C&C 30 vs Humboldt 30
How do the C&C 30 and Humboldt 30 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 30 
Humboldt 30 | C&C 30 | Humboldt 30 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 30.0 ft9.14 m | 30.0 ft9.14 m |
| Waterline length | 24.9 ft7.60 m | 26.7 ft8.13 m |
| Beam | 10.0 ft3.05 m | 10.5 ft3.20 m |
| Draft | 5.0 ft1.52 m | 5.5 ft1.68 m |
| Displacement | 8,000 lb3,629 kg | 5,050 lb2,291 kg |
| Ballast | 3,450 lb1,565 kg | 2,222 lb1,008 kg |
| Sail area | 459 ft²42.6 m² | 502 ft²46.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 18.36 | 27.29 |
| Displacement / Length | 231 | 119 |
| Comfort ratio | 21.8 | 12.3 |
| Capsize screening | 2.00 | 2.45 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.7 | 6.9 |
C&C 30 vs Humboldt 30: the short version
- The C&C 30 and Humboldt 30 are close in length (30.0 ft9.14 m vs 30.0 ft9.14 m ).
- The C&C 30 is heavier, displacing about 58% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Humboldt 30 carries the more powerful rig (27.3 vs 18.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The C&C 30 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C 30 rates better for offshore work (2.00 vs 2.45).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.