C&C 101 vs C&C 39
How do the C&C 101 and C&C 39 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 101 | C&C 101 | C&C 39 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.8 ft10.00 m | 39.3 ft11.96 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 30.5 ft9.30 m |
| Beam | 11.0 ft3.34 m | 11.5 ft3.51 m |
| Draft | 6.5 ft1.98 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Displacement | 8,100 lb3,674 kg | 16,750 lb7,598 kg |
| Ballast | 3,351 lb1,520 kg | —— |
| Sail area | 613 ft²56.9 m² | 726 ft²67.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.32 | 17.74 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 264 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 30.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.18 | 1.80 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 7.4 |
C&C 101 vs C&C 39: the short version
- The C&C 39 is the larger boat at 39.3 ft11.96 m LOA versus 32.8 ft10.00 m for the C&C 101.
- The C&C 39 is heavier, displacing about 107% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 101 carries the more powerful rig (24.3 vs 17.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C 39 rates better for offshore work (1.80 vs 2.18).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.