Kirby 30 vs Mirage 29
How do the Kirby 30 and Mirage 29 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Kirby 30 
Mirage 29 | Kirby 30 | Mirage 29 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 29.7 ft9.04 m | 29.0 ft8.84 m |
| Waterline length | 23.5 ft7.16 m | 24.3 ft7.39 m |
| Beam | 10.3 ft3.12 m | 10.5 ft3.20 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 4.8 ft1.47 m |
| Displacement | 5,350 lb2,427 kg | 6,800 lb3,084 kg |
| Ballast | 2,300 lb1,043 kg | 2,300 lb1,043 kg |
| Sail area | 434 ft²40.3 m² | 375 ft²34.8 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 22.70 | 16.72 |
| Displacement / Length | 184 | 213 |
| Comfort ratio | 14.7 | 17.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.34 | 2.22 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.5 | 6.6 |
Kirby 30 vs Mirage 29: the short version
- The Kirby 30 is the larger boat at 29.7 ft9.04 m LOA versus 29.0 ft8.84 m for the Mirage 29.
- The Mirage 29 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 16.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Mirage 29 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Mirage 29 rates better for offshore work (2.22 vs 2.34).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.