Mirage 27 vs Mirage 32
How do the Mirage 27 and Mirage 32 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
%20sailboat%20Bothan%204073.jpg?width=960)
Mirage 27 
Mirage 32 | Mirage 27 | Mirage 32 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 27.2 ft8.28 m | 32.0 ft9.75 m |
| Waterline length | 21.5 ft6.55 m | 26.0 ft7.92 m |
| Beam | 9.3 ft2.82 m | 10.5 ft3.20 m |
| Draft | 4.2 ft1.27 m | 4.8 ft1.47 m |
| Displacement | 5,500 lb2,495 kg | 8,000 lb3,629 kg |
| Ballast | 2,200 lb998 kg | 2,800 lb1,270 kg |
| Sail area | 370 ft²34.4 m² | 433 ft²40.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 19.00 | 17.32 |
| Displacement / Length | 247 | 203 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.9 | 19.4 |
| Capsize screening | 2.10 | 2.10 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.2 | 6.8 |
Mirage 27 vs Mirage 32: the short version
- The Mirage 32 is the larger boat at 32.0 ft9.75 m LOA versus 27.2 ft8.28 m for the Mirage 27.
- The Mirage 32 is heavier, displacing about 45% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Mirage 27 carries the more powerful rig (19.0 vs 17.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Mirage 32 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Mirage 27 rates better for offshore work (2.10 vs 2.10).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.