Archambault A27 vs M34
How do the Archambault A27 and M34 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Archambault A27 
M34 | Archambault A27 | M34 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 27.4 ft8.35 m | 34.0 ft10.36 m |
| Waterline length | 23.8 ft7.25 m | 33.1 ft10.08 m |
| Beam | 9.8 ft2.98 m | 9.8 ft2.97 m |
| Draft | 5.4 ft1.65 m | 8.2 ft2.49 m |
| Displacement | 4,750 lb2,155 kg | 5,952 lb2,700 kg |
| Ballast | 1,764 lb800 kg | 2,315 lb1,050 kg |
| Sail area | 446 ft²41.4 m² | 764 ft²71.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 25.25 | 37.22 |
| Displacement / Length | 157 | 73 |
| Comfort ratio | 14.2 | 13.3 |
| Capsize screening | 2.33 | 2.15 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 7.7 |
Archambault A27 vs M34: the short version
- The M34 is the larger boat at 34.0 ft10.36 m LOA versus 27.4 ft8.35 m for the Archambault A27.
- The M34 is heavier, displacing about 25% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the M34 carries the more powerful rig (37.2 vs 25.3), 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 M34 rates better for offshore work (2.15 vs 2.33).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.