C&C 32 vs C&C 99
How do the C&C 32 and C&C 99 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 32 
C&C 99 | C&C 32 | C&C 99 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 31.5 ft9.60 m | 32.5 ft9.91 m |
| Waterline length | 24.7 ft7.52 m | 29.1 ft8.86 m |
| Beam | 10.3 ft3.12 m | 10.8 ft3.30 m |
| Draft | 5.7 ft1.73 m | 5.5 ft1.68 m |
| Displacement | 9,680 lb4,391 kg | 9,265 lb4,203 kg |
| Ballast | 3,900 lb1,769 kg | 3,500 lb1,588 kg |
| Sail area | 462 ft²42.9 m² | 562 ft²52.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 16.27 | 20.38 |
| Displacement / Length | 288 | 168 |
| Comfort ratio | 25.2 | 19.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.92 | 2.06 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.7 | 7.2 |
C&C 32 vs C&C 99: the short version
- The C&C 99 is the larger boat at 32.5 ft9.91 m LOA versus 31.5 ft9.60 m for the C&C 32.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 99 carries the more powerful rig (20.4 vs 16.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The C&C 32 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C 32 rates better for offshore work (1.92 vs 2.06).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.