Alajuela 33 vs Endeavour 33
How do the Alajuela 33 and Endeavour 33 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Alajuela 33 
Endeavour 33 | Alajuela 33 | Endeavour 33 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 33.0 ft10.06 m | 33.0 ft10.06 m |
| Waterline length | 27.5 ft8.38 m | 27.5 ft8.38 m |
| Beam | 10.7 ft3.25 m | 11.5 ft3.51 m |
| Draft | 4.8 ft1.45 m | 4.5 ft1.37 m |
| Displacement | 13,500 lb6,123 kg | 11,350 lb5,148 kg |
| Ballast | 4,700 lb2,132 kg | 4,600 lb2,087 kg |
| Sail area | 575 ft²53.4 m² | 539 ft²50.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.23 | 17.08 |
| Displacement / Length | 290 | 244 |
| Comfort ratio | 30.6 | 23.3 |
| Capsize screening | 1.79 | 2.05 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.0 | 7.0 |
Alajuela 33 vs Endeavour 33: the short version
- The Alajuela 33 and Endeavour 33 are close in length (33.0 ft10.06 m vs 33.0 ft10.06 m ).
- The Alajuela 33 is heavier, displacing about 19% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Endeavour 33 carries the more powerful rig (17.1 vs 16.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Alajuela 33 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Alajuela 33 rates better for offshore work (1.79 vs 2.05).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.