C&C 131 vs C&C 39
How do the C&C 131 and C&C 39 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 131 | C&C 131 | C&C 39 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 43.0 ft13.10 m | 39.3 ft11.96 m |
| Waterline length | 37.2 ft11.35 m | 30.5 ft9.30 m |
| Beam | 13.0 ft3.95 m | 11.5 ft3.51 m |
| Draft | 8.7 ft2.65 m | 6.3 ft1.91 m |
| Displacement | 16,975 lb7,700 kg | 16,750 lb7,598 kg |
| Ballast | 6,790 lb3,080 kg | —— |
| Sail area | 889 ft²82.6 m² | 726 ft²67.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.54 | 17.74 |
| Displacement / Length | 147 | 264 |
| Comfort ratio | 22.2 | 30.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.02 | 1.80 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 8.2 | 7.4 |
C&C 131 vs C&C 39: the short version
- The C&C 131 is the larger boat at 43.0 ft13.10 m LOA versus 39.3 ft11.96 m for the C&C 39.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 131 carries the more powerful rig (21.5 vs 17.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The C&C 39 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C 39 rates better for offshore work (1.80 vs 2.02).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.