A-Scow vs Swan 46 Mk I
How do the A-Scow and Swan 46 Mk I compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
A-Scow | A-Scow | Swan 46 Mk I | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 38.0 ft11.58 m | 37.9 ft11.55 m |
| Waterline length | —— | 37.9 ft11.55 m |
| Beam | 8.3 ft2.51 m | 14.5 ft4.41 m |
| Draft | 4.0 ft1.22 m | 8.2 ft2.50 m |
| Displacement | 1,850 lb839 kg | 31,306 lb14,200 kg |
| Ballast | —— | 11,400 lb5,171 kg |
| Sail area | 500 ft²46.5 m² | 978 ft²90.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 53.09 | 15.75 |
| Displacement / Length | — | 257 |
| Comfort ratio | — | 36.4 |
| Capsize screening | 2.69 | 1.84 |
| Hull speed (kn) | — | 8.2 |
A-Scow vs Swan 46 Mk I: the short version
- The A-Scow and Swan 46 Mk I are close in length (38.0 ft11.58 m vs 37.9 ft11.55 m ).
- The Swan 46 Mk I is heavier, displacing about 1592% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the A-Scow carries the more powerful rig (53.1 vs 15.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 46 Mk I rates better for offshore work (1.84 vs 2.69).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.