Bristol Caravel 22 vs Laminex Pocket Rocket
How do the Bristol Caravel 22 and Laminex Pocket Rocket compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bristol Caravel 22 | Bristol Caravel 22 | Laminex Pocket Rocket | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 22.0 ft6.71 m | 22.0 ft6.71 m |
| Waterline length | 19.5 ft5.94 m | 21.5 ft6.55 m |
| Beam | 7.8 ft2.36 m | 9.5 ft2.90 m |
| Draft | 3.5 ft1.07 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 2,850 lb1,293 kg | 2,400 lb1,089 kg |
| Ballast | 1,150 lb522 kg | 1,100 lb499 kg |
| Sail area | 205 ft²19.0 m² | 258 ft²24.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.32 | 23.03 |
| Displacement / Length | 172 | 108 |
| Comfort ratio | 14.2 | 8.5 |
| Capsize screening | 2.19 | 2.84 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.9 | 6.2 |
Bristol Caravel 22 vs Laminex Pocket Rocket: the short version
- The Bristol Caravel 22 and Laminex Pocket Rocket are close in length (22.0 ft6.71 m vs 22.0 ft6.71 m ).
- The Bristol Caravel 22 is heavier, displacing about 19% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Laminex Pocket Rocket carries the more powerful rig (23.0 vs 16.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Bristol Caravel 22 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Bristol Caravel 22 rates better for offshore work (2.19 vs 2.84).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.