C&C 131 vs Landfall 38
How do the C&C 131 and Landfall 38 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 | Landfall 38 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 43.0 ft13.10 m | 37.6 ft11.45 m |
| Waterline length | 37.2 ft11.35 m | 30.2 ft9.20 m |
| Beam | 13.0 ft3.95 m | 12.0 ft3.66 m |
| Draft | 8.7 ft2.65 m | 5.0 ft1.52 m |
| Displacement | 16,975 lb7,700 kg | 16,700 lb7,575 kg |
| Ballast | 6,790 lb3,080 kg | 6,500 lb2,948 kg |
| Sail area | 889 ft²82.6 m² | 648 ft²60.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.54 | 15.87 |
| Displacement / Length | 147 | 271 |
| Comfort ratio | 22.2 | 29.1 |
| Capsize screening | 2.02 | 1.88 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 8.2 | 7.4 |
C&C 131 vs Landfall 38: the short version
- The C&C 131 is the larger boat at 43.0 ft13.10 m LOA versus 37.6 ft11.45 m for the Landfall 38.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 131 carries the more powerful rig (21.5 vs 15.9), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Landfall 38 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Landfall 38 rates better for offshore work (1.88 vs 2.02).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.