J/80 vs J/92
How do the J/80 and J/92 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
J/80 
J/92 | J/80 | J/92 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 26.3 ft8.00 m | 30.0 ft9.14 m |
| Waterline length | 22.0 ft6.71 m | 26.5 ft8.08 m |
| Beam | 8.2 ft2.51 m | 10.0 ft3.05 m |
| Draft | 4.9 ft1.49 m | 5.9 ft1.80 m |
| Displacement | 2,899 lb1,315 kg | 5,512 lb2,500 kg |
| Ballast | 1,400 lb635 kg | 2,275 lb1,032 kg |
| Sail area | 337 ft²31.3 m² | 470 ft²43.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 26.52 | 24.10 |
| Displacement / Length | 121 | 132 |
| Comfort ratio | 11.6 | 14.4 |
| Capsize screening | 2.31 | 2.27 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.3 | 6.9 |
J/80 vs J/92: the short version
- The J/92 is the larger boat at 30.0 ft9.14 m LOA versus 26.3 ft8.00 m for the J/80.
- The J/92 is heavier, displacing about 90% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the J/80 carries the more powerful rig (26.5 vs 24.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The J/92 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the J/92 rates better for offshore work (2.27 vs 2.31).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.