MacGregor 25, how fast set up from trailer
Rolavine
25 with swing keel in nice shape. Anyone know how long to set up?
Michael
back of the truck or whatever, about 7 or 8 if you try to trailer with
the motor on the bracket (don't ask, it was not pretty) I own one now
and have always trailered without the motor mounted, I learned from a
fellow sailors mistake. pretty light for gusty conditions but it will
teach you one hell of a lot about sail trim and watching for shifts.
Michael
Scott Vernon
things to look at are the keel winch and the keel swing bolt and the keel
trunk itself. How much is the boat? For any more questions about the M25,
check out : http://www.sailnet.com/ and go to their Magregor mail list.
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa. _/)__/)__/)_
Rolavine wrote in message <20000424153019...@ng-cl1.aol.com>...
Douglas King
>
> >Looking for good sailing trailer boat that is fast to set up. Found a MacGregor
> >25 with swing keel in nice shape. Anyone know how long to set up?
Michael wrote:
>
> about 1.5 hours if you trailer with the motor in the cockpit or the
> back of the truck or whatever, about 7 or 8 if you try to trailer with
> the motor on the bracket (don't ask, it was not pretty)
Good grief! An hour and a half? I have a friend with a Venture 21 and it
only takes him about forty minutes. Of course, he's had a bit of
practice and developed skills so it would take a beginner a bit longer,
but still that seems like a 'way long time.
> .... I own one now
> and have always trailered without the motor mounted, I learned from a
> fellow sailors mistake.
Why not make the motor mount strong enough to carry the motor? It ha to
carry the motor when you're seailing, and even take the strain of
propelling the whole boat when motoring. It seems to me that this
approach is a bit illogical. Still, a lot of people do it that way.
> .... pretty light for gusty conditions but it will
> teach you one hell of a lot about sail trim and watching for shifts.
Agreed. The Mac 25 is rather long and carries a healthy amount of canvas
for its weight. They can be very responsive and quick, although they
steer better with a few minor rudder modifications.
You might try asking at
http://www.cruisecortez.com/webbbs/trailersailor/index.cgi
or
http://www.cruisecortez.com/webbbs/macgregor/
or even receiving one of the MacGregor lists for more detailed info.
Fresh Breezes- Doug King
--
This is what we look like when we're at our best:
http://recboats.hsh.com/45.htm
Michael
<doug...@mindSPAMspring.com> wrote:
>> rola...@aol.com (Rolavine) wrote:
>>
>> >Looking for good sailing trailer boat that is fast to set up. Found a MacGregor
>> >25 with swing keel in nice shape. Anyone know how long to set up?
>
>Michael wrote:
>>
>> about 1.5 hours if you trailer with the motor in the cockpit or the
>> back of the truck or whatever, about 7 or 8 if you try to trailer with
>> the motor on the bracket (don't ask, it was not pretty)
>
>Good grief! An hour and a half? I have a friend with a Venture 21 and it
>only takes him about forty minutes. Of course, he's had a bit of
>practice and developed skills so it would take a beginner a bit longer,
>but still that seems like a 'way long time.
A venture 21 has about 6 or 7 feet shorter mast and about 20 or 30
pounds lighter, the boom is lighter the deck is closer to the road it
has to do with economy of scale, but if you want to show me how to
take it from the road to the lake with boom and sails on in 40
minutes, I welcome you. I had a Sanibel 18 that I could launch in
about 30 to 40 minutes motor, sails, and all, but this ain't that.
Maybe you could come help me launch the Island Trader I am going to
look at next week if I get it, 40 minutes from truck to water, 2 masts
about 42' and 30' plus booms and sails?
>
>> .... I own one now
>> and have always trailered without the motor mounted, I learned from a
>> fellow sailors mistake.
>
>Why not make the motor mount strong enough to carry the motor? It ha to
>carry the motor when you're seailing, and even take the strain of
>propelling the whole boat when motoring. It seems to me that this
>approach is a bit illogical. Still, a lot of people do it that way.
>
A motor mount is designed for holding a certain weight vertically and
accepting thrust from certain directions which exhibits itself as
torque peppendicular to the transom, no outboard mount that I know of
is designed to take bouncing a hundred pounds of weight on the
highway, the forces are just different from what any boat on water
will take, and the stronger you make it the heavier and the more
expensive it becomes and then there is the question of transom
strength. as I said I learned from anothers mistake, he lost the
motor, mount, damaged the transom and the next car in line on the
highway was planted in a ditch and totaled because he did not want to
spend 15 minutes mounting the motor after he arrived.
>> .... pretty light for gusty conditions but it will
>> teach you one hell of a lot about sail trim and watching for shifts.
>
>Agreed. The Mac 25 is rather long and carries a healthy amount of canvas
>for its weight. They can be very responsive and quick, although they
>steer better with a few minor rudder modifications.
I don't know what you feel is a minor modification, but I do intend to
make a new rudder for next season if I am still in the boat, that
looks to me like 150 to 200 hours of shaping and sanding and
varnishing etc, more than minor if you ask me, but I guess you could
use toothpicks and elmers glue maybe duck tape?
