Dawson 26 vs IW 26
How do the Dawson 26 and IW 26 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Dawson 26 | Dawson 26 | IW 26 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 25.6 ft7.80 m | 25.6 ft7.80 m |
| Waterline length | 22.2 ft6.76 m | 19.5 ft5.95 m |
| Beam | 8.0 ft2.44 m | 8.4 ft2.55 m |
| Draft | 5.3 ft1.62 m | 4.6 ft1.40 m |
| Displacement | 4,700 lb2,132 kg | 4,189 lb1,900 kg |
| Ballast | 1,165 lb528 kg | 1,984 lb900 kg |
| Sail area | 270 ft²25.1 m² | 339 ft²31.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.40 | 20.87 |
| Displacement / Length | 193 | 251 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.6 | 17.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.91 | 2.08 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.3 | 5.9 |
| Average used price | — | €4,500 |
Dawson 26 vs IW 26: the short version
- The Dawson 26 and IW 26 are close in length (25.6 ft7.80 m vs 25.6 ft7.80 m ).
- The Dawson 26 is heavier, displacing about 12% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the IW 26 carries the more powerful rig (20.9 vs 15.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Dawson 26 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Dawson 26 rates better for offshore work (1.91 vs 2.08).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.