Ranger 16 vs Ranger 37
How do the Ranger 16 and Ranger 37 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Ranger 16 | Ranger 16 | Ranger 37 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 16.7 ft5.08 m | 37.0 ft11.28 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 28.3 ft8.63 m |
| Beam | 6.0 ft1.83 m | 11.3 ft3.45 m |
| Draft | 3.0 ft0.90 m | 6.0 ft1.83 m |
| Displacement | 450 lb204 kg | 15,200 lb6,895 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 7,300 lb3,311 kg |
| Sail area | 154 ft²14.3 m² | 629 ft²58.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 41.96 | 16.40 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 298 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 30.0 |
| Capsize screening | 3.13 | 1.83 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 7.1 |
Ranger 16 vs Ranger 37: the short version
- The Ranger 37 is the larger boat at 37.0 ft11.28 m LOA versus 16.7 ft5.08 m for the Ranger 16.
- The Ranger 37 is heavier, displacing about 3278% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Ranger 16 carries the more powerful rig (42.0 vs 16.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Ranger 37 rates better for offshore work (1.83 vs 3.13).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.