Cal 2-27 vs Cal 3-27
How do the Cal 2-27 and Cal 3-27 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Cal 2-27 
Cal 3-27 | Cal 2-27 | Cal 3-27 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 26.6 ft8.10 m | 26.7 ft8.13 m |
| Waterline length | 22.1 ft6.73 m | 23.3 ft7.09 m |
| Beam | 9.3 ft2.82 m | 9.0 ft2.74 m |
| Draft | 4.3 ft1.30 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 6,700 lb3,039 kg | 5,200 lb2,359 kg |
| Ballast | 3,100 lb1,406 kg | 2,000 lb907 kg |
| Sail area | 375 ft²34.8 m² | 336 ft²31.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.88 | 17.91 |
| Displacement / Length | 278 | 185 |
| Comfort ratio | 22.8 | 17.7 |
| Capsize screening | 1.96 | 2.08 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.3 | 6.5 |
Cal 2-27 vs Cal 3-27: the short version
- The Cal 2-27 and Cal 3-27 are close in length (26.6 ft8.10 m vs 26.7 ft8.13 m ).
- The Cal 2-27 is heavier, displacing about 29% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Cal 3-27 carries the more powerful rig (17.9 vs 16.9), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Cal 2-27 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Cal 2-27 rates better for offshore work (1.96 vs 2.08).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.