Ranger 28 vs Ranger 33
How do the Ranger 28 and Ranger 33 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Ranger 28 Ranger Yachts (a division of Bangor Punta) · 1976 Ranger 33 Ranger Yachts (a division of Bangor Punta) · 1969 | Ranger 28 | Ranger 33 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 28.0 ft8.53 m | 33.2 ft10.11 m |
| Waterline length | 21.7 ft6.61 m | 26.3 ft8.00 m |
| Beam | 9.6 ft2.92 m | 9.6 ft2.92 m |
| Draft | 4.5 ft1.37 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 5,081 lb2,305 kg | 10,500 lb4,763 kg |
| Ballast | 2,792 lb1,266 kg | 4,500 lb2,041 kg |
| Sail area | 389 ft²36.1 m² | 528 ft²49.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.06 | 17.62 |
| Displacement / Length | 223 | 259 |
| Comfort ratio | 16.4 | 28.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.23 | 1.75 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.2 | 6.9 |
Ranger 28 vs Ranger 33: the short version
- The Ranger 33 is the larger boat at 33.2 ft10.11 m LOA versus 28.0 ft8.53 m for the Ranger 28.
- The Ranger 33 is heavier, displacing about 107% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Ranger 28 carries the more powerful rig (21.1 vs 17.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Ranger 33 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Ranger 33 rates better for offshore work (1.75 vs 2.23).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.