Bristol 40 vs Bristol Caravel 22
How do the Bristol 40 and Bristol Caravel 22 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bristol 40 | Bristol 40 | Bristol Caravel 22 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 40.2 ft12.25 m | 22.0 ft6.71 m |
| Waterline length | 27.5 ft8.39 m | 19.5 ft5.94 m |
| Beam | 10.8 ft3.29 m | 7.8 ft2.36 m |
| Draft | 5.4 ft1.65 m | 3.5 ft1.07 m |
| Displacement | 17,580 lb7,974 kg | 2,850 lb1,293 kg |
| Ballast | 6,500 lb2,948 kg | 1,150 lb522 kg |
| Sail area | 648 ft²60.2 m² | 205 ft²19.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.33 | 16.32 |
| Displacement / Length | 376 | 172 |
| Comfort ratio | 36.4 | 14.2 |
| Capsize screening | 1.66 | 2.19 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.0 | 5.9 |
Bristol 40 vs Bristol Caravel 22: the short version
- The Bristol 40 is the larger boat at 40.2 ft12.25 m LOA versus 22.0 ft6.71 m for the Bristol Caravel 22.
- The Bristol 40 is heavier, displacing about 517% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Bristol Caravel 22 carries the more powerful rig (16.3 vs 15.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Bristol 40 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Bristol 40 rates better for offshore work (1.66 vs 2.19).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.