Corbin 39 vs Marlow-Hunter 40
How do the Corbin 39 and Marlow-Hunter 40 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Corbin 39 | Corbin 39 | Marlow-Hunter 40 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 41.5 ft12.65 m | 41.3 ft12.57 m |
| Waterline length | 32.0 ft9.75 m | 36.0 ft10.97 m |
| Beam | 12.1 ft3.68 m | 13.2 ft4.01 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 5.2 ft1.57 m |
| Displacement | 22,800 lb10,342 kg | 19,700 lb8,936 kg |
| Ballast | 9,000 lb4,082 kg | 6,027 lb2,734 kg |
| Sail area | 811 ft²75.3 m² | 1,006 ft²93.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.14 | 22.07 |
| Displacement / Length | 311 | 188 |
| Comfort ratio | 36.6 | 26.2 |
| Capsize screening | 1.70 | 1.95 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.6 | 8.0 |
Corbin 39 vs Marlow-Hunter 40: the short version
- The Corbin 39 and Marlow-Hunter 40 are close in length (41.5 ft12.65 m vs 41.3 ft12.57 m ).
- The Corbin 39 is heavier, displacing about 16% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Marlow-Hunter 40 carries the more powerful rig (22.1 vs 16.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Corbin 39 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Corbin 39 rates better for offshore work (1.70 vs 1.95).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.