C&C 101 vs C&C 99
How do the C&C 101 and C&C 99 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 99 | C&C 101 | C&C 99 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.8 ft10.00 m | 32.5 ft9.91 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 29.1 ft8.86 m |
| Beam | 11.0 ft3.34 m | 10.8 ft3.30 m |
| Draft | 6.5 ft1.98 m | 5.5 ft1.68 m |
| Displacement | 8,100 lb3,674 kg | 9,265 lb4,203 kg |
| Ballast | 3,351 lb1,520 kg | 3,500 lb1,588 kg |
| Sail area | 613 ft²56.9 m² | 562 ft²52.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.32 | 20.38 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 168 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 19.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.18 | 2.06 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 7.2 |
C&C 101 vs C&C 99: the short version
- The C&C 101 and C&C 99 are close in length (32.8 ft10.00 m vs 32.5 ft9.91 m ).
- The C&C 99 is heavier, displacing about 14% 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 20.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C 99 rates better for offshore work (2.06 vs 2.18).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.