Catalina 36 vs Ericson 36
How do the Catalina 36 and Ericson 36 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Catalina 36 
Ericson 36 | Catalina 36 | Ericson 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 35.6 ft10.84 m | 35.6 ft10.84 m |
| Waterline length | 30.3 ft9.22 m | 29.0 ft8.84 m |
| Beam | 11.9 ft3.63 m | 11.8 ft3.61 m |
| Draft | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Displacement | 15,000 lb6,804 kg | 11,600 lb5,262 kg |
| Ballast | 6,000 lb2,722 kg | 5,230 lb2,372 kg |
| Sail area | 555 ft²51.6 m² | 598 ft²55.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 14.60 | 18.67 |
| Displacement / Length | 242 | 212 |
| Comfort ratio | 26.8 | 21.6 |
| Capsize screening | 1.93 | 2.09 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.4 | 7.2 |
Catalina 36 vs Ericson 36: the short version
- The Catalina 36 and Ericson 36 are close in length (35.6 ft10.84 m vs 35.6 ft10.84 m ).
- The Catalina 36 is heavier, displacing about 29% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Ericson 36 carries the more powerful rig (18.7 vs 14.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Catalina 36 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Catalina 36 rates better for offshore work (1.93 vs 2.09).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.