Bristol Corsair 24 vs MacGregor 24
How do the Bristol Corsair 24 and MacGregor 24 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Bristol Corsair 24 
MacGregor 24 | Bristol Corsair 24 | MacGregor 24 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 24.6 ft7.49 m | 24.6 ft7.49 m |
| Waterline length | 18.1 ft5.51 m | 21.3 ft6.50 m |
| Beam | 8.0 ft2.44 m | 7.9 ft2.41 m |
| Draft | 3.4 ft1.04 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 5,920 lb2,685 kg | 2,100 lb953 kg |
| Ballast | 3,000 lb1,361 kg | 575 lb261 kg |
| Sail area | 291 ft²27.0 m² | 231 ft²21.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 14.23 | 22.54 |
| Displacement / Length | 447 | 97 |
| Comfort ratio | 28.6 | 9.2 |
| Capsize screening | 1.77 | 2.47 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 5.7 | 6.2 |
Bristol Corsair 24 vs MacGregor 24: the short version
- The Bristol Corsair 24 and MacGregor 24 are close in length (24.6 ft7.49 m vs 24.6 ft7.49 m ).
- The Bristol Corsair 24 is heavier, displacing about 182% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the MacGregor 24 carries the more powerful rig (22.5 vs 14.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Bristol Corsair 24 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Bristol Corsair 24 rates better for offshore work (1.77 vs 2.47).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.