Swan 391 vs Swan 41
How do the Swan 391 and Swan 41 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Swan 391 
Swan 41 | Swan 391 | Swan 41 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 33.1 ft10.08 m | 30.3 ft9.22 m |
| Waterline length | 33.1 ft10.08 m | 30.3 ft9.22 m |
| Beam | 12.4 ft3.79 m | 11.9 ft3.64 m |
| Draft | 7.2 ft2.19 m | 6.9 ft2.10 m |
| Displacement | 18,900 lb8,573 kg | 23,810 lb10,800 kg |
| Ballast | 6,800 lb3,084 kg | 9,700 lb4,400 kg |
| Sail area | 767 ft²71.3 m² | 794 ft²73.8 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 17.30 | 15.35 |
| Displacement / Length | 233 | 384 |
| Comfort ratio | 30.8 | 44.7 |
| Capsize screening | 1.87 | 1.66 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.7 | 7.4 |
Swan 391 vs Swan 41: the short version
- The Swan 391 is the larger boat at 33.1 ft10.08 m LOA versus 30.3 ft9.22 m for the Swan 41.
- The Swan 41 is heavier, displacing about 26% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the Swan 391 carries the more powerful rig (17.3 vs 15.3), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 41 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 41 rates better for offshore work (1.66 vs 1.87).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.