1998 Hunter 340 vs Hanse 342 — Comparison

1998 Hunter 340 1998 Hunter 340
VS
Hanse 342 Hanse 342

Specifications Side by Side

Specification 1998 Hunter 340 Hanse 342
General
Manufacturer Hunter Hanse
Year 1998–2003 2006–2010
Type Sloop Sloop
Country USA Germany
Designer Glenn Henderson judel/vrolijk & co
Dimensions
LOA 10.36 m (34.0 ft) 10.30 m (33.8 ft)
LWL 9.02 m (29.6 ft) 9.20 m (30.2 ft)
Beam 3.51 m (11.5 ft) 3.40 m (11.2 ft)
Draft 1.52 m (5.0 ft) 1.80 m (5.9 ft)
Weight
Displacement 5,443 kg (12,000 lbs) 5,300 kg (11,684 lbs)
Ballast 2,041 kg (4,500 lbs) 1,650 kg (3,638 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area 51.1 m² (550 ft²) 52.0 m² (560 ft²)
Hull Material Fiberglass Fiberglass
Keel Type Fin Fin
Engine & Tanks
Engine 22 HP 21 HP
Fuel Capacity 95 L (25.1 gal) 100 L (26.4 gal)
Water Capacity 152 L (40.2 gal) 180 L (47.6 gal)
Accommodation
Berths 7 6
Cabins 2 2

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
1998 Hunter 340
16.78
Hanse 342
17.38
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
1998 Hunter 340
37.50
Hanse 342
31.13
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
1998 Hunter 340
0.80
Hanse 342
0.78
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
1998 Hunter 340
17.69
Hanse 342
17.57

Detailed Comparison

The 1998 Hunter 340 and Hanse 342 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1998 Hunter 340 is a 1990s design by Hunter from USA, while the Hanse 342 is a 2000s offering from Hanse from Germany. The 1998 Hunter 340 was penned by Glenn Henderson. The Hanse 342 was designed by judel/vrolijk & co.

In terms of size, the 1998 Hunter 340 measures 10.36m (34.0ft) overall with a beam of 3.51m, compared to the Hanse 342 at 10.30m (33.8ft) with a 3.40m beam. The 1998 Hunter 340 is 0.06m longer than the Hanse 342. The 1998 Hunter 340 displaces approximately 3% 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 Hanse 342, with an SA/D of 17.38 and 52.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hanse 342 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 Hanse 342 has a comfort ratio of 17.6 and a capsize screening value of 0.78. The ballast ratios are 37.5% for the 1998 Hunter 340 and 31.1% for the Hanse 342, 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 Hanse 342 offers 6 berths in 2 cabins with 180L water and 100L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The 1998 Hunter 340 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 Hanse 342 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.

For liveaboard: The 1998 Hunter 340 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