Bayfield 29 vs Ohlson 29 / Winga 29
How do the Bayfield 29 and Ohlson 29 / Winga 29 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bayfield 29 | Bayfield 29 | Ohlson 29 / Winga 29 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 29.0 ft8.84 m | 28.9 ft8.80 m |
| Waterline length | 21.8 ft6.63 m | 22.0 ft6.70 m |
| Beam | 10.2 ft3.10 m | 8.9 ft2.70 m |
| Draft | 3.5 ft1.07 m | 5.3 ft1.60 m |
| Displacement | 7,100 lb3,221 kg | 7,275 lb3,300 kg |
| Ballast | 3,000 lb1,361 kg | 2,866 lb1,300 kg |
| Sail area | 420 ft²39.0 m² | 355 ft²33.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 18.19 | 15.13 |
| Displacement / Length | 308 | 306 |
| Comfort ratio | 20.9 | 25.6 |
| Capsize screening | 2.12 | 1.83 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.2 | 6.3 |
| Average used price | — | €6,500 |
Bayfield 29 vs Ohlson 29 / Winga 29: the short version
- The Bayfield 29 and Ohlson 29 / Winga 29 are close in length (29.0 ft8.84 m vs 28.9 ft8.80 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Bayfield 29 carries the more powerful rig (18.2 vs 15.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Ohlson 29 / Winga 29 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Ohlson 29 / Winga 29 rates better for offshore work (1.83 vs 2.12).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.