Maxi Fenix vs Wasa 270
How do the Maxi Fenix and Wasa 270 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Maxi Fenix | Maxi Fenix | Wasa 270 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 27.2 ft8.30 m | 27.2 ft8.30 m |
| Waterline length | 24.3 ft7.40 m | 23.6 ft7.20 m |
| Beam | 9.3 ft2.85 m | 8.4 ft2.56 m |
| Draft | 5.1 ft1.55 m | 5.4 ft1.65 m |
| Displacement | 6,173 lb2,800 kg | 4,850 lb2,200 kg |
| Ballast | 2,150 lb975 kg | 1,764 lb800 kg |
| Sail area | 452 ft²42.0 m² | 360 ft²33.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.49 | 20.10 |
| Displacement / Length | 193 | 164 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.3 | 17.8 |
| Capsize screening | 2.04 | 1.98 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.6 | 6.5 |
| Average used price | €9,500 | €18,500 |
Maxi Fenix vs Wasa 270: the short version
- The Maxi Fenix and Wasa 270 are close in length (27.2 ft8.30 m vs 27.2 ft8.30 m ).
- The Maxi Fenix is heavier, displacing about 27% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Maxi Fenix carries the more powerful rig (21.5 vs 20.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Maxi Fenix scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Wasa 270 rates better for offshore work (1.98 vs 2.04).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.