D&M 22 vs Laminex Pocket Rocket
How do the D&M 22 and Laminex Pocket Rocket compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
D&M 22 | D&M 22 | Laminex Pocket Rocket | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 22.0 ft6.71 m | 22.0 ft6.71 m |
| Waterline length | 18.8 ft5.71 m | 21.5 ft6.55 m |
| Beam | 8.4 ft2.57 m | 9.5 ft2.90 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 2,775 lb1,259 kg | 2,400 lb1,089 kg |
| Ballast | 1,000 lb454 kg | 1,100 lb499 kg |
| Sail area | 254 ft²23.6 m² | 258 ft²24.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 20.58 | 23.03 |
| Displacement / Length | 188 | 108 |
| Comfort ratio | 12.7 | 8.5 |
| Capsize screening | 2.40 | 2.84 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.8 | 6.2 |
D&M 22 vs Laminex Pocket Rocket: the short version
- The D&M 22 and Laminex Pocket Rocket are close in length (22.0 ft6.71 m vs 22.0 ft6.71 m ).
- The D&M 22 is heavier, displacing about 16% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Laminex Pocket Rocket carries the more powerful rig (23.0 vs 20.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The D&M 22 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the D&M 22 rates better for offshore work (2.40 vs 2.84).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.