C&C 115 vs C&C 131
How do the C&C 115 and C&C 131 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 115 
C&C 131 | C&C 115 | C&C 131 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.8 ft11.51 m | 43.0 ft13.10 m |
| Waterline length | 33.0 ft10.06 m | 37.2 ft11.35 m |
| Beam | 11.9 ft3.63 m | 13.0 ft3.95 m |
| Draft | 6.7 ft2.03 m | 8.7 ft2.65 m |
| Displacement | 11,800 lb5,352 kg | 16,975 lb7,700 kg |
| Ballast | 4,200 lb1,905 kg | 6,790 lb3,080 kg |
| Sail area | 781 ft²72.6 m² | 889 ft²82.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.11 | 21.54 |
| Displacement / Length | 147 | 147 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.5 | 22.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.09 | 2.02 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.7 | 8.2 |
C&C 115 vs C&C 131: the short version
- The C&C 131 is the larger boat at 43.0 ft13.10 m LOA versus 37.8 ft11.51 m for the C&C 115.
- The C&C 131 is heavier, displacing about 44% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 115 carries the more powerful rig (24.1 vs 21.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The C&C 131 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C 131 rates better for offshore work (2.02 vs 2.09).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.