Run vs Starsurf 912 S
How do the Run and Starsurf 912 S compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Run | Run | Starsurf 912 S | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 12.5 ft3.80 m | 12.5 ft3.80 m |
| Waterline length | —— | —— |
| Beam | 2.2 ft0.67 m | 2.1 ft0.65 m |
| Draft | —— | —— |
| Displacement | 42 lb19 kg | 47 lb21 kg |
| Ballast | —— | —— |
| Sail area | —— | —— |
| SA / Displacement | — | — |
| Displacement / Length | — | — |
| Comfort ratio | — | — |
| Capsize screening | 2.53 | 2.36 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | — |
Run vs Starsurf 912 S: the short version
- The Run and Starsurf 912 S are close in length (12.5 ft3.80 m vs 12.5 ft3.80 m ).
- The Starsurf 912 S is heavier, displacing about 12% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- By the capsize screening formula the Starsurf 912 S rates better for offshore work (2.36 vs 2.53).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.