Bayfield 36 vs CS 36 Merlin
How do the Bayfield 36 and CS 36 Merlin compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bayfield 36 | Bayfield 36 | CS 36 Merlin | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 36.0 ft10.97 m | 36.0 ft10.97 m |
| Waterline length | 30.5 ft9.30 m | 29.2 ft8.89 m |
| Beam | 12.0 ft3.66 m | 11.5 ft3.51 m |
| Draft | 5.0 ft1.52 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Displacement | 18,500 lb8,391 kg | 13,000 lb5,897 kg |
| Ballast | 6,500 lb2,948 kg | 5,590 lb2,536 kg |
| Sail area | 764 ft²71.0 m² | 608 ft²56.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.48 | 17.60 |
| Displacement / Length | 291 | 234 |
| Comfort ratio | 32.5 | 24.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.81 | 1.96 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.4 | 7.2 |
Bayfield 36 vs CS 36 Merlin: the short version
- The Bayfield 36 and CS 36 Merlin are close in length (36.0 ft10.97 m vs 36.0 ft10.97 m ).
- The Bayfield 36 is heavier, displacing about 42% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the CS 36 Merlin carries the more powerful rig (17.6 vs 17.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Bayfield 36 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Bayfield 36 rates better for offshore work (1.81 vs 1.96).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.