J/80 vs Marieholm 26
How do the J/80 and Marieholm 26 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
J/80 
Marieholm 26 | J/80 | Marieholm 26 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 26.3 ft8.00 m | 26.3 ft8.00 m |
| Waterline length | 22.0 ft6.71 m | 20.2 ft6.15 m |
| Beam | 8.2 ft2.51 m | 7.4 ft2.25 m |
| Draft | 4.9 ft1.49 m | 4.1 ft1.24 m |
| Displacement | 2,899 lb1,315 kg | 5,512 lb2,500 kg |
| Ballast | 1,400 lb635 kg | 2,535 lb1,150 kg |
| Sail area | 337 ft²31.3 m² | 374 ft²34.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 26.52 | 19.18 |
| Displacement / Length | 121 | 299 |
| Comfort ratio | 11.6 | 27.0 |
| Capsize screening | 2.31 | 1.67 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.3 | 6.0 |
| Average used price | — | €6,000 |
J/80 vs Marieholm 26: the short version
- The J/80 and Marieholm 26 are close in length (26.3 ft8.00 m vs 26.3 ft8.00 m ).
- The Marieholm 26 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 19.2), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Marieholm 26 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Marieholm 26 rates better for offshore work (1.67 vs 2.31).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.