AMF Apollo 16 vs Newport 16
How do the AMF Apollo 16 and Newport 16 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
AMF Apollo 16 
Newport 16 | AMF Apollo 16 | Newport 16 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 15.8 ft4.80 m | 15.6 ft4.75 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 13.7 ft4.17 m |
| Beam | 5.9 ft1.80 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Draft | 2.6 ft0.79 m | 3.8 ft1.14 m |
| Displacement | 300 lb136 kg | 750 lb340 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 250 lb113 kg |
| Sail area | 129 ft²12.0 m² | 143 ft²13.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 46.06 | 27.72 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 131 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 7.1 |
| Capsize screening | 3.54 | 2.75 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 5.0 |
AMF Apollo 16 vs Newport 16: the short version
- The AMF Apollo 16 and Newport 16 are close in length (15.8 ft4.80 m vs 15.6 ft4.75 m ).
- The Newport 16 is heavier, displacing about 150% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the AMF Apollo 16 carries the more powerful rig (46.1 vs 27.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Newport 16 rates better for offshore work (2.75 vs 3.54).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.