Halman 20 vs Triss Magnum
How do the Halman 20 and Triss Magnum compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Halman 20 
Triss Magnum | Halman 20 | Triss Magnum | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 19.7 ft6.00 m | 19.7 ft6.00 m |
| Waterline length | 17.1 ft5.21 m | 7.2 ft2.20 m |
| Beam | 7.8 ft2.36 m | 7.9 ft2.40 m |
| Draft | 2.8 ft0.86 m | 3.6 ft1.10 m |
| Displacement | 2,500 lb1,134 kg | 2,535 lb1,150 kg |
| Ballast | 1,000 lb454 kg | 1,235 lb560 kg |
| Sail area | 179 ft²16.6 m² | 248 ft²23.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.55 | 21.34 |
| Displacement / Length | 224 | 3007 |
| Comfort ratio | 14.1 | 22.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.28 | 2.31 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.5 | 3.6 |
| Average used price | — | €1,000 |
Halman 20 vs Triss Magnum: the short version
- The Halman 20 and Triss Magnum are close in length (19.7 ft6.00 m vs 19.7 ft6.00 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Triss Magnum carries the more powerful rig (21.3 vs 15.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Triss Magnum scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Halman 20 rates better for offshore work (2.28 vs 2.31).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.