Swan 39 vs Swan 61
How do the Swan 39 and Swan 61 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Swan 39 | Swan 39 | Swan 61 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 31.5 ft9.60 m | 48.2 ft14.68 m |
| Waterline length | 31.5 ft9.60 m | 48.2 ft14.68 m |
| Beam | 12.5 ft3.81 m | 16.4 ft5.00 m |
| Draft | 7.2 ft2.19 m | 10.2 ft3.10 m |
| Displacement | 18,001 lb8,165 kg | 61,068 lb27,700 kg |
| Ballast | 7,900 lb3,583 kg | 20,300 lb9,208 kg |
| Sail area | 761 ft²70.7 m² | 1,656 ft²153.8 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.73 | 17.09 |
| Displacement / Length | 257 | 244 |
| Comfort ratio | 30.6 | 47.3 |
| Capsize screening | 1.91 | 1.67 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.5 | 9.3 |
Swan 39 vs Swan 61: the short version
- The Swan 61 is the larger boat at 48.2 ft14.68 m LOA versus 31.5 ft9.60 m for the Swan 39.
- The Swan 61 is heavier, displacing about 239% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Swan 39 carries the more powerful rig (17.7 vs 17.1), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 61 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 61 rates better for offshore work (1.67 vs 1.91).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.