Swan 39 vs Swan 42
How do the Swan 39 and Swan 42 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Swan 39 
Swan 42 | Swan 39 | Swan 42 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 31.5 ft9.60 m | 34.0 ft10.35 m |
| Waterline length | 31.5 ft9.60 m | 34.0 ft10.35 m |
| Beam | 12.5 ft3.81 m | 13.0 ft3.95 m |
| Draft | 7.2 ft2.19 m | 7.9 ft2.40 m |
| Displacement | 18,001 lb8,165 kg | 23,810 lb10,800 kg |
| Ballast | 7,900 lb3,583 kg | 9,200 lb4,173 kg |
| Sail area | 761 ft²70.7 m² | 1,029 ft²95.6 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.73 | 19.89 |
| Displacement / Length | 257 | 271 |
| Comfort ratio | 30.6 | 35.7 |
| Capsize screening | 1.91 | 1.80 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.5 | 7.8 |
Swan 39 vs Swan 42: the short version
- The Swan 42 is the larger boat at 34.0 ft10.35 m LOA versus 31.5 ft9.60 m for the Swan 39.
- The Swan 42 is heavier, displacing about 32% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Swan 42 carries the more powerful rig (19.9 vs 17.7), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 42 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 42 rates better for offshore work (1.80 vs 1.91).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.