Alberg 30 vs C&C 30 Redwing
How do the Alberg 30 and C&C 30 Redwing compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Alberg 30 
C&C 30 Redwing | Alberg 30 | C&C 30 Redwing | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 30.3 ft9.23 m | 30.3 ft9.22 m |
| Waterline length | 21.7 ft6.61 m | 21.8 ft6.63 m |
| Beam | 8.8 ft2.67 m | 8.8 ft2.67 m |
| Draft | 4.3 ft1.31 m | 4.5 ft1.37 m |
| Displacement | 9,000 lb4,082 kg | 7,650 lb3,470 kg |
| Ballast | 3,300 lb1,497 kg | 3,530 lb1,601 kg |
| Sail area | 410 ft²38.1 m² | 395 ft²36.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.16 | 16.28 |
| Displacement / Length | 395 | 332 |
| Comfort ratio | 31.9 | 27.1 |
| Capsize screening | 1.68 | 1.78 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.2 | 6.2 |
Alberg 30 vs C&C 30 Redwing: the short version
- The Alberg 30 and C&C 30 Redwing are close in length (30.3 ft9.23 m vs 30.3 ft9.22 m ).
- The Alberg 30 is heavier, displacing about 18% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 30 Redwing carries the more powerful rig (16.3 vs 15.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Alberg 30 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Alberg 30 rates better for offshore work (1.68 vs 1.78).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.