C&C Custom 67 vs Swan 86
How do the C&C Custom 67 and Swan 86 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
C&C Custom 67 
Swan 86 | C&C Custom 67 | Swan 86 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 73.0 ft22.25 m | 69.2 ft21.10 m |
| Waterline length | 58.0 ft17.68 m | 69.2 ft21.10 m |
| Beam | 18.3 ft5.59 m | 20.3 ft6.20 m |
| Draft | 10.5 ft3.20 m | 11.5 ft3.50 m |
| Displacement | 98,700 lb44,770 kg | 121,254 lb55,000 kg |
| Ballast | 35,274 lb16,000 kg | 44,000 lb19,958 kg |
| Sail area | 2,860 ft²265.7 m² | 3,058 ft²284.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 21.43 | 19.97 |
| Displacement / Length | 226 | 163 |
| Comfort ratio | 50.8 | 49.0 |
| Capsize screening | 1.59 | 1.64 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 10.2 | 11.1 |
C&C Custom 67 vs Swan 86: the short version
- The C&C Custom 67 is the larger boat at 73.0 ft22.25 m LOA versus 69.2 ft21.10 m for the Swan 86.
- The Swan 86 is heavier, displacing about 23% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the C&C Custom 67 carries the more powerful rig (21.4 vs 20.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The C&C Custom 67 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the C&C Custom 67 rates better for offshore work (1.59 vs 1.64).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.