C&C Landfall 39 vs Eagle 38
How do the C&C Landfall 39 and Eagle 38 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C Landfall 39 
Eagle 38 | C&C Landfall 39 | Eagle 38 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 38.8 ft11.81 m | 38.6 ft11.77 m |
| Waterline length | 31.0 ft9.45 m | —— |
| Beam | 12.2 ft3.73 m | 8.5 ft2.60 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 4.1 ft1.25 m |
| Displacement | 19,497 lb8,844 kg | 8,378 lb3,800 kg |
| Ballast | 6,248 lb2,834 kg | 2,976 lb1,350 kg |
| Sail area | 667 ft²62.0 m² | 644 ft²59.8 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 14.73 | 24.98 |
| Displacement / Length | 292 | — |
| Comfort ratio | 32.2 | — |
| Capsize screening | 1.82 | 1.68 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.5 | — |
C&C Landfall 39 vs Eagle 38: the short version
- The C&C Landfall 39 and Eagle 38 are close in length (38.8 ft11.81 m vs 38.6 ft11.77 m ).
- The C&C Landfall 39 is heavier, displacing about 133% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Eagle 38 carries the more powerful rig (25.0 vs 14.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Eagle 38 rates better for offshore work (1.68 vs 1.82).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.