C&C 115 vs Shannon 38
How do the C&C 115 and Shannon 38 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 115 
Shannon 38 | C&C 115 | Shannon 38 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.8 ft11.51 m | 37.8 ft11.51 m |
| Waterline length | 33.0 ft10.06 m | 29.2 ft8.89 m |
| Beam | 11.9 ft3.63 m | 11.5 ft3.51 m |
| Draft | 6.7 ft2.03 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 11,800 lb5,352 kg | 18,500 lb8,391 kg |
| Ballast | 4,200 lb1,905 kg | —— |
| Sail area | 781 ft²72.6 m² | 728 ft²67.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.11 | 16.65 |
| Displacement / Length | 147 | 333 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.5 | 34.8 |
| Capsize screening | 2.09 | 1.74 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.7 | 7.2 |
C&C 115 vs Shannon 38: the short version
- The C&C 115 and Shannon 38 are close in length (37.8 ft11.51 m vs 37.8 ft11.51 m ).
- The Shannon 38 is heavier, displacing about 57% 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 16.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Shannon 38 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Shannon 38 rates better for offshore work (1.74 vs 2.09).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.