Bayfield 25 vs MacGregor 25
How do the Bayfield 25 and MacGregor 25 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bayfield 25 
MacGregor 25 | Bayfield 25 | MacGregor 25 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 25.0 ft7.62 m | 25.0 ft7.62 m |
| Waterline length | 19.7 ft6.00 m | 23.0 ft7.01 m |
| Beam | 8.0 ft2.44 m | 7.9 ft2.41 m |
| Draft | 2.9 ft0.89 m | 5.7 ft1.73 m |
| Displacement | 3,500 lb1,588 kg | 2,100 lb953 kg |
| Ballast | 1,300 lb590 kg | 625 lb283 kg |
| Sail area | 289 ft²26.8 m² | 251 ft²23.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 20.06 | 24.49 |
| Displacement / Length | 205 | 77 |
| Comfort ratio | 15.9 | 8.7 |
| Capsize screening | 2.11 | 2.47 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.9 | 6.4 |
Bayfield 25 vs MacGregor 25: the short version
- The Bayfield 25 and MacGregor 25 are close in length (25.0 ft7.62 m vs 25.0 ft7.62 m ).
- The Bayfield 25 is heavier, displacing about 67% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the MacGregor 25 carries the more powerful rig (24.5 vs 20.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Bayfield 25 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Bayfield 25 rates better for offshore work (2.11 vs 2.47).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.