1963 Cal 40 vs 2000 Sabre 386 — Comparison
1963 Cal 40
2000 Sabre 386
Specifications Side by Side
| Specification | 1963 Cal 40 | 2000 Sabre 386 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Manufacturer | Cal | Sabre |
| Year | 1963–1972 | 2000–2007 |
| Type | Sloop | Sloop |
| Country | USA | USA |
| Designer | Bill Lapworth | Jim Taylor |
| Dimensions | ||
| LOA | 12.19 m (40.0 ft) | 11.58 m (38.0 ft) |
| LWL | 9.14 m (30.0 ft) | 9.75 m (32.0 ft) |
| Beam | 3.35 m (11.0 ft) | 3.56 m (11.7 ft) |
| Draft | 1.83 m (6.0 ft) | 1.75 m (5.7 ft) |
| Weight | ||
| Displacement | 7,030 kg (15,498 lbs) | 7,257 kg (15,999 lbs) |
| Ballast | 2,722 kg (6,001 lbs) | 2,948 kg (6,499 lbs) |
| Sailing | ||
| Sail Area | 61.3 m² (660 ft²) | 60.5 m² (651 ft²) |
| Hull Material | Fiberglass | Fiberglass |
| Keel Type | Fin | Fin |
| Engine & Tanks | ||
| Engine | 22 HP | 35 HP |
| Fuel Capacity | 76 L (20.1 gal) | 114 L (30.1 gal) |
| Water Capacity | 114 L (30.1 gal) | 189 L (49.9 gal) |
| Accommodation | ||
| Berths | 6 | 7 |
| Cabins | 2 | 2 |
Performance Comparison
Detailed Comparison
The 1963 Cal 40 and 2000 Sabre 386 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1963 Cal 40 is a classic design by Cal from USA, while the 2000 Sabre 386 is a 2000s offering from Sabre from USA. The 1963 Cal 40 was penned by Bill Lapworth. The 2000 Sabre 386 was designed by Jim Taylor.
In terms of size, the 1963 Cal 40 measures 12.19m (40.0ft) overall with a beam of 3.35m, compared to the 2000 Sabre 386 at 11.58m (38.0ft) with a 3.56m beam. The 1963 Cal 40 is 0.61m longer than the 2000 Sabre 386. The 2000 Sabre 386 displaces approximately 3% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.
Looking at performance, the 1963 Cal 40 has moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising with an SA/D ratio of 16.97 and 61.3 m² of sail area. The 2000 Sabre 386, with an SA/D of 16.40 and 60.5 m² of canvas, offers moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising. The 1963 Cal 40 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.
For comfort and safety, the 1963 Cal 40 offers a moderate motion comfort level (comfort ratio: 21.4) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.70). The 2000 Sabre 386 has a comfort ratio of 19.4 and a capsize screening value of 0.74. The ballast ratios are 38.7% for the 1963 Cal 40 and 40.6% for the 2000 Sabre 386, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.
Below deck, the 1963 Cal 40 provides 6 berths in 2 cabins with 114L of water capacity and 76L of fuel. The 2000 Sabre 386 offers 7 berths in 2 cabins with 189L water and 114L fuel capacity.
Verdict
For cruising: The 1963 Cal 40 is the better choice for comfortable cruising thanks to its higher comfort ratio, offering a gentler motion at sea that crews will appreciate on longer passages.
For racing: The 1963 Cal 40 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.
For liveaboard: The 2000 Sabre 386 offers more sleeping accommodation, making it better suited for extended living aboard. Consider water and fuel capacity for extended stays away from marinas.