Mirage 26 vs Mirage 29
How do the Mirage 26 and Mirage 29 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Mirage 26 
Mirage 29 | Mirage 26 | Mirage 29 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 26.2 ft7.98 m | 29.0 ft8.84 m |
| Waterline length | 21.7 ft6.61 m | 24.3 ft7.39 m |
| Beam | 9.3 ft2.82 m | 10.5 ft3.20 m |
| Draft | 4.5 ft1.37 m | 4.8 ft1.47 m |
| Displacement | 4,770 lb2,164 kg | 6,800 lb3,084 kg |
| Ballast | 2,050 lb930 kg | 2,300 lb1,043 kg |
| Sail area | 313 ft²29.1 m² | 375 ft²34.8 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.67 | 16.72 |
| Displacement / Length | 209 | 213 |
| Comfort ratio | 16.5 | 17.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.20 | 2.22 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.2 | 6.6 |
Mirage 26 vs Mirage 29: the short version
- The Mirage 29 is the larger boat at 29.0 ft8.84 m LOA versus 26.2 ft7.98 m for the Mirage 26.
- The Mirage 29 is heavier, displacing about 43% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Mirage 26 carries the more powerful rig (17.7 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 26 rates better for offshore work (2.20 vs 2.22).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.