Isotope vs Leeward 16
How do the Isotope and Leeward 16 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Isotope | Isotope | Leeward 16 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 16.0 ft4.88 m | 16.0 ft4.88 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 15.0 ft4.57 m |
| Beam | 7.5 ft2.29 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Draft | 2.5 ft0.76 m | 2.9 ft0.89 m |
| Displacement | 275 lb125 kg | 650 lb295 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | 185 ft²17.2 m² | 168 ft²15.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 70.00 | 35.82 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 86 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 5.7 |
| Capsize screening | 4.61 | 2.89 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 5.2 |
Isotope vs Leeward 16: the short version
- The Isotope and Leeward 16 are close in length (16.0 ft4.88 m vs 16.0 ft4.88 m ).
- The Leeward 16 is heavier, displacing about 136% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Isotope carries the more powerful rig (70.0 vs 35.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Leeward 16 rates better for offshore work (2.89 vs 4.61).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.