Interlake vs Prindle 18-2
How do the Interlake and Prindle 18-2 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Interlake 
Prindle 18-2 | Interlake | Prindle 18-2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 18.0 ft5.49 m | 18.0 ft5.49 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 17.2 ft5.24 m |
| Beam | 6.3 ft1.91 m | 8.5 ft2.59 m |
| Draft | 4.6 ft1.40 m | 2.1 ft0.63 m |
| Displacement | 650 lb295 kg | 375 lb170 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | 175 ft²16.3 m² | 233 ft²21.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 37.31 | 71.69 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 33 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 1.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.89 | 4.71 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 5.6 |
Interlake vs Prindle 18-2: the short version
- The Interlake and Prindle 18-2 are close in length (18.0 ft5.49 m vs 18.0 ft5.49 m ).
- The Interlake is heavier, displacing about 73% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Prindle 18-2 carries the more powerful rig (71.7 vs 37.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Interlake rates better for offshore work (2.89 vs 4.71).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.