C&C 110 vs C&C 46
How do the C&C 110 and C&C 46 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 110 | C&C 110 | C&C 46 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 36.3 ft11.07 m | 45.6 ft13.89 m |
| Waterline length | 31.5 ft9.60 m | 38.8 ft11.84 m |
| Beam | 12.0 ft3.66 m | 13.0 ft3.96 m |
| Draft | 6.5 ft1.98 m | 7.5 ft2.29 m |
| Displacement | 10,900 lb4,944 kg | 26,700 lb12,111 kg |
| Ballast | 4,200 lb1,905 kg | —— |
| Sail area | 706 ft²65.6 m² | 939 ft²87.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 22.98 | 16.82 |
| Displacement / Length | 156 | 204 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.7 | 33.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.16 | 1.74 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.5 | 8.4 |
C&C 110 vs C&C 46: the short version
- The C&C 46 is the larger boat at 45.6 ft13.89 m LOA versus 36.3 ft11.07 m for the C&C 110.
- The C&C 46 is heavier, displacing about 145% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 110 carries the more powerful rig (23.0 vs 16.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The C&C 46 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C 46 rates better for offshore work (1.74 vs 2.16).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.