Cal 39 Mark II vs Nautical 39
How do the Cal 39 Mark II and Nautical 39 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Cal 39 Mark II | Cal 39 Mark II | Nautical 39 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 39.0 ft11.89 m | 39.0 ft11.89 m |
| Waterline length | 32.1 ft9.78 m | 32.5 ft9.91 m |
| Beam | 12.0 ft3.66 m | 12.0 ft3.66 m |
| Draft | 6.7 ft2.03 m | 5.3 ft1.62 m |
| Displacement | 17,000 lb7,711 kg | 22,500 lb10,206 kg |
| Ballast | 7,000 lb3,175 kg | —— |
| Sail area | 719 ft²66.8 m² | 677 ft²62.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.40 | 13.59 |
| Displacement / Length | 230 | 293 |
| Comfort ratio | 28.1 | 36.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.87 | 1.70 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.6 | 7.6 |
Cal 39 Mark II vs Nautical 39: the short version
- The Cal 39 Mark II and Nautical 39 are close in length (39.0 ft11.89 m vs 39.0 ft11.89 m ).
- The Nautical 39 is heavier, displacing about 32% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Cal 39 Mark II carries the more powerful rig (17.4 vs 13.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Nautical 39 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Nautical 39 rates better for offshore work (1.70 vs 1.87).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.