Swan 100 vs Swan 371
How do the Swan 100 and Swan 371 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Swan 100 
Swan 371 | Swan 100 | Swan 371 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 86.8 ft26.46 m | 29.7 ft9.06 m |
| Waterline length | 86.8 ft26.46 m | 29.7 ft9.06 m |
| Beam | 23.2 ft7.06 m | 11.3 ft3.46 m |
| Draft | 13.2 ft4.02 m | 6.8 ft2.07 m |
| Displacement | 158,733 lb72,000 kg | 16,100 lb7,303 kg |
| Ballast | 63,934 lb29,000 kg | 5,701 lb2,586 kg |
| Sail area | 4,947 ft²459.6 m² | 597 ft²55.5 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 27.00 | 14.98 |
| Displacement / Length | 108 | 274 |
| Comfort ratio | 43.1 | 32.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.71 | 1.80 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 12.5 | 7.3 |
Swan 100 vs Swan 371: the short version
- The Swan 100 is the larger boat at 86.8 ft26.46 m LOA versus 29.7 ft9.06 m for the Swan 371.
- The Swan 100 is heavier, displacing about 886% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Swan 100 carries the more powerful rig (27.0 vs 15.0), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 100 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 100 rates better for offshore work (1.71 vs 1.80).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.