Cal 3-27 vs Niagara 26
How do the Cal 3-27 and Niagara 26 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Cal 3-27 
Niagara 26 | Cal 3-27 | Niagara 26 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 26.7 ft8.13 m | 26.7 ft8.13 m |
| Waterline length | 23.3 ft7.09 m | 23.0 ft7.01 m |
| Beam | 9.0 ft2.74 m | 8.3 ft2.54 m |
| Draft | 5.0 ft1.52 m | 4.4 ft1.35 m |
| Displacement | 5,200 lb2,359 kg | 4,000 lb1,814 kg |
| Ballast | 2,000 lb907 kg | 1,700 lb771 kg |
| Sail area | 336 ft²31.2 m² | 316 ft²29.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.91 | 20.06 |
| Displacement / Length | 185 | 147 |
| Comfort ratio | 17.7 | 15.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.08 | 2.10 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 6.4 |
Cal 3-27 vs Niagara 26: the short version
- The Cal 3-27 and Niagara 26 are close in length (26.7 ft8.13 m vs 26.7 ft8.13 m ).
- The Cal 3-27 is heavier, displacing about 30% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Niagara 26 carries the more powerful rig (20.1 vs 17.9), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Cal 3-27 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Cal 3-27 rates better for offshore work (2.08 vs 2.10).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.