Alpha 160 F vs Tarifa
How do the Alpha 160 F and Tarifa compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Alpha 160 F | Alpha 160 F | Tarifa | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 10.8 ft3.30 m | 10.8 ft3.30 m |
| Waterline length | —— | —— |
| Beam | 2.2 ft0.66 m | 2.1 ft0.65 m |
| Draft | —— | —— |
| Displacement | 35 lb16 kg | 29 lb13 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | —— | —— |
| SA / Displacement | — | — |
| Displacement / Length | — | — |
| Comfort ratio | — | — |
| Capsize screening | 2.65 | 2.77 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | — |
Alpha 160 F vs Tarifa: the short version
- The Alpha 160 F and Tarifa are close in length (10.8 ft3.30 m vs 10.8 ft3.30 m ).
- The Alpha 160 F is heavier, displacing about 21% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- By the capsize screening formula the Alpha 160 F rates better for offshore work (2.65 vs 2.77).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.