Wing Loading / climb rate

I think this is exactly what originally asked. Thus, equal weight gliders, the one with bigger wing area (reduced wing loading) can fly slower and gain altitude better in weaker thermals compared to the glider with a heavier wing loading.
Then again, you WANT wing loading in the case of a ridge where a heavier wing loading glider helps. This from a guy that has time on the PA ridges at max @9lbs in a ASW-20 A and C, vs. heavier 20 B's.
Bigger wing area also adds to surface drag which hurts performance. There is a reason the term "light wing floater" was coined.

On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 10:16:11 PM UTC+3, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
I think this is exactly what originally asked. Thus, equal weight gliders, the one with bigger wing area (reduced wing loading) can fly slower and gain altitude better in weaker thermals compared to the glider with a heavier wing loading.

*Only* because at the slower speed it can turn tighter and the thermal might be stronger in the middle.

Note that low wing loading doesn't equate to low sink. Sink comes from the drag and modern construction gives low drag despite high wing loadings.

That classic floater the K8 has a min sink of 132 fpm at 32.4 knots with 4.48 lb/sq ft.
The 1-26 has min sink of 174 fpm (at a speed I couldn't find) with 4.38 lb/sq ft.

An LS8 has min sink of 116 fpm with 6.56 lb/sq ft (dry, 190lb pilot). ASW28 110 fpm. Diana claims 88.6 fpm despite a high wing loading.

Oh, I agree. I also noted that the increased wing area adds to drag. We stated the same thing in different ways.