Swan 131 vs Swan 62
How do the Swan 131 and Swan 62 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Swan 131 
Swan 62 | Swan 131 | Swan 62 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 114.7 ft34.96 m | 52.2 ft15.90 m |
| Waterline length | 114.7 ft34.96 m | 52.2 ft15.90 m |
| Beam | 27.9 ft8.50 m | 17.5 ft5.34 m |
| Draft | 15.4 ft4.70 m | 9.8 ft3.00 m |
| Displacement | 396,832 lb180,000 kg | 62,832 lb28,500 kg |
| Ballast | 79,366 lb36,000 kg | 24,692 lb11,200 kg |
| Sail area | —— | 2,392 ft²222.2 m² |
| SA / Displacement | — | 24.22 |
| Displacement / Length | 117 | 198 |
| Comfort ratio | 63.6 | 41.1 |
| Capsize screening | 1.52 | 1.76 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 14.4 | 9.7 |
Swan 131 vs Swan 62: the short version
- The Swan 131 is the larger boat at 114.7 ft34.96 m LOA versus 52.2 ft15.90 m for the Swan 62.
- The Swan 131 is heavier, displacing about 532% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- The Swan 131 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 131 rates better for offshore work (1.52 vs 1.76).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.