Mirage 26 vs Tur 80
How do the Mirage 26 and Tur 80 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Mirage 26 
Tur 80 | Mirage 26 | Tur 80 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 26.2 ft7.98 m | 26.1 ft7.96 m |
| Waterline length | 21.7 ft6.61 m | 21.5 ft6.55 m |
| Beam | 9.3 ft2.82 m | 8.2 ft2.51 m |
| Draft | 4.5 ft1.37 m | 3.5 ft1.08 m |
| Displacement | 4,770 lb2,164 kg | 5,071 lb2,300 kg |
| Ballast | 2,050 lb930 kg | 1,984 lb900 kg |
| Sail area | 313 ft²29.1 m² | 366 ft²34.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.67 | 19.84 |
| Displacement / Length | 209 | 228 |
| Comfort ratio | 16.5 | 20.7 |
| Capsize screening | 2.20 | 1.92 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.2 | 6.2 |
| Average used price | — | €3,100 |
Mirage 26 vs Tur 80: the short version
- The Mirage 26 and Tur 80 are close in length (26.2 ft7.98 m vs 26.1 ft7.96 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Tur 80 carries the more powerful rig (19.8 vs 17.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Tur 80 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Tur 80 rates better for offshore work (1.92 vs 2.20).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.