Bayfield 29 vs Cal 29
How do the Bayfield 29 and Cal 29 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bayfield 29 | Bayfield 29 | Cal 29 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 29.0 ft8.84 m | 29.0 ft8.84 m |
| Waterline length | 21.8 ft6.63 m | 24.0 ft7.32 m |
| Beam | 10.2 ft3.10 m | 9.3 ft2.82 m |
| Draft | 3.5 ft1.07 m | 4.5 ft1.37 m |
| Displacement | 7,100 lb3,221 kg | 8,000 lb3,629 kg |
| Ballast | 3,000 lb1,361 kg | 3,350 lb1,520 kg |
| Sail area | 420 ft²39.0 m² | 422 ft²39.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 18.19 | 16.88 |
| Displacement / Length | 308 | 258 |
| Comfort ratio | 20.9 | 25.0 |
| Capsize screening | 2.12 | 1.85 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.2 | 6.6 |
Bayfield 29 vs Cal 29: the short version
- The Bayfield 29 and Cal 29 are close in length (29.0 ft8.84 m vs 29.0 ft8.84 m ).
- The Cal 29 is heavier, displacing about 13% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Bayfield 29 carries the more powerful rig (18.2 vs 16.9), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Cal 29 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Cal 29 rates better for offshore work (1.85 vs 2.12).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.