ClubSwan 50 vs Swan 651
How do the ClubSwan 50 and Swan 651 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
ClubSwan 50 | ClubSwan 50 | Swan 651 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 54.9 ft16.74 m | 55.1 ft16.80 m |
| Waterline length | 45.9 ft14.00 m | 55.1 ft16.80 m |
| Beam | 13.8 ft4.20 m | 17.4 ft5.30 m |
| Draft | 11.5 ft3.50 m | 11.5 ft3.50 m |
| Displacement | 18,739 lb8,500 kg | 79,366 lb36,000 kg |
| Ballast | 7,605 lb3,450 kg | 31,700 lb14,379 kg |
| Sail area | 1,700 ft²157.9 m² | —— |
| SA / Displacement | 38.55 | — |
| Displacement / Length | 86 | 212 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.1 | 49.6 |
| Capsize screening | 2.08 | 1.62 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 9.1 | 9.9 |
ClubSwan 50 vs Swan 651: the short version
- The ClubSwan 50 and Swan 651 are close in length (54.9 ft16.74 m vs 55.1 ft16.80 m ).
- The Swan 651 is heavier, displacing about 324% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- The Swan 651 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 651 rates better for offshore work (1.62 vs 2.08).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.