Columbia 34 Mark II vs Viking 34
How do the Columbia 34 Mark II and Viking 34 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Columbia 34 Mark II 
Viking 34 | Columbia 34 Mark II | Viking 34 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 33.6 ft10.24 m | 33.6 ft10.24 m |
| Waterline length | 27.3 ft8.33 m | 27.2 ft8.28 m |
| Beam | 10.0 ft3.05 m | 9.8 ft3.00 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 6.0 ft1.83 m |
| Displacement | 12,000 lb5,443 kg | 8,900 lb4,037 kg |
| Ballast | 4,700 lb2,132 kg | 4,500 lb2,041 kg |
| Sail area | 526 ft²48.9 m² | 540 ft²50.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.06 | 20.12 |
| Displacement / Length | 262 | 198 |
| Comfort ratio | 29.6 | 22.5 |
| Capsize screening | 1.75 | 1.90 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.0 | 7.0 |
Columbia 34 Mark II vs Viking 34: the short version
- The Columbia 34 Mark II and Viking 34 are close in length (33.6 ft10.24 m vs 33.6 ft10.24 m ).
- The Columbia 34 Mark II is heavier, displacing about 35% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Viking 34 carries the more powerful rig (20.1 vs 16.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Columbia 34 Mark II scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Columbia 34 Mark II rates better for offshore work (1.75 vs 1.90).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.