ClubSwan 42 vs Swan 66
How do the ClubSwan 42 and Swan 66 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
ClubSwan 42 
Swan 66 | ClubSwan 42 | Swan 66 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.0 ft11.29 m | 56.4 ft17.19 m |
| Waterline length | 37.0 ft11.29 m | 56.4 ft17.19 m |
| Beam | 12.9 ft3.93 m | 17.7 ft5.39 m |
| Draft | 8.9 ft2.70 m | 10.5 ft3.20 m |
| Displacement | 16,865 lb7,650 kg | 66,139 lb30,000 kg |
| Ballast | 7,046 lb3,196 kg | 20,720 lb9,398 kg |
| Sail area | 1,176 ft²109.3 m² | 2,347 ft²218.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 28.61 | 22.96 |
| Displacement / Length | 148 | 165 |
| Comfort ratio | 23.4 | 39.5 |
| Capsize screening | 2.01 | 1.75 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 8.2 | 10.1 |
ClubSwan 42 vs Swan 66: the short version
- The Swan 66 is the larger boat at 56.4 ft17.19 m LOA versus 37.0 ft11.29 m for the ClubSwan 42.
- The Swan 66 is heavier, displacing about 292% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the ClubSwan 42 carries the more powerful rig (28.6 vs 23.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 66 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 66 rates better for offshore work (1.75 vs 2.01).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.