C-Scow vs Flying Dutchman
How do the C-Scow and Flying Dutchman compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C-Scow 
Flying Dutchman | C-Scow | Flying Dutchman | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 20.0 ft6.10 m | 19.9 ft6.06 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 18.0 ft5.50 m |
| Beam | 7.0 ft2.13 m | 5.8 ft1.78 m |
| Draft | 3.3 ft1.01 m | 3.7 ft1.12 m |
| Displacement | 650 lb295 kg | 364 lb165 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | 216 ft²20.1 m² | 183 ft²17.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 46.06 | 57.43 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 28 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 2.9 |
| Capsize screening | 3.23 | 3.27 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 5.7 |
C-Scow vs Flying Dutchman: the short version
- The C-Scow and Flying Dutchman are close in length (20.0 ft6.10 m vs 19.9 ft6.06 m ).
- The C-Scow is heavier, displacing about 79% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Flying Dutchman carries the more powerful rig (57.4 vs 46.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the C-Scow rates better for offshore work (3.23 vs 3.27).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.