C&C 115 vs Landfall 35
How do the C&C 115 and Landfall 35 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 115 
Landfall 35 | C&C 115 | Landfall 35 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.8 ft11.51 m | 34.9 ft10.64 m |
| Waterline length | 33.0 ft10.06 m | 26.8 ft8.15 m |
| Beam | 11.9 ft3.63 m | 10.7 ft3.25 m |
| Draft | 6.7 ft2.03 m | 4.8 ft1.47 m |
| Displacement | 11,800 lb5,352 kg | 13,000 lb5,897 kg |
| Ballast | 4,200 lb1,905 kg | 5,500 lb2,495 kg |
| Sail area | 781 ft²72.6 m² | 517 ft²48.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.11 | 14.96 |
| Displacement / Length | 147 | 303 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.5 | 29.4 |
| Capsize screening | 2.09 | 1.82 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.7 | 6.9 |
C&C 115 vs Landfall 35: the short version
- The C&C 115 is the larger boat at 37.8 ft11.51 m LOA versus 34.9 ft10.64 m for the Landfall 35.
- The Landfall 35 is heavier, displacing about 10% 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 15.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Landfall 35 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Landfall 35 rates better for offshore work (1.82 vs 2.09).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.