C&C 45 vs New Zealand 45
How do the C&C 45 and New Zealand 45 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 45 | C&C 45 | New Zealand 45 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 45.3 ft13.79 m | 45.0 ft13.72 m |
| Waterline length | 39.1 ft11.91 m | 36.5 ft11.13 m |
| Beam | 13.8 ft4.19 m | 13.8 ft4.19 m |
| Draft | 8.8 ft2.67 m | 8.0 ft2.44 m |
| Displacement | 19,100 lb8,664 kg | 22,000 lb9,979 kg |
| Ballast | 9,800 lb4,445 kg | 10,515 lb4,770 kg |
| Sail area | 1,107 ft²102.8 m² | 900 ft²83.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 24.79 | 18.34 |
| Displacement / Length | 143 | 202 |
| Comfort ratio | 22.0 | 26.5 |
| Capsize screening | 2.06 | 1.96 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 8.4 | 8.1 |
C&C 45 vs New Zealand 45: the short version
- The C&C 45 and New Zealand 45 are close in length (45.3 ft13.79 m vs 45.0 ft13.72 m ).
- The New Zealand 45 is heavier, displacing about 15% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 45 carries the more powerful rig (24.8 vs 18.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The New Zealand 45 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the New Zealand 45 rates better for offshore work (1.96 vs 2.06).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.