Dione 98 vs M32
How do the Dione 98 and M32 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Dione 98 
M32 | Dione 98 | M32 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.0 ft9.75 m | 31.8 ft9.68 m |
| Waterline length | 23.8 ft7.26 m | —— |
| Beam | 10.3 ft3.13 m | 18.2 ft5.54 m |
| Draft | 5.6 ft1.70 m | —— |
| Displacement | 6,834 lb3,100 kg | 1,124 lb510 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | 394 ft²36.6 m² | 1,216 ft²113.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.51 | 179.97 |
| Displacement / Length | 226 | — |
| Comfort ratio | 18.1 | — |
| Capsize screening | 2.16 | 6.99 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | — |
Dione 98 vs M32: the short version
- The Dione 98 and M32 are close in length (32.0 ft9.75 m vs 31.8 ft9.68 m ).
- The Dione 98 is heavier, displacing about 508% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the M32 carries the more powerful rig (180.0 vs 17.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Dione 98 rates better for offshore work (2.16 vs 6.99).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.