Archambault A40 vs Baltic 40
How do the Archambault A40 and Baltic 40 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Archambault A40 | Archambault A40 | Baltic 40 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 39.3 ft11.99 m | 39.3 ft11.99 m |
| Waterline length | 36.9 ft11.25 m | 32.8 ft9.98 m |
| Beam | 12.3 ft3.76 m | 12.8 ft3.89 m |
| Draft | 7.9 ft2.41 m | 7.2 ft2.19 m |
| Displacement | 13,669 lb6,200 kg | 14,992 lb6,800 kg |
| Ballast | 5,512 lb2,500 kg | 6,173 lb2,800 kg |
| Sail area | 838 ft²77.9 m² | 803 ft²74.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 23.45 | 21.13 |
| Displacement / Length | 121 | 191 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.8 | 22.5 |
| Capsize screening | 2.06 | 2.07 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 8.1 | 7.7 |
Archambault A40 vs Baltic 40: the short version
- The Archambault A40 and Baltic 40 are close in length (39.3 ft11.99 m vs 39.3 ft11.99 m ).
- The Baltic 40 is heavier, displacing about 10% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Archambault A40 carries the more powerful rig (23.5 vs 21.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Baltic 40 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Archambault A40 rates better for offshore work (2.06 vs 2.07).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.