CS 36 vs CS 395
How do the CS 36 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 36 
CS 395 | CS 36 | CS 395 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 36.5 ft11.13 m | 40.1 ft12.24 m |
| Waterline length | 29.3 ft8.92 m | 31.1 ft9.49 m |
| Beam | 11.5 ft3.51 m | 12.7 ft3.87 m |
| Draft | 6.3 ft1.91 m | 7.3 ft2.22 m |
| Displacement | 15,500 lb7,031 kg | 12,786 lb5,800 kg |
| Ballast | 6,500 lb2,948 kg | 5,644 lb2,560 kg |
| Sail area | 640 ft²59.5 m² | 747 ft²69.4 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.47 | 21.86 |
| Displacement / Length | 277 | 189 |
| Comfort ratio | 29.5 | 19.8 |
| Capsize screening | 1.84 | 2.17 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.2 | 7.5 |
CS 36 vs CS 395: the short version
- The CS 395 is the larger boat at 40.1 ft12.24 m LOA versus 36.5 ft11.13 m for the CS 36.
- The CS 36 is heavier, displacing about 21% 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 16.5), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The CS 36 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the CS 36 rates better for offshore work (1.84 vs 2.17).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.