Herreshoff 31 vs Mamba 31
How do the Herreshoff 31 and Mamba 31 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Herreshoff 31 | Herreshoff 31 | Mamba 31 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 30.8 ft9.40 m | 30.7 ft9.35 m |
| Waterline length | 28.0 ft8.53 m | 26.3 ft8.00 m |
| Beam | 10.3 ft3.15 m | 10.1 ft3.07 m |
| Draft | 4.0 ft1.22 m | 5.4 ft1.65 m |
| Displacement | 7,560 lb3,429 kg | 7,716 lb3,500 kg |
| Ballast | 3,350 lb1,520 kg | 3,527 lb1,600 kg |
| Sail area | 641 ft²59.6 m² | 506 ft²47.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 26.63 | 20.73 |
| Displacement / Length | 154 | 190 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.1 | 19.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.11 | 2.04 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.1 | 6.9 |
| Average used price | — | €12,000 |
Herreshoff 31 vs Mamba 31: the short version
- The Herreshoff 31 and Mamba 31 are close in length (30.8 ft9.40 m vs 30.7 ft9.35 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Herreshoff 31 carries the more powerful rig (26.6 vs 20.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Mamba 31 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Mamba 31 rates better for offshore work (2.04 vs 2.11).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.