Allegro 27 vs Herreshoff H-26
How do the Allegro 27 and Herreshoff H-26 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Allegro 27 | Allegro 27 | Herreshoff H-26 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 26.4 ft8.03 m | 26.3 ft8.02 m |
| Waterline length | 24.0 ft7.32 m | 22.3 ft6.78 m |
| Beam | 9.1 ft2.76 m | 9.0 ft2.74 m |
| Draft | 4.1 ft1.25 m | 3.9 ft1.19 m |
| Displacement | 7,496 lb3,400 kg | 6,500 lb2,948 kg |
| Ballast | 2,866 lb1,300 kg | 3,000 lb1,361 kg |
| Sail area | 334 ft²31.0 m² | 360 ft²33.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 13.95 | 16.54 |
| Displacement / Length | 241 | 263 |
| Comfort ratio | 24.9 | 22.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.85 | 1.93 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.6 | 6.3 |
| Average used price | €6,200 | — |
Allegro 27 vs Herreshoff H-26: the short version
- The Allegro 27 and Herreshoff H-26 are close in length (26.4 ft8.03 m vs 26.3 ft8.02 m ).
- The Allegro 27 is heavier, displacing about 15% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Herreshoff H-26 carries the more powerful rig (16.5 vs 14.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Allegro 27 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Allegro 27 rates better for offshore work (1.85 vs 1.93).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.