Archambault Coco vs Golif 22
How do the Archambault Coco and Golif 22 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Archambault Coco | Archambault Coco | Golif 22 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 21.3 ft6.50 m | 21.3 ft6.50 m |
| Waterline length | 20.3 ft6.20 m | 16.4 ft5.00 m |
| Beam | 8.9 ft2.70 m | 7.4 ft2.26 m |
| Draft | 4.5 ft1.36 m | 3.7 ft1.12 m |
| Displacement | 2,535 lb1,150 kg | 2,866 lb1,300 kg |
| Ballast | 992 lb450 kg | 1,058,219 lb480,000 kg |
| Sail area | 285 ft²26.5 m² | 232 ft²21.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.53 | 18.40 |
| Displacement / Length | 134 | 290 |
| Comfort ratio | 10.4 | 17.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.60 | 2.09 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.0 | 5.4 |
| Average used price | — | €1,200 |
Archambault Coco vs Golif 22: the short version
- The Archambault Coco and Golif 22 are close in length (21.3 ft6.50 m vs 21.3 ft6.50 m ).
- The Golif 22 is heavier, displacing about 13% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Archambault Coco carries the more powerful rig (24.5 vs 18.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Golif 22 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Golif 22 rates better for offshore work (2.09 vs 2.60).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.