22

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
1998 Hunter 340
16.78
1988 Moody 36
15.29
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
1998 Hunter 340
37.50
1988 Moody 36
39.71
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
1998 Hunter 340
0.80
1988 Moody 36
0.74
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
1998 Hunter 340
17.69
1988 Moody 36
20.90

Detailed Comparison

The 1998 Hunter 340 and 1988 Moody 36 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1998 Hunter 340 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the 1988 Moody 36 is a 1980s offering from Moody from UK. The 1998 Hunter 340 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The 1988 Moody 36 was designed by Bill Dixon.

In terms of size, the 1998 Hunter 340 measures 10.36m (34.0ft) overall with a beam of 3.51m, compared to the 1988 Moody 36 at 10.97m (36.0ft) with a 3.51m beam. The 1988 Moody 36 is 0.61m longer than the 1998 Hunter 340. The 1988 Moody 36 displaces approximately 25% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.

Looking at performance, the 1998 Hunter 340 has moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising with an SA/D ratio of 16.78 and 51.1 m² of sail area. The 1988 Moody 36, with an SA/D of 15.29 and 54.0 m² of canvas, offers moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising. The 1998 Hunter 340 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.

For comfort and safety, the 1998 Hunter 340 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 17.7) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.80). The 1988 Moody 36 has a comfort ratio of 20.9 and a capsize screening value of 0.74. The ballast ratios are 37.5% for the 1998 Hunter 340 and 39.7% for the 1988 Moody 36, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.

Below deck, the 1998 Hunter 340 provides 7 berths in 2 cabins with 152L of water capacity and 95L of fuel. The 1988 Moody 36 offers 7 berths in 2 cabins with 200L water and 120L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The 1988 Moody 36 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 1998 Hunter 340 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: 1998 Hunter 340 · 1988 Moody 36