BB 10 vs C&C 101
How do the BB 10 and C&C 101 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
BB 10 | BB 10 | C&C 101 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.8 ft10.00 m | 32.8 ft10.00 m |
| Waterline length | 23.9 ft7.29 m | —— |
| Beam | 7.5 ft2.30 m | 11.0 ft3.34 m |
| Draft | 4.8 ft1.46 m | 6.5 ft1.98 m |
| Displacement | 4,956 lb2,248 kg | 8,100 lb3,674 kg |
| Ballast | 2,700 lb1,225 kg | 3,351 lb1,520 kg |
| Sail area | 358 ft²33.3 m² | 613 ft²56.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 19.71 | 24.32 |
| Displacement / Length | 162 | — |
| Comfort ratio | 19.5 | — |
| Capsize screening | 1.77 | 2.18 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.6 | — |
BB 10 vs C&C 101: the short version
- The BB 10 and C&C 101 are close in length (32.8 ft10.00 m vs 32.8 ft10.00 m ).
- The C&C 101 is heavier, displacing about 63% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 101 carries the more powerful rig (24.3 vs 19.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the BB 10 rates better for offshore work (1.77 vs 2.18).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.