ClubSwan 50 vs Swan 86
How do the ClubSwan 50 and Swan 86 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 86 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 54.9 ft16.74 m | 69.2 ft21.10 m |
| Waterline length | 45.9 ft14.00 m | 69.2 ft21.10 m |
| Beam | 13.8 ft4.20 m | 20.3 ft6.20 m |
| Draft | 11.5 ft3.50 m | 11.5 ft3.50 m |
| Displacement | 18,739 lb8,500 kg | 121,254 lb55,000 kg |
| Ballast | 7,605 lb3,450 kg | 44,000 lb19,958 kg |
| Sail area | 1,700 ft²157.9 m² | 3,058 ft²284.1 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 38.55 | 19.97 |
| Displacement / Length | 86 | 163 |
| Comfort ratio | 18.1 | 49.0 |
| Capsize screening | 2.08 | 1.64 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 9.1 | 11.1 |
ClubSwan 50 vs Swan 86: the short version
- The Swan 86 is the larger boat at 69.2 ft21.10 m LOA versus 54.9 ft16.74 m for the ClubSwan 50.
- The Swan 86 is heavier, displacing about 547% 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 20.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 86 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 86 rates better for offshore work (1.64 vs 2.08).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.