C&C 36R vs Landfall 35
How do the C&C 36R and Landfall 35 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C 36R | C&C 36R | Landfall 35 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 35.1 ft10.69 m | 34.9 ft10.64 m |
| Waterline length | 30.5 ft9.30 m | 26.8 ft8.15 m |
| Beam | 11.2 ft3.40 m | 10.7 ft3.25 m |
| Draft | 6.0 ft1.83 m | 4.8 ft1.47 m |
| Displacement | 12,700 lb5,761 kg | 13,000 lb5,897 kg |
| Ballast | 6,030 lb2,735 kg | 5,500 lb2,495 kg |
| Sail area | 632 ft²58.7 m² | 517 ft²48.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 18.58 | 14.96 |
| Displacement / Length | 200 | 303 |
| Comfort ratio | 24.7 | 29.4 |
| Capsize screening | 1.92 | 1.82 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.4 | 6.9 |
C&C 36R vs Landfall 35: the short version
- The C&C 36R and Landfall 35 are close in length (35.1 ft10.69 m vs 34.9 ft10.64 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the C&C 36R carries the more powerful rig (18.6 vs 15.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Landfall 35 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Landfall 35 rates better for offshore work (1.82 vs 1.92).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.