C&C 1/2 Ton vs Knarr
How do the C&C 1/2 Ton and Knarr compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 1/2 Ton 
Knarr | C&C 1/2 Ton | Knarr | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 30.4 ft9.27 m | 30.4 ft9.28 m |
| Waterline length | 24.3 ft7.42 m | 20.4 ft6.21 m |
| Beam | 10.8 ft3.29 m | 7.0 ft2.12 m |
| Draft | 5.3 ft1.62 m | 4.3 ft1.30 m |
| Displacement | 6,400 lb2,903 kg | 4,905 lb2,225 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 2,822 lb1,280 kg |
| Sail area | 387 ft²36.0 m² | 255 ft²23.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.96 | 14.13 |
| Displacement / Length | 198 | 259 |
| Comfort ratio | 15.9 | 24.4 |
| Capsize screening | 2.33 | 1.64 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.6 | 6.0 |
C&C 1/2 Ton vs Knarr: the short version
- The C&C 1/2 Ton and Knarr are close in length (30.4 ft9.27 m vs 30.4 ft9.28 m ).
- The C&C 1/2 Ton is heavier, displacing about 30% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 1/2 Ton carries the more powerful rig (18.0 vs 14.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Knarr scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Knarr rates better for offshore work (1.64 vs 2.33).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.