Kirby 30 vs Mirage 275
How do the Kirby 30 and Mirage 275 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Kirby 30 | Kirby 30 | Mirage 275 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 29.7 ft9.04 m | 27.5 ft8.38 m |
| Waterline length | 23.5 ft7.16 m | 22.5 ft6.86 m |
| Beam | 10.3 ft3.12 m | 9.8 ft3.00 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 4.3 ft1.32 m |
| Displacement | 5,350 lb2,427 kg | 6,800 lb3,084 kg |
| Ballast | 2,300 lb1,043 kg | 2,400 lb1,089 kg |
| Sail area | 434 ft²40.3 m² | 334 ft²31.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 22.70 | 14.89 |
| Displacement / Length | 184 | 267 |
| Comfort ratio | 14.7 | 20.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.34 | 2.08 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 6.4 |
Kirby 30 vs Mirage 275: the short version
- The Kirby 30 is the larger boat at 29.7 ft9.04 m LOA versus 27.5 ft8.38 m for the Mirage 275.
- The Mirage 275 is heavier, displacing about 27% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Kirby 30 carries the more powerful rig (22.7 vs 14.9), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Mirage 275 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Mirage 275 rates better for offshore work (2.08 vs 2.34).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.