Swan 391 vs Swan 68
How do the Swan 391 and Swan 68 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Swan 391 
Swan 68 | Swan 391 | Swan 68 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 33.1 ft10.08 m | 54.7 ft16.68 m |
| Waterline length | 33.1 ft10.08 m | 54.7 ft16.68 m |
| Beam | 12.4 ft3.79 m | 17.8 ft5.42 m |
| Draft | 7.2 ft2.19 m | 11.7 ft3.56 m |
| Displacement | 18,900 lb8,573 kg | 88,185 lb40,000 kg |
| Ballast | 6,800 lb3,084 kg | 35,274 lb16,000 kg |
| Sail area | 767 ft²71.3 m² | —— |
| SA / Displacement | 17.30 | — |
| Displacement / Length | 233 | 240 |
| Comfort ratio | 30.8 | 53.9 |
| Capsize screening | 1.87 | 1.60 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 7.7 | 9.9 |
Swan 391 vs Swan 68: the short version
- The Swan 68 is the larger boat at 54.7 ft16.68 m LOA versus 33.1 ft10.08 m for the Swan 391.
- The Swan 68 is heavier, displacing about 367% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- The Swan 68 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 68 rates better for offshore work (1.60 vs 1.87).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.