Archambault A31 vs Marieholm 32 / 32E
How do the Archambault A31 and Marieholm 32 / 32E compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Archambault A31 | Archambault A31 | Marieholm 32 / 32E | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 31.3 ft9.54 m | 31.4 ft9.56 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 23.9 ft7.30 m |
| Beam | 10.6 ft3.22 m | 9.8 ft3.00 m |
| Draft | 6.2 ft1.88 m | 5.1 ft1.55 m |
| Displacement | 6,945 lb3,150 kg | 7,716 lb3,500 kg |
| Ballast | 2,976 lb1,350 kg | 2,866 lb1,300 kg |
| Sail area | 555 ft²51.6 m² | 479 ft²44.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.39 | 19.63 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 251 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 21.7 |
| Capsize screening | 2.22 | 1.99 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 6.6 |
| Average used price | — | €24,000 |
Archambault A31 vs Marieholm 32 / 32E: the short version
- The Archambault A31 and Marieholm 32 / 32E are close in length (31.3 ft9.54 m vs 31.4 ft9.56 m ).
- The Marieholm 32 / 32E is heavier, displacing about 11% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Archambault A31 carries the more powerful rig (24.4 vs 19.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Marieholm 32 / 32E rates better for offshore work (1.99 vs 2.22).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.