C&C 115 vs C&C 50
How do the C&C 115 and C&C 50 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 50 | C&C 115 | C&C 50 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.8 ft11.51 m | 49.8 ft15.19 m |
| Waterline length | 33.0 ft10.06 m | 39.0 ft11.89 m |
| Beam | 11.9 ft3.63 m | 14.5 ft4.42 m |
| Draft | 6.7 ft2.03 m | 8.0 ft2.44 m |
| Displacement | 11,800 lb5,352 kg | 31,100 lb14,107 kg |
| Ballast | 4,200 lb1,905 kg | 15,000 lb6,804 kg |
| Sail area | 781 ft²72.6 m² | 1,273 ft²118.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.11 | 20.60 |
| Displacement / Length | 147 | 234 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.5 | 32.3 |
| Capsize screening | 2.09 | 1.84 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.7 | 8.4 |
C&C 115 vs C&C 50: the short version
- The C&C 50 is the larger boat at 49.8 ft15.19 m LOA versus 37.8 ft11.51 m for the C&C 115.
- The C&C 50 is heavier, displacing about 164% 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 20.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The C&C 50 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C 50 rates better for offshore work (1.84 vs 2.09).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.