Swan 80 vs Swan 82
How do the Swan 80 and Swan 82 compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
Swan 80 | Swan 80 | Swan 82 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 69.3 ft21.12 m | 69.8 ft21.26 m |
| Waterline length | 69.3 ft21.12 m | 69.8 ft21.26 m |
| Beam | 19.1 ft5.82 m | 19.2 ft5.86 m |
| Draft | 13.8 ft4.20 m | 12.4 ft3.78 m |
| Displacement | 80,910 lb36,700 kg | 83,776 lb38,000 kg |
| Ballast | 33,100 lb15,014 kg | 29,300 lb13,290 kg |
| Sail area | 3,324 ft²308.8 m² | 3,474 ft²322.7 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 28.43 | 29.03 |
| Displacement / Length | 109 | 110 |
| Comfort ratio | 35.6 | 36.2 |
| Capsize screening | 1.77 | 1.76 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 11.2 | 11.2 |
Swan 80 vs Swan 82: the short version
- The Swan 80 and Swan 82 are close in length (69.3 ft21.12 m vs 69.8 ft21.26 m ).
- On sail area/displacement the Swan 82 carries the more powerful rig (29.0 vs 28.4), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Swan 82 scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Swan 82 rates better for offshore work (1.76 vs 1.77).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.