Sabre 38 vs Swan 46 Mk II
How do the Sabre 38 and Swan 46 Mk II 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 II | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 8.9 ft2.70 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 II: the short version
- The Sabre 38 and Swan 46 Mk II are close in length (37.8 ft11.53 m vs 37.9 ft11.55 m ).
- The Swan 46 Mk II 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 II scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 46 Mk II 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.