Dragon vs Shipman 28
How do the Dragon and Shipman 28 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Dragon 
Shipman 28 | Dragon | Shipman 28 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 29.2 ft8.90 m | 29.1 ft8.86 m |
| Waterline length | 18.6 ft5.66 m | 21.0 ft6.40 m |
| Beam | 6.2 ft1.90 m | 8.5 ft2.60 m |
| Draft | 3.9 ft1.20 m | 5.1 ft1.55 m |
| Displacement | 3,748 lb1,700 kg | 6,173 lb2,800 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 2,667 lb1,210 kg |
| Sail area | 298 ft²27.7 m² | 307 ft²28.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 19.76 | 14.60 |
| Displacement / Length | 261 | 298 |
| Comfort ratio | 23.3 | 23.4 |
| Capsize screening | 1.60 | 1.86 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.8 | 6.1 |
| Average used price | — | €5,100 |
Dragon vs Shipman 28: the short version
- The Dragon and Shipman 28 are close in length (29.2 ft8.90 m vs 29.1 ft8.86 m ).
- The Shipman 28 is heavier, displacing about 65% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Dragon carries the more powerful rig (19.8 vs 14.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Shipman 28 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Dragon rates better for offshore work (1.60 vs 1.86).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.