International 210 vs Pearson Triton
How do the International 210 and Pearson Triton compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
International 210 | International 210 | Pearson Triton | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 29.8 ft9.09 m | 28.3 ft8.63 m |
| Waterline length | 22.5 ft6.86 m | 21.5 ft6.55 m |
| Beam | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 8.3 ft2.51 m |
| Draft | 5.8 ft1.78 m | 3.9 ft1.19 m |
| Displacement | 2,300 lb1,043 kg | 6,930 lb3,143 kg |
| Ballast | 1,145 lb519 kg | 3,019 lb1,369 kg |
| Sail area | 285 ft²26.5 m² | 371 ft²34.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 26.17 | 16.33 |
| Displacement / Length | 90 | 311 |
| Comfort ratio | 13.7 | 27.4 |
| Capsize screening | 1.77 | 1.73 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.4 | 6.2 |
International 210 vs Pearson Triton: the short version
- The International 210 is the larger boat at 29.8 ft9.09 m LOA versus 28.3 ft8.63 m for the Pearson Triton.
- The Pearson Triton is heavier, displacing about 201% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the International 210 carries the more powerful rig (26.2 vs 16.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Pearson Triton scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Pearson Triton rates better for offshore work (1.73 vs 1.77).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.