Bristol 39 vs Nautical 39
How do the Bristol 39 and Nautical 39 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bristol 39 | Bristol 39 | Nautical 39 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 39.0 ft11.89 m | 39.0 ft11.89 m |
| Waterline length | 27.5 ft8.39 m | 32.5 ft9.91 m |
| Beam | 10.8 ft3.28 m | 12.0 ft3.66 m |
| Draft | 5.4 ft1.65 m | 5.3 ft1.62 m |
| Displacement | 17,580 lb7,974 kg | 22,500 lb10,206 kg |
| Ballast | 6,500 lb2,948 kg | —— |
| Sail area | 648 ft²60.2 m² | 677 ft²62.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.33 | 13.59 |
| Displacement / Length | 376 | 293 |
| Comfort ratio | 37.1 | 36.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.65 | 1.70 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.0 | 7.6 |
Bristol 39 vs Nautical 39: the short version
- The Bristol 39 and Nautical 39 are close in length (39.0 ft11.89 m vs 39.0 ft11.89 m ).
- The Nautical 39 is heavier, displacing about 28% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Bristol 39 carries the more powerful rig (15.3 vs 13.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Bristol 39 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Bristol 39 rates better for offshore work (1.65 vs 1.70).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.