Buccaneer vs Interlake
How do the Buccaneer and Interlake compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Buccaneer 
Interlake | Buccaneer | Interlake | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 18.0 ft5.49 m | 18.0 ft5.49 m |
| Waterline length | 16.7 ft5.08 m | —— |
| Beam | 6.0 ft1.83 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Draft | 3.8 ft1.17 m | 4.6 ft1.40 m |
| Displacement | 500 lb227 kg | 650 lb295 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | 175 ft²16.3 m² | 175 ft²16.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 44.45 | 37.31 |
| Displacement / Length | 48 | — |
| Comfort ratio | 4.2 | — |
| Capsize screening | 3.02 | 2.89 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.5 | — |
Buccaneer vs Interlake: the short version
- The Buccaneer and Interlake are close in length (18.0 ft5.49 m vs 18.0 ft5.49 m ).
- The Interlake is heavier, displacing about 30% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Buccaneer carries the more powerful rig (44.4 vs 37.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Interlake rates better for offshore work (2.89 vs 3.02).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.