Etap 30 vs Neptunkryssare
How do the Etap 30 and Neptunkryssare compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Etap 30 
Neptunkryssare | Etap 30 | Neptunkryssare | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 29.6 ft9.02 m | 29.5 ft9.00 m |
| Waterline length | 25.1 ft7.64 m | 19.2 ft5.85 m |
| Beam | 10.3 ft3.15 m | 6.3 ft1.92 m |
| Draft | 5.9 ft1.80 m | 3.9 ft1.20 m |
| Displacement | 7,940 lb3,602 kg | 2,535 lb1,150 kg |
| Ballast | 3,032 lb1,375 kg | 1,190 lb540 kg |
| Sail area | 548 ft²50.9 m² | 204 ft²19.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 22.03 | 17.56 |
| Displacement / Length | 225 | 160 |
| Comfort ratio | 20.7 | 15.1 |
| Capsize screening | 2.07 | 1.85 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.7 | 5.9 |
Etap 30 vs Neptunkryssare: the short version
- The Etap 30 and Neptunkryssare are close in length (29.6 ft9.02 m vs 29.5 ft9.00 m ).
- The Etap 30 is heavier, displacing about 213% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Etap 30 carries the more powerful rig (22.0 vs 17.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Etap 30 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Neptunkryssare rates better for offshore work (1.85 vs 2.07).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.