AMF Apollo 16 vs Bombardier 4.8
How do the AMF Apollo 16 and Bombardier 4.8 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
AMF Apollo 16 | AMF Apollo 16 | Bombardier 4.8 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 15.8 ft4.80 m | 15.8 ft4.82 m |
| Waterline length | —— | —— |
| Beam | 5.9 ft1.80 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Draft | 2.6 ft0.79 m | 3.8 ft1.17 m |
| Displacement | 300 lb136 kg | 300 lb136 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | 129 ft²12.0 m² | 128 ft²11.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 46.06 | 45.70 |
| Displacement / Length | — | — |
| Comfort ratio | — | — |
| Capsize screening | 3.54 | 2.99 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | — |
AMF Apollo 16 vs Bombardier 4.8: the short version
- The AMF Apollo 16 and Bombardier 4.8 are close in length (15.8 ft4.80 m vs 15.8 ft4.82 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the AMF Apollo 16 carries the more powerful rig (46.1 vs 45.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Bombardier 4.8 rates better for offshore work (2.99 vs 3.54).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.