Com-pac 16 vs Laguna 16
How do the Com-pac 16 and Laguna 16 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Com-pac 16 
Laguna 16 | Com-pac 16 | Laguna 16 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 16.0 ft4.88 m | 16.0 ft4.88 m |
| Waterline length | 14.0 ft4.27 m | 14.7 ft4.47 m |
| Beam | 6.0 ft1.83 m | 7.4 ft2.26 m |
| Draft | 1.5 ft0.46 m | 2.4 ft0.74 m |
| Displacement | 1,100 lb499 kg | 1,000 lb454 kg |
| Ballast | 450 lb204 kg | 400 lb181 kg |
| Sail area | 120 ft²11.1 m² | 117 ft²10.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 18.02 | 18.72 |
| Displacement / Length | 179 | 141 |
| Comfort ratio | 10.7 | 7.1 |
| Capsize screening | 2.32 | 2.97 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.0 | 5.1 |
Com-pac 16 vs Laguna 16: the short version
- The Com-pac 16 and Laguna 16 are close in length (16.0 ft4.88 m vs 16.0 ft4.88 m ).
- The Com-pac 16 is heavier, displacing about 10% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Laguna 16 carries the more powerful rig (18.7 vs 18.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Com-pac 16 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Com-pac 16 rates better for offshore work (2.32 vs 2.97).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.