Hanse 342 vs Hunter 27 — Comparison

Hanse 342 Hanse 342
VS
Hunter 27 Hunter 27

Specifications Side by Side

Specification Hanse 342 Hunter 27
General
Manufacturer Hanse Hunter
Year 2006–2010 1992–1998
Type Sloop Sloop
Country Germany USA
Designer judel/vrolijk & co Hunter Design Team
Dimensions
LOA 10.30 m (33.8 ft) 8.23 m (27.0 ft)
LWL 9.20 m (30.2 ft) 7.32 m (24.0 ft)
Beam 3.40 m (11.2 ft) 2.79 m (9.2 ft)
Draft 1.80 m (5.9 ft) 1.52 m (5.0 ft)
Weight
Displacement 5,300 kg (11,684 lbs) 2,495 kg (5,501 lbs)
Ballast 1,650 kg (3,638 lbs) 907 kg (2,000 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area 52.0 m² (560 ft²) 33.0 m² (355 ft²)
Hull Material Fiberglass Fiberglass
Keel Type Fin Fin
Engine & Tanks
Engine 21 HP 12 HP
Fuel Capacity 100 L (26.4 gal) 45 L (11.9 gal)
Water Capacity 180 L (47.6 gal) 68 L (18.0 gal)
Accommodation
Berths 6 5
Cabins 2 1

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
Hanse 342
17.38
Hunter 27
18.23
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
Hanse 342
31.13
Hunter 27
36.35
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
Hanse 342
0.78
Hunter 27
0.82
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
Hanse 342
17.57
Hunter 27
16.96

Detailed Comparison

The Hanse 342 and Hunter 27 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The Hanse 342 is a 2000s design by Hanse from Germany, while the Hunter 27 is a 1990s offering from Hunter from USA. The Hanse 342 was penned by judel/vrolijk & co. The Hunter 27 was designed by Hunter Design Team.

In terms of size, the Hanse 342 measures 10.30m (33.8ft) overall with a beam of 3.40m, compared to the Hunter 27 at 8.23m (27.0ft) with a 2.79m beam. The Hanse 342 is 2.07m longer than the Hunter 27. The Hanse 342 displaces approximately 112% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.

Looking at performance, the Hanse 342 has good sail power for versatile performance with an SA/D ratio of 17.38 and 52.0 m² of sail area. The Hunter 27, with an SA/D of 18.23 and 33.0 m² of canvas, offers good sail power for versatile performance. The Hunter 27 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.

For comfort and safety, the Hanse 342 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 17.6) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.78). The Hunter 27 has a comfort ratio of 17.0 and a capsize screening value of 0.82. The ballast ratios are 31.1% for the Hanse 342 and 36.4% for the Hunter 27, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.

Below deck, the Hanse 342 provides 6 berths in 2 cabins with 180L of water capacity and 100L of fuel. The Hunter 27 offers 5 berths in 1 cabin with 68L water and 45L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The Hanse 342 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 27 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.

For liveaboard: The Hanse 342 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