DB-2 vs Ranger 33
How do the DB-2 and Ranger 33 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
DB-2 | DB-2 | Ranger 33 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 33.1 ft10.10 m | 33.2 ft10.11 m |
| Waterline length | 26.2 ft8.00 m | 26.3 ft8.00 m |
| Beam | 11.2 ft3.40 m | 9.6 ft2.92 m |
| Draft | 6.2 ft1.90 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 6,945 lb3,150 kg | 10,500 lb4,763 kg |
| Ballast | 3,627 lb1,645 kg | 4,500 lb2,041 kg |
| Sail area | 565 ft²52.5 m² | 528 ft²49.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.83 | 17.62 |
| Displacement / Length | 172 | 259 |
| Comfort ratio | 15.3 | 28.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.34 | 1.75 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.9 | 6.9 |
DB-2 vs Ranger 33: the short version
- The DB-2 and Ranger 33 are close in length (33.1 ft10.10 m vs 33.2 ft10.11 m ).
- The Ranger 33 is heavier, displacing about 51% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the DB-2 carries the more powerful rig (24.8 vs 17.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Ranger 33 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Ranger 33 rates better for offshore work (1.75 vs 2.34).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.