Blue Water 24 vs Shark 24
How do the Blue Water 24 and Shark 24 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Blue Water 24 
Shark 24 | Blue Water 24 | Shark 24 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 24.0 ft7.32 m | 24.0 ft7.31 m |
| Waterline length | 19.7 ft6.00 m | 20.0 ft6.10 m |
| Beam | 8.6 ft2.62 m | 6.9 ft2.10 m |
| Draft | 4.1 ft1.24 m | 3.0 ft0.91 m |
| Displacement | 7,950 lb3,606 kg | 2,100 lb953 kg |
| Ballast | 3,000 lb1,361 kg | 675 lb306 kg |
| Sail area | 276 ft²25.6 m² | 190 ft²17.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 11.09 | 18.54 |
| Displacement / Length | 466 | 117 |
| Comfort ratio | 33.4 | 11.7 |
| Capsize screening | 1.72 | 2.15 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.9 | 6.0 |
| Average used price | — | €2,980 |
Blue Water 24 vs Shark 24: the short version
- The Blue Water 24 and Shark 24 are close in length (24.0 ft7.32 m vs 24.0 ft7.31 m ).
- The Blue Water 24 is heavier, displacing about 279% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Shark 24 carries the more powerful rig (18.5 vs 11.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Blue Water 24 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Blue Water 24 rates better for offshore work (1.72 vs 2.15).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.