1980 Peterson 34 vs 2000 Sabre 386 — Comparison

1980 Peterson 34 1980 Peterson 34
VS
2000 Sabre 386 2000 Sabre 386

Specifications Side by Side

Specification 1980 Peterson 34 2000 Sabre 386
General
Manufacturer Peterson Sabre
Year 1980–1986 2000–2007
Type Sloop Sloop
Country USA USA
Designer Doug Peterson Jim Taylor
Dimensions
LOA 10.36 m (34.0 ft) 11.58 m (38.0 ft)
LWL 8.53 m (28.0 ft) 9.75 m (32.0 ft)
Beam 3.28 m (10.8 ft) 3.56 m (11.7 ft)
Draft 1.83 m (6.0 ft) 1.75 m (5.7 ft)
Weight
Displacement 5,216 kg (11,499 lbs) 7,257 kg (15,999 lbs)
Ballast 2,268 kg (5,000 lbs) 2,948 kg (6,499 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area 51.1 m² (550 ft²) 60.5 m² (651 ft²)
Hull Material Fiberglass Fiberglass
Keel Type Fin Fin
Engine & Tanks
Engine 18 HP 35 HP
Fuel Capacity 76 L (20.1 gal) 114 L (30.1 gal)
Water Capacity 114 L (30.1 gal) 189 L (49.9 gal)
Accommodation
Berths 6 7
Cabins 2 2

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
1980 Peterson 34
17.26
2000 Sabre 386
16.40
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
1980 Peterson 34
43.48
2000 Sabre 386
40.62
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
1980 Peterson 34
0.76
2000 Sabre 386
0.74
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
1980 Peterson 34
19.98
2000 Sabre 386
19.37

Detailed Comparison

The 1980 Peterson 34 and 2000 Sabre 386 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1980 Peterson 34 is a 1980s design by Peterson from USA, while the 2000 Sabre 386 is a 2000s offering from Sabre from USA. The 1980 Peterson 34 was penned by Doug Peterson. The 2000 Sabre 386 was designed by Jim Taylor.

In terms of size, the 1980 Peterson 34 measures 10.36m (34.0ft) overall with a beam of 3.28m, compared to the 2000 Sabre 386 at 11.58m (38.0ft) with a 3.56m beam. The 2000 Sabre 386 is 1.22m longer than the 1980 Peterson 34. The 2000 Sabre 386 displaces approximately 39% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.

Looking at performance, the 1980 Peterson 34 has good sail power for versatile performance with an SA/D ratio of 17.26 and 51.1 m² of sail area. The 2000 Sabre 386, with an SA/D of 16.40 and 60.5 m² of canvas, offers moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising. The 1980 Peterson 34 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.

For comfort and safety, the 1980 Peterson 34 offers a firm, racing-oriented motion (comfort ratio: 20.0) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.76). The 2000 Sabre 386 has a comfort ratio of 19.4 and a capsize screening value of 0.74. The ballast ratios are 43.5% for the 1980 Peterson 34 and 40.6% for the 2000 Sabre 386, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.

Below deck, the 1980 Peterson 34 provides 6 berths in 2 cabins with 114L of water capacity and 76L of fuel. The 2000 Sabre 386 offers 7 berths in 2 cabins with 189L water and 114L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The 1980 Peterson 34 is the better choice for comfortable cruising thanks to its higher comfort ratio, offering a gentler motion at sea that crews will appreciate on longer passages.

For racing: The 1980 Peterson 34 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.

For liveaboard: The 2000 Sabre 386 offers more sleeping accommodation, making it better suited for extended living aboard. Consider water and fuel capacity for extended stays away from marinas.

Compare Different Boats

VS