Comfort 32 vs Sprint 95
How do the Comfort 32 and Sprint 95 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Comfort 32 | Comfort 32 | Sprint 95 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 31.2 ft9.50 m | 31.1 ft9.48 m |
| Waterline length | 24.6 ft7.50 m | 27.6 ft8.40 m |
| Beam | 10.7 ft3.27 m | 9.6 ft2.92 m |
| Draft | 5.6 ft1.70 m | 5.9 ft1.80 m |
| Displacement | 9,921 lb4,500 kg | 4,950 lb2,245 kg |
| Ballast | 3,968 lb1,800 kg | 1,764 lb800 kg |
| Sail area | 603 ft²56.0 m² | —— |
| SA / Displacement | 20.90 | — |
| Displacement / Length | 297 | 106 |
| Comfort ratio | 24.5 | 13.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.00 | 2.25 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.6 | 7.0 |
| Average used price | €17,000 | — |
Comfort 32 vs Sprint 95: the short version
- The Comfort 32 and Sprint 95 are close in length (31.2 ft9.50 m vs 31.1 ft9.48 m ).
- The Comfort 32 is heavier, displacing about 100% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- The Comfort 32 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Comfort 32 rates better for offshore work (2.00 vs 2.25).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.