Archambault A27 vs Archambault A35
How do the Archambault A27 and Archambault A35 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Archambault A27 | Archambault A27 | Archambault A35 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 27.4 ft8.35 m | 34.7 ft10.59 m |
| Waterline length | 23.8 ft7.25 m | 30.5 ft9.29 m |
| Beam | 9.8 ft2.98 m | 11.7 ft3.55 m |
| Draft | 5.4 ft1.65 m | 6.9 ft2.10 m |
| Displacement | 4,750 lb2,155 kg | 9,811 lb4,450 kg |
| Ballast | 1,764 lb800 kg | 4,387 lb1,990 kg |
| Sail area | 446 ft²41.4 m² | 727 ft²67.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 25.25 | 25.38 |
| Displacement / Length | 157 | 155 |
| Comfort ratio | 14.2 | 18.1 |
| Capsize screening | 2.33 | 2.18 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 7.4 |
Archambault A27 vs Archambault A35: the short version
- The Archambault A35 is the larger boat at 34.7 ft10.59 m LOA versus 27.4 ft8.35 m for the Archambault A27.
- The Archambault A35 is heavier, displacing about 107% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Archambault A35 carries the more powerful rig (25.4 vs 25.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Archambault A35 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Archambault A35 rates better for offshore work (2.18 vs 2.33).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.