C&C 115 vs Landfall 48
How do the C&C 115 and Landfall 48 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 48 | C&C 115 | Landfall 48 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.8 ft11.51 m | 47.5 ft14.48 m |
| Waterline length | 33.0 ft10.06 m | 37.3 ft11.38 m |
| Beam | 11.9 ft3.63 m | 14.0 ft4.27 m |
| Draft | 6.7 ft2.03 m | 6.6 ft2.01 m |
| Displacement | 11,800 lb5,352 kg | 31,600 lb14,334 kg |
| Ballast | 4,200 lb1,905 kg | 12,300 lb5,579 kg |
| Sail area | 781 ft²72.6 m² | 960 ft²89.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.11 | 15.37 |
| Displacement / Length | 147 | 271 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.5 | 36.0 |
| Capsize screening | 2.09 | 1.77 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.7 | 8.2 |
C&C 115 vs Landfall 48: the short version
- The Landfall 48 is the larger boat at 47.5 ft14.48 m LOA versus 37.8 ft11.51 m for the C&C 115.
- The Landfall 48 is heavier, displacing about 168% 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 15.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Landfall 48 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Landfall 48 rates better for offshore work (1.77 vs 2.09).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.