Bic 210 vs Magnum Fun 350
How do the Bic 210 and Magnum Fun 350 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bic 210 | Bic 210 | Magnum Fun 350 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 11.5 ft3.50 m | 11.7 ft3.55 m |
| Waterline length | —— | —— |
| Beam | 2.2 ft0.68 m | 2.1 ft0.64 m |
| Draft | —— | —— |
| Displacement | 40 lb18 kg | 37 lb17 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | —— | —— |
| SA / Displacement | — | — |
| Displacement / Length | — | — |
| Comfort ratio | — | — |
| Capsize screening | 2.61 | 2.52 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | — |
Bic 210 vs Magnum Fun 350: the short version
- The Bic 210 and Magnum Fun 350 are close in length (11.5 ft3.50 m vs 11.7 ft3.55 m ).
- The Bic 210 is heavier, displacing about 8% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- By the capsize screening formula the Magnum Fun 350 rates better for offshore work (2.52 vs 2.61).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.