Omega 28 vs Viking 28
How do the Omega 28 and Viking 28 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Omega 28 
Viking 28 | Omega 28 | Viking 28 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 28.1 ft8.57 m | 28.2 ft8.59 m |
| Waterline length | 22.3 ft6.80 m | 22.0 ft6.71 m |
| Beam | 9.6 ft2.93 m | 8.4 ft2.55 m |
| Draft | 4.9 ft1.50 m | 4.5 ft1.37 m |
| Displacement | 5,952 lb2,700 kg | 4,775 lb2,166 kg |
| Ballast | 2,646 lb1,200 kg | 2,250 lb1,021 kg |
| Sail area | 441 ft²41.0 m² | 317 ft²29.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.48 | 17.89 |
| Displacement / Length | 239 | 200 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.8 | 18.3 |
| Capsize screening | 2.12 | 1.99 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.3 | 6.3 |
| Average used price | €7,100 | — |
Omega 28 vs Viking 28: the short version
- The Omega 28 and Viking 28 are close in length (28.1 ft8.57 m vs 28.2 ft8.59 m ).
- The Omega 28 is heavier, displacing about 25% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Omega 28 carries the more powerful rig (21.5 vs 17.9), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Omega 28 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Viking 28 rates better for offshore work (1.99 vs 2.12).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.