DB-2 vs Scanmar 33
How do the DB-2 and Scanmar 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 | Scanmar 33 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 33.1 ft10.10 m | 33.1 ft10.10 m |
| Waterline length | 26.2 ft8.00 m | 27.2 ft8.30 m |
| Beam | 11.2 ft3.40 m | 10.8 ft3.30 m |
| Draft | 6.2 ft1.90 m | 5.7 ft1.75 m |
| Displacement | 6,945 lb3,150 kg | 10,141 lb4,600 kg |
| Ballast | 3,627 lb1,645 kg | 4,189 lb1,900 kg |
| Sail area | 565 ft²52.5 m² | 678 ft²63.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.83 | 23.15 |
| Displacement / Length | 172 | 224 |
| Comfort ratio | 15.3 | 22.6 |
| Capsize screening | 2.34 | 2.00 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.9 | 7.0 |
| Average used price | — | €29,000 |
DB-2 vs Scanmar 33: the short version
- The DB-2 and Scanmar 33 are close in length (33.1 ft10.10 m vs 33.1 ft10.10 m ).
- The Scanmar 33 is heavier, displacing about 46% 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 23.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Scanmar 33 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Scanmar 33 rates better for offshore work (2.00 vs 2.34).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.