>
>You might try asking at
>http://www.cruisecortez.com/webbbs/trailersailor/index.cgi
>or
>http://www.cruisecortez.com/webbbs/macgregor/
>or even receiving one of the MacGregor lists for more detailed info.
>
>Fresh Breezes- Doug King
Just exactly what boat do you own and how many mac 25's have you
rigged?
Michael
Douglas King
> A venture 21 has about 6 or 7 feet shorter mast and about 20 or 30
> pounds lighter, the boom is lighter the deck is closer to the road it
> has to do with economy of scale, but if you want to show me how to
> take it from the road to the lake with boom and sails on in 40
> minutes, I welcome you. I had a Sanibel 18 that I could launch in
> about 30 to 40 minutes motor, sails, and all, but this ain't that.
Right.
However, the difference in the effort to rig a masthead V21 and a
fractional Mac25 ar not that great.
> Maybe you could come help me launch the Island Trader I am going to
> look at next week if I get it, 40 minutes from truck to water, 2 masts
> about 42' and 30' plus booms and sails?
No thanks. Unless you want to pay my per diem.
> A motor mount is designed for holding a certain weight vertically and
> accepting thrust from certain directions which exhibits itself as
> torque peppendicular to the transom
Right again.
> no outboard mount that I know of
> is designed to take bouncing a hundred pounds of weight on the
> highway
Well, first of all, for a small boat you need a small outboard. If you
want to grossly overpower your boat, that's one of the prices you pay. A
four-stroke 8hp weighs about 70 pounds. A realistic motor for a Mac 25
would be more like a 5hp.
> .... the forces are just different from what any boat on water
> will take, and the stronger you make it the heavier and the more
> expensive it becomes and then there is the question of transom
> strength. as I said I learned from anothers mistake, he lost the
> motor, mount, damaged the transom and the next car in line on the
> highway was planted in a ditch and totaled because he did not want to
> spend 15 minutes mounting the motor after he arrived.
Well, I have only owned one trailerable cruiser, and one of the
specifics I looked at was the ability to carry the motor mounted so I
wouldn't have to bust my back and waste time. There were many such to
choose from.
In almost five years of trailering and sailing between Massachusetts and
Georgia, on interstates and back roads, we haven't had one single
problem relating to the motor mount.
Of course, as I said earlier, a lot of people believe de-mounting the
motor is a necessary step. For many boats and mounts, it is, as your
friend found out.
> I don't know what you feel is a minor modification, but I do intend to
> make a new rudder for next season if I am still in the boat, that
> looks to me like 150 to 200 hours of shaping and sanding and
> varnishing etc, more than minor if you ask me, but I guess you could
> use toothpicks and elmers glue maybe duck tape?
Building a new rudder is different from modifying an existing one.
The MacGregor list Scott mentioned had details on modifying rudders
fairly recently, in general the idea was was to build up & extend the
leading edge to get some balance area on the blade so as to get more
positive steering with less force on the tiller. This can be done in far
less than 200 hours even by a very finicky craftsman. Another mod
discussed is reinforcing the rudder head to reduce the play and increase
the rigidity, again to increase the positive control.
Of course, you may be able to produce a far superior rudder by building
a new one from scratch. That's an involved project and may well take
more than 200 hours.
> Just exactly what boat do you own and how many mac 25's have you
> rigged?
I have owned about twenty or so sailboats, from eight to forty feet,
beginning back in 1968. Currently we own 3 (not counting canoes, prams,
and inflatables), and live pretty far inland, so all 3 of our boats ride
on wheels. Only one carries a motor and has a cabin, and it takes about
fifteen minutes (or less) to rig and launch. We have many friends with
different types of trailerable cruisers and I have rigged and sailed a
few Mac25s and Mac26s also. Never owned one, MacGregors aren't my cup of
tea. If you would like to see 2 of our current boats click on the link
in my sig file.
Further details of my qualifications available on request ;)
Frank Hagan
<doug...@mindSPAMspring.com> wrote:
>> no outboard mount that I know of
>> is designed to take bouncing a hundred pounds of weight on the
>> highway
>
>Well, first of all, for a small boat you need a small outboard. If you
>want to grossly overpower your boat, that's one of the prices you pay. A
>four-stroke 8hp weighs about 70 pounds. A realistic motor for a Mac 25
>would be more like a 5hp.
One of the things owners like about the new Mac is the ability to put
a 40 to 50 hp motor on it, and make it a motor-sailer. Highly touted
in the literature.
Douglas King
> >Well, first of all, for a small boat you need a small outboard. If you
> >want to grossly overpower your boat, that's one of the prices you pay. A
> >four-stroke 8hp weighs about 70 pounds. A realistic motor for a Mac 25
> >would be more like a 5hp.
Frank Hagan wrote:>
> One of the things owners like about the new Mac is the ability to put
> a 40 to 50 hp motor on it, and make it a motor-sailer.
That would be a Mac 26, formerly designated as the 26X and still known
by that, to distinguish it from the older *sailboat* Mac 26.
