Etap 22 vs Etap 39s
How do the Etap 22 and Etap 39s compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Etap 22 | Etap 22 | Etap 39s | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 21.6 ft6.60 m | 39.0 ft11.88 m |
| Waterline length | 18.7 ft5.70 m | 33.5 ft10.20 m |
| Beam | 7.9 ft2.40 m | 12.6 ft3.85 m |
| Draft | 4.1 ft1.25 m | 6.4 ft1.95 m |
| Displacement | 2,756 lb1,250 kg | 14,991 lb6,800 kg |
| Ballast | 1,213 lb550 kg | 4,960 lb2,250 kg |
| Sail area | 215 ft²20.0 m² | 835 ft²77.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.50 | 21.97 |
| Displacement / Length | 188 | 179 |
| Comfort ratio | 13.9 | 22.5 |
| Capsize screening | 2.25 | 2.05 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.8 | 7.8 |
Etap 22 vs Etap 39s: the short version
- The Etap 39s is the larger boat at 39.0 ft11.88 m LOA versus 21.6 ft6.60 m for the Etap 22.
- The Etap 39s is heavier, displacing about 444% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Etap 39s carries the more powerful rig (22.0 vs 17.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Etap 39s scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Etap 39s rates better for offshore work (2.05 vs 2.25).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.