Marlow-Hunter 47 vs Swan 60
How do the Marlow-Hunter 47 and Swan 60 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Marlow-Hunter 47 | Marlow-Hunter 47 | Swan 60 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 50.5 ft15.39 m | 50.7 ft15.45 m |
| Waterline length | 44.7 ft13.62 m | 50.7 ft15.45 m |
| Beam | 15.0 ft4.57 m | 17.6 ft5.35 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 11.4 ft3.47 m |
| Displacement | 36,000 lb16,329 kg | 51,809 lb23,500 kg |
| Ballast | 12,500 lb5,670 kg | —— |
| Sail area | —— | —— |
| SA / Displacement | — | — |
| Displacement / Length | 180 | 178 |
| Comfort ratio | 32.5 | 34.8 |
| Capsize screening | 1.82 | 1.88 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 9.0 | 9.5 |
Marlow-Hunter 47 vs Swan 60: the short version
- The Marlow-Hunter 47 and Swan 60 are close in length (50.5 ft15.39 m vs 50.7 ft15.45 m ).
- The Swan 60 is heavier, displacing about 44% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- The Swan 60 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Marlow-Hunter 47 rates better for offshore work (1.82 vs 1.88).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.