3.22 vs Alpha 160 F
How do the 3.22 and Alpha 160 F compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
3.22 | 3.22 | Alpha 160 F | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 10.6 ft3.22 m | 10.8 ft3.30 m |
| Waterline length | —— | —— |
| Beam | 2.1 ft0.63 m | 2.2 ft0.66 m |
| Draft | —— | —— |
| Displacement | 33 lb15 kg | 35 lb16 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | —— | —— |
| SA / Displacement | — | — |
| Displacement / Length | — | — |
| Comfort ratio | — | — |
| Capsize screening | 2.58 | 2.65 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | — |
3.22 vs Alpha 160 F: the short version
- The 3.22 and Alpha 160 F are close in length (10.6 ft3.22 m vs 10.8 ft3.30 m ).
- By the capsize screening formula the 3.22 rates better for offshore work (2.58 vs 2.65).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.