Bluenose one-design sloop vs Stone Horse
How do the Bluenose one-design sloop and Stone Horse compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bluenose one-design sloop 
Stone Horse | Bluenose one-design sloop | Stone Horse | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 23.4 ft7.14 m | 23.3 ft7.11 m |
| Waterline length | 16.0 ft4.88 m | 18.3 ft5.59 m |
| Beam | 6.3 ft1.91 m | 7.1 ft2.16 m |
| Draft | 3.7 ft1.12 m | 3.5 ft1.07 m |
| Displacement | 2,050 lb930 kg | 4,500 lb2,041 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 2,000 lb907 kg |
| Sail area | 218 ft²20.3 m² | 315 ft²29.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.61 | 18.49 |
| Displacement / Length | 223 | 326 |
| Comfort ratio | 15.1 | 25.8 |
| Capsize screening | 1.97 | 1.72 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.4 | 5.7 |
Bluenose one-design sloop vs Stone Horse: the short version
- The Bluenose one-design sloop and Stone Horse are close in length (23.4 ft7.14 m vs 23.3 ft7.11 m ).
- The Stone Horse is heavier, displacing about 120% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Bluenose one-design sloop carries the more powerful rig (21.6 vs 18.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Stone Horse scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Stone Horse rates better for offshore work (1.72 vs 1.97).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.