Irwin 27 vs Irwin 41 Citation
How do the Irwin 27 and Irwin 41 Citation compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Irwin 27 | Irwin 27 | Irwin 41 Citation | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 27.1 ft8.25 m | 40.8 ft12.43 m |
| Waterline length | 20.5 ft6.25 m | 33.3 ft10.14 m |
| Beam | 8.7 ft2.64 m | 13.0 ft3.97 m |
| Draft | 7.8 ft2.39 m | 7.3 ft2.21 m |
| Displacement | 6,600 lb2,994 kg | 17,500 lb7,938 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 9,500 lb4,309 kg |
| Sail area | 372 ft²34.6 m² | 787 ft²73.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.92 | 18.68 |
| Displacement / Length | 342 | 212 |
| Comfort ratio | 25.5 | 24.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.85 | 2.01 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.1 | 7.7 |
Irwin 27 vs Irwin 41 Citation: the short version
- The Irwin 41 Citation is the larger boat at 40.8 ft12.43 m LOA versus 27.1 ft8.25 m for the Irwin 27.
- The Irwin 41 Citation is heavier, displacing about 165% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Irwin 41 Citation carries the more powerful rig (18.7 vs 16.9), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Irwin 27 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Irwin 27 rates better for offshore work (1.85 vs 2.01).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.