Irwin 41 vs Irwin 41 Citation
How do the Irwin 41 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 41 | Irwin 41 | Irwin 41 Citation | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 41.5 ft12.65 m | 40.8 ft12.43 m |
| Waterline length | 35.1 ft10.69 m | 33.3 ft10.14 m |
| Beam | 13.5 ft4.11 m | 13.0 ft3.97 m |
| Draft | 4.5 ft1.37 m | 7.3 ft2.21 m |
| Displacement | 25,000 lb11,340 kg | 17,500 lb7,938 kg |
| Ballast | 8,000 lb3,629 kg | 9,500 lb4,309 kg |
| Sail area | 803 ft²74.6 m² | 787 ft²73.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 15.03 | 18.68 |
| Displacement / Length | 259 | 212 |
| Comfort ratio | 32.6 | 24.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.85 | 2.01 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.9 | 7.7 |
Irwin 41 vs Irwin 41 Citation: the short version
- The Irwin 41 is the larger boat at 41.5 ft12.65 m LOA versus 40.8 ft12.43 m for the Irwin 41 Citation.
- The Irwin 41 is heavier, displacing about 43% 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 15.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Irwin 41 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Irwin 41 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.