CS 395 vs CS 40
How do the CS 395 and CS 40 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
CS 395 | CS 395 | CS 40 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 40.1 ft12.24 m | 39.3 ft11.96 m |
| Waterline length | 31.1 ft9.49 m | 32.7 ft9.96 m |
| Beam | 12.7 ft3.87 m | 12.7 ft3.86 m |
| Draft | 7.3 ft2.22 m | 6.6 ft2.01 m |
| Displacement | 12,786 lb5,800 kg | 17,000 lb7,711 kg |
| Ballast | 5,644 lb2,560 kg | 7,500 lb3,402 kg |
| Sail area | 747 ft²69.4 m² | 767 ft²71.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.86 | 18.56 |
| Displacement / Length | 189 | 218 |
| Comfort ratio | 19.8 | 25.8 |
| Capsize screening | 2.17 | 1.97 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.5 | 7.7 |
CS 395 vs CS 40: the short version
- The CS 395 is the larger boat at 40.1 ft12.24 m LOA versus 39.3 ft11.96 m for the CS 40.
- The CS 40 is heavier, displacing about 33% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the CS 395 carries the more powerful rig (21.9 vs 18.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The CS 40 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the CS 40 rates better for offshore work (1.97 vs 2.17).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.