Bayfield 30/32 vs Gougeon 32
How do the Bayfield 30/32 and Gougeon 32 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bayfield 30/32 
Gougeon 32 | Bayfield 30/32 | Gougeon 32 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.0 ft9.75 m | 32.0 ft9.75 m |
| Waterline length | 23.3 ft7.09 m | 32.0 ft9.75 m |
| Beam | 10.5 ft3.20 m | 8.3 ft2.53 m |
| Draft | 3.8 ft1.14 m | 4.3 ft1.30 m |
| Displacement | 9,600 lb4,354 kg | 1,100 lb499 kg |
| Ballast | 4,000 lb1,814 kg | 1,200 lb544 kg |
| Sail area | 433 ft²40.2 m² | 296 ft²27.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.34 | 44.44 |
| Displacement / Length | 341 | 15 |
| Comfort ratio | 25.0 | 3.2 |
| Capsize screening | 1.98 | 3.22 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 7.6 |
Bayfield 30/32 vs Gougeon 32: the short version
- The Bayfield 30/32 and Gougeon 32 are close in length (32.0 ft9.75 m vs 32.0 ft9.75 m ).
- The Bayfield 30/32 is heavier, displacing about 773% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Gougeon 32 carries the more powerful rig (44.4 vs 15.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Bayfield 30/32 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Bayfield 30/32 rates better for offshore work (1.98 vs 3.22).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.