Baltic 40 vs Swan 40
How do the Baltic 40 and Swan 40 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Baltic 40 
Swan 40 | Baltic 40 | Swan 40 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 39.3 ft11.99 m | 39.3 ft11.98 m |
| Waterline length | 32.8 ft9.98 m | 28.5 ft8.70 m |
| Beam | 12.8 ft3.89 m | 10.8 ft3.30 m |
| Draft | 7.2 ft2.19 m | 6.7 ft2.05 m |
| Displacement | 14,992 lb6,800 kg | 18,960 lb8,600 kg |
| Ballast | 6,173 lb2,800 kg | 7,900 lb3,583 kg |
| Sail area | 803 ft²74.6 m² | 709 ft²65.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.13 | 15.95 |
| Displacement / Length | 191 | 364 |
| Comfort ratio | 22.5 | 38.6 |
| Capsize screening | 2.07 | 1.62 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.7 | 7.2 |
Baltic 40 vs Swan 40: the short version
- The Baltic 40 and Swan 40 are close in length (39.3 ft11.99 m vs 39.3 ft11.98 m ).
- The Swan 40 is heavier, displacing about 26% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Baltic 40 carries the more powerful rig (21.1 vs 16.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 40 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 40 rates better for offshore work (1.62 vs 2.07).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.