Swan 115 vs Swan 391
How do the Swan 115 and Swan 391 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Swan 115 
Swan 391 | Swan 115 | Swan 391 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 107.7 ft32.84 m | 33.1 ft10.08 m |
| Waterline length | 107.7 ft32.84 m | 33.1 ft10.08 m |
| Beam | 26.6 ft8.12 m | 12.4 ft3.79 m |
| Draft | 11.5 ft3.50 m | 7.2 ft2.19 m |
| Displacement | 203,928 lb92,500 kg | 18,900 lb8,573 kg |
| Ballast | 70,547 lb32,000 kg | 6,800 lb3,084 kg |
| Sail area | 7,025 ft²652.6 m² | 767 ft²71.3 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 32.44 | 17.30 |
| Displacement / Length | 73 | 233 |
| Comfort ratio | 37.0 | 30.8 |
| Capsize screening | 1.81 | 1.87 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 13.9 | 7.7 |
Swan 115 vs Swan 391: the short version
- The Swan 115 is the larger boat at 107.7 ft32.84 m LOA versus 33.1 ft10.08 m for the Swan 391.
- The Swan 115 is heavier, displacing about 979% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Swan 115 carries the more powerful rig (32.4 vs 17.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 115 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 115 rates better for offshore work (1.81 vs 1.87).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.