Bristol 40 vs Endeavour 40
How do the Bristol 40 and Endeavour 40 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 | Endeavour 40 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 40.2 ft12.25 m | 40.0 ft12.19 m |
| Waterline length | 27.5 ft8.39 m | 32.0 ft9.75 m |
| Beam | 10.8 ft3.29 m | 13.0 ft3.96 m |
| Draft | 5.4 ft1.65 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 17,580 lb7,974 kg | 25,000 lb11,340 kg |
| Ballast | 6,500 lb2,948 kg | 9,000 lb4,082 kg |
| Sail area | 648 ft²60.2 m² | 788 ft²73.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.33 | 14.75 |
| Displacement / Length | 376 | 341 |
| Comfort ratio | 36.4 | 36.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.66 | 1.78 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.0 | 7.6 |
Bristol 40 vs Endeavour 40: the short version
- The Bristol 40 and Endeavour 40 are close in length (40.2 ft12.25 m vs 40.0 ft12.19 m ).
- The Endeavour 40 is heavier, displacing about 42% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Bristol 40 carries the more powerful rig (15.3 vs 14.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Endeavour 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 1.78).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.