Archambault A27 vs Brick
How do the Archambault A27 and Brick 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 | Brick | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 27.4 ft8.35 m | 31.3 ft9.55 m |
| Waterline length | 23.8 ft7.25 m | 31.3 ft9.55 m |
| Beam | 9.8 ft2.98 m | 8.2 ft2.50 m |
| Draft | 5.4 ft1.65 m | 3.9 ft1.20 m |
| Displacement | 4,750 lb2,155 kg | 3,968 lb1,800 kg |
| Ballast | 1,764 lb800 kg | 1,543 lb700 kg |
| Sail area | 446 ft²41.4 m² | 272 ft²25.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 25.25 | 17.36 |
| Displacement / Length | 157 | 58 |
| Comfort ratio | 14.2 | 11.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.33 | 2.07 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 7.5 |
Archambault A27 vs Brick: the short version
- The Brick is the larger boat at 31.3 ft9.55 m LOA versus 27.4 ft8.35 m for the Archambault A27.
- The Archambault A27 is heavier, displacing about 20% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Archambault A27 carries the more powerful rig (25.3 vs 17.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Archambault A27 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Brick rates better for offshore work (2.07 vs 2.33).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.