ClubSwan 50 vs Swan 82
How do the ClubSwan 50 and Swan 82 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 82 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 54.9 ft16.74 m | 69.8 ft21.26 m |
| Waterline length | 45.9 ft14.00 m | 69.8 ft21.26 m |
| Beam | 13.8 ft4.20 m | 19.2 ft5.86 m |
| Draft | 11.5 ft3.50 m | 12.4 ft3.78 m |
| Displacement | 18,739 lb8,500 kg | 83,776 lb38,000 kg |
| Ballast | 7,605 lb3,450 kg | 29,300 lb13,290 kg |
| Sail area | 1,700 ft²157.9 m² | 3,474 ft²322.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 38.55 | 29.03 |
| Displacement / Length | 86 | 110 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.1 | 36.2 |
| Capsize screening | 2.08 | 1.76 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 9.1 | 11.2 |
ClubSwan 50 vs Swan 82: the short version
- The Swan 82 is the larger boat at 69.8 ft21.26 m LOA versus 54.9 ft16.74 m for the ClubSwan 50.
- The Swan 82 is heavier, displacing about 347% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the ClubSwan 50 carries the more powerful rig (38.6 vs 29.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 82 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 82 rates better for offshore work (1.76 vs 2.08).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.