Aloha 32 vs Contrast 33
How do the Aloha 32 and Contrast 33 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Aloha 32 | Aloha 32 | Contrast 33 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.4 ft9.88 m | 32.3 ft9.85 m |
| Waterline length | 25.0 ft7.62 m | 27.2 ft8.30 m |
| Beam | 10.8 ft3.30 m | 10.1 ft3.07 m |
| Draft | 4.8 ft1.45 m | 5.4 ft1.65 m |
| Displacement | 9,800 lb4,445 kg | 9,259 lb4,200 kg |
| Ballast | 4,018 lb1,823 kg | 3,748 lb1,700 kg |
| Sail area | 524 ft²48.7 m² | 614 ft²57.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 18.31 | 22.28 |
| Displacement / Length | 280 | 205 |
| Comfort ratio | 23.3 | 23.0 |
| Capsize screening | 2.02 | 1.92 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.7 | 7.0 |
| Average used price | — | €28,000 |
Aloha 32 vs Contrast 33: the short version
- The Aloha 32 and Contrast 33 are close in length (32.4 ft9.88 m vs 32.3 ft9.85 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Contrast 33 carries the more powerful rig (22.3 vs 18.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Aloha 32 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Contrast 33 rates better for offshore work (1.92 vs 2.02).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.