Sabre 38 vs Swan 46 Mk I
How do the Sabre 38 and Swan 46 Mk I compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Sabre 38 | Sabre 38 | Swan 46 Mk I | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 37.8 ft11.53 m | 37.9 ft11.55 m |
| Waterline length | 31.2 ft9.50 m | 37.9 ft11.55 m |
| Beam | 11.5 ft3.51 m | 14.5 ft4.41 m |
| Draft | 6.5 ft1.98 m | 8.2 ft2.50 m |
| Displacement | 15,200 lb6,895 kg | 31,306 lb14,200 kg |
| Ballast | 6,400 lb2,903 kg | 11,400 lb5,171 kg |
| Sail area | 691 ft²64.2 m² | 978 ft²90.9 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 18.02 | 15.75 |
| Displacement / Length | 224 | 257 |
| Comfort ratio | 27.4 | 36.4 |
| Capsize screening | 1.86 | 1.84 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.5 | 8.2 |
Sabre 38 vs Swan 46 Mk I: the short version
- The Sabre 38 and Swan 46 Mk I are close in length (37.8 ft11.53 m vs 37.9 ft11.55 m ).
- The Swan 46 Mk I is heavier, displacing about 106% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Sabre 38 carries the more powerful rig (18.0 vs 15.8), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 46 Mk I scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 46 Mk I rates better for offshore work (1.84 vs 1.86).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.