Albin 82 MS vs Bristol 29.9
How do the Albin 82 MS and Bristol 29.9 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Albin 82 MS 
Bristol 29.9 | Albin 82 MS | Bristol 29.9 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 29.9 ft9.12 m | 29.9 ft9.12 m |
| Waterline length | 25.0 ft7.62 m | 24.0 ft7.32 m |
| Beam | 9.3 ft2.84 m | 10.2 ft3.10 m |
| Draft | 3.9 ft1.19 m | 4.3 ft1.32 m |
| Displacement | 7,496 lb3,400 kg | 8,650 lb3,924 kg |
| Ballast | 1,984 lb900 kg | 3,600 lb1,633 kg |
| Sail area | 323 ft²30.0 m² | 391 ft²36.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 13.49 | 14.85 |
| Displacement / Length | 214 | 279 |
| Comfort ratio | 22.3 | 23.6 |
| Capsize screening | 1.91 | 1.98 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.7 | 6.6 |
Albin 82 MS vs Bristol 29.9: the short version
- The Albin 82 MS and Bristol 29.9 are close in length (29.9 ft9.12 m vs 29.9 ft9.12 m ).
- The Bristol 29.9 is heavier, displacing about 15% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Bristol 29.9 carries the more powerful rig (14.8 vs 13.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Bristol 29.9 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Albin 82 MS rates better for offshore work (1.91 vs 1.98).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.