Dickerson 37 vs Ranger 37
How do the Dickerson 37 and Ranger 37 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Dickerson 37 | Dickerson 37 | Ranger 37 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.0 ft11.28 m | 37.0 ft11.28 m |
| Waterline length | 28.8 ft8.79 m | 28.3 ft8.63 m |
| Beam | 11.5 ft3.51 m | 11.3 ft3.45 m |
| Draft | 4.5 ft1.37 m | 6.0 ft1.83 m |
| Displacement | 15,950 lb7,235 kg | 15,200 lb6,895 kg |
| Ballast | 5,850 lb2,654 kg | 7,300 lb3,311 kg |
| Sail area | 556 ft²51.7 m² | 629 ft²58.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 14.04 | 16.40 |
| Displacement / Length | 297 | 298 |
| Comfort ratio | 30.5 | 30.0 |
| Capsize screening | 1.83 | 1.83 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.2 | 7.1 |
Dickerson 37 vs Ranger 37: the short version
- The Dickerson 37 and Ranger 37 are close in length (37.0 ft11.28 m vs 37.0 ft11.28 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Ranger 37 carries the more powerful rig (16.4 vs 14.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Dickerson 37 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Dickerson 37 rates better for offshore work (1.83 vs 1.83).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.