AMF 2100 vs Bay Hen 21
How do the AMF 2100 and Bay Hen 21 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
AMF 2100 | AMF 2100 | Bay Hen 21 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 21.1 ft6.43 m | 21.0 ft6.40 m |
| Waterline length | 17.6 ft5.36 m | 18.3 ft5.56 m |
| Beam | 8.0 ft2.44 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Draft | 4.0 ft1.22 m | 3.5 ft1.07 m |
| Displacement | 2,200 lb998 kg | 900 lb408 kg |
| Ballast | 850 lb386 kg | —— |
| Sail area | 209 ft²19.4 m² | 175 ft²16.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 19.77 | 30.04 |
| Displacement / Length | 181 | 66 |
| Comfort ratio | 11.4 | 6.3 |
| Capsize screening | 2.46 | 2.59 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.6 | 5.7 |
AMF 2100 vs Bay Hen 21: the short version
- The AMF 2100 and Bay Hen 21 are close in length (21.1 ft6.43 m vs 21.0 ft6.40 m ).
- The AMF 2100 is heavier, displacing about 144% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Bay Hen 21 carries the more powerful rig (30.0 vs 19.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The AMF 2100 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the AMF 2100 rates better for offshore work (2.46 vs 2.59).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.