CS 33 vs CS 395
How do the CS 33 and CS 395 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
CS 33 
CS 395 | CS 33 | CS 395 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 32.7 ft9.96 m | 40.1 ft12.24 m |
| Waterline length | 26.4 ft8.05 m | 31.1 ft9.49 m |
| Beam | 10.7 ft3.25 m | 12.7 ft3.87 m |
| Draft | 5.8 ft1.77 m | 7.3 ft2.22 m |
| Displacement | 10,000 lb4,536 kg | 12,786 lb5,800 kg |
| Ballast | 4,250 lb1,928 kg | 5,644 lb2,560 kg |
| Sail area | 503 ft²46.7 m² | 747 ft²69.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.34 | 21.86 |
| Displacement / Length | 242 | 189 |
| Comfort ratio | 23.3 | 19.8 |
| Capsize screening | 1.98 | 2.17 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.9 | 7.5 |
CS 33 vs CS 395: the short version
- The CS 395 is the larger boat at 40.1 ft12.24 m LOA versus 32.7 ft9.96 m for the CS 33.
- The CS 395 is heavier, displacing about 28% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the CS 395 carries the more powerful rig (21.9 vs 17.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The CS 33 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the CS 33 rates better for offshore work (1.98 vs 2.17).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.