AMF Apollo 16 vs F1
How do the AMF Apollo 16 and F1 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 | F1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 15.8 ft4.80 m | 15.7 ft4.79 m |
| Waterline length | —— | —— |
| Beam | 5.9 ft1.80 m | 6.6 ft2.00 m |
| Draft | 2.6 ft0.79 m | —— |
| Displacement | 300 lb136 kg | 254 lb115 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | 129 ft²12.0 m² | 121 ft²11.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 46.06 | 48.27 |
| Displacement / Length | — | — |
| Comfort ratio | — | — |
| Capsize screening | 3.54 | 4.14 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | — |
AMF Apollo 16 vs F1: the short version
- The AMF Apollo 16 and F1 are close in length (15.8 ft4.80 m vs 15.7 ft4.79 m ).
- The AMF Apollo 16 is heavier, displacing about 18% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the F1 carries the more powerful rig (48.3 vs 46.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the AMF Apollo 16 rates better for offshore work (3.54 vs 4.14).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.