E-Scow vs TES 28 Magnam
How do the E-Scow and TES 28 Magnam compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
E-Scow 
TES 28 Magnam | E-Scow | TES 28 Magnam | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 28.0 ft8.53 m | 28.0 ft8.53 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 26.0 ft7.92 m |
| Beam | 6.8 ft2.06 m | 9.9 ft3.02 m |
| Draft | 3.8 ft1.14 m | 4.6 ft1.40 m |
| Displacement | 965 lb438 kg | 6,400 lb2,903 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 1,980 lb898 kg |
| Sail area | 323 ft²30.0 m² | 380 ft²35.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 52.92 | 17.64 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 163 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 17.5 |
| Capsize screening | 2.73 | 2.14 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 6.8 |
E-Scow vs TES 28 Magnam: the short version
- The E-Scow and TES 28 Magnam are close in length (28.0 ft8.53 m vs 28.0 ft8.53 m ).
- The TES 28 Magnam is heavier, displacing about 563% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the E-Scow carries the more powerful rig (52.9 vs 17.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the TES 28 Magnam rates better for offshore work (2.14 vs 2.73).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.