Gougeon 32 vs Ontario 32
How do the Gougeon 32 and Ontario 32 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Gougeon 32 
Ontario 32 | Gougeon 32 | Ontario 32 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.0 ft9.75 m | 32.0 ft9.75 m |
| Waterline length | 32.0 ft9.75 m | 26.5 ft8.08 m |
| Beam | 8.3 ft2.53 m | 11.0 ft3.35 m |
| Draft | 4.3 ft1.30 m | 4.5 ft1.37 m |
| Displacement | 1,100 lb499 kg | 9,800 lb4,445 kg |
| Ballast | 1,200 lb544 kg | 3,977 lb1,804 kg |
| Sail area | 296 ft²27.5 m² | 481 ft²44.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 44.44 | 16.81 |
| Displacement / Length | 15 | 235 |
| Comfort ratio | 3.2 | 22.1 |
| Capsize screening | 3.22 | 2.06 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.6 | 6.9 |
Gougeon 32 vs Ontario 32: the short version
- The Gougeon 32 and Ontario 32 are close in length (32.0 ft9.75 m vs 32.0 ft9.75 m ).
- The Ontario 32 is heavier, displacing about 791% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Gougeon 32 carries the more powerful rig (44.4 vs 16.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Ontario 32 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Ontario 32 rates better for offshore work (2.06 vs 3.22).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.