> ... Highly touted in the literature.
Yup. It is highly touted primarily in MacGregor advertising, much of
which is complete fiction. The best feature is that it's a big and roomy
boat for the price. However, if you don't know the difference between a
Mac 25, a Mac 26 (sometimes called the Mac 26c), and a Mac 26 (formerly
X) PowRSailR, then you don't know what we were talking about.
Feel free to rave about the new 26. There's been an aching void in this
NG ever since EdGordon666 left.
Jon Alvord
They are trailerable, easy to rig (15-20 min sometimes longer if you have to
answere everyones questions) and fast (up to 25kn on a reach). If you would like to
know more or have questions feel free to email me. I am not a dealer, just an
owner.
Jon
Jon Alvord
Michael wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 11:02:31 +0100, Douglas King
> <doug...@mindSPAMspring.com> wrote:
>
> >> rola...@aol.com (Rolavine) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Looking for good sailing trailer boat that is fast to set up. Found a MacGregor
> >> >25 with swing keel in nice shape. Anyone know how long to set up?
> >
> >Michael wrote:
> >>
> >> about 1.5 hours if you trailer with the motor in the cockpit or the
> >> back of the truck or whatever, about 7 or 8 if you try to trailer with
> >> the motor on the bracket (don't ask, it was not pretty)
> >
> >Good grief! An hour and a half? I have a friend with a Venture 21 and it
> >only takes him about forty minutes. Of course, he's had a bit of
> >practice and developed skills so it would take a beginner a bit longer,
> >but still that seems like a 'way long time.
>
> A venture 21 has about 6 or 7 feet shorter mast and about 20 or 30
> pounds lighter, the boom is lighter the deck is closer to the road it
> has to do with economy of scale, but if you want to show me how to
> take it from the road to the lake with boom and sails on in 40
> minutes, I welcome you. I had a Sanibel 18 that I could launch in
> about 30 to 40 minutes motor, sails, and all, but this ain't that.
> Maybe you could come help me launch the Island Trader I am going to
> look at next week if I get it, 40 minutes from truck to water, 2 masts
> about 42' and 30' plus booms and sails?
I can take a Corsair F31R and be in the water in 20-30 min, and that is with a 42'
mast, main and jib, but unfolded and moving out to sail, and with speed in the 20's
what else could be greater. Did I mention I have a 22' beam, standing headroom(6'2"),
sleeping for 6 (more if its nice outside and I can sleep on the tramps)
>
>
> >
> >> .... I own one now
> >> and have always trailered without the motor mounted, I learned from a
> >> fellow sailors mistake.
> >
> >Why not make the motor mount strong enough to carry the motor? It ha to
> >carry the motor when you're seailing, and even take the strain of
> >propelling the whole boat when motoring. It seems to me that this
> >approach is a bit illogical. Still, a lot of people do it that way.
> >
> A motor mount is designed for holding a certain weight vertically and
> accepting thrust from certain directions which exhibits itself as
> torque peppendicular to the transom, no outboard mount that I know of
> is designed to take bouncing a hundred pounds of weight on the
> highway, the forces are just different from what any boat on water
> will take, and the stronger you make it the heavier and the more
> expensive it becomes and then there is the question of transom
> strength. as I said I learned from anothers mistake, he lost the
> motor, mount, damaged the transom and the next car in line on the
> highway was planted in a ditch and totaled because he did not want to
> spend 15 minutes mounting the motor after he arrived.
>
> >> .... pretty light for gusty conditions but it will
> >> teach you one hell of a lot about sail trim and watching for shifts.
> >
> >Agreed. The Mac 25 is rather long and carries a healthy amount of canvas
> >for its weight. They can be very responsive and quick, although they
> >steer better with a few minor rudder modifications.
>
> I don't know what you feel is a minor modification, but I do intend to
> make a new rudder for next season if I am still in the boat, that
> looks to me like 150 to 200 hours of shaping and sanding and
> varnishing etc, more than minor if you ask me, but I guess you could
> use toothpicks and elmers glue maybe duck tape?
> >
> >You might try asking at
> >http://www.cruisecortez.com/webbbs/trailersailor/index.cgi
> >or
> >http://www.cruisecortez.com/webbbs/macgregor/
> >or even receiving one of the MacGregor lists for more detailed info.
> >
> >Fresh Breezes- Doug King
> Just exactly what boat do you own and how many mac 25's have you
> rigged?
>
> Michael
Frank Hagan
Thomas Stewart
I sailed a Venture 222 for years, Boy, are you full of it!! My son, who
was a teen at the time, and I could rig it, launch it and park the
traveler in a 1/2 hr or less.
As far as carrying the motor on the mount, again you're wrong. Man! open
your eyes and see the number of boat being trailered with their motors
mounted and tilted up. Drive around and observe how many boat on
trailers are stored in the driveways with the motor still mounted.
As far as your theory of torque. Screwed up again. A motor tilted up
has the weight of the power head on one side of the mount and the lower
unit on the other. The torque is greatess when the engine is in use,
which the mount is designed for.
As for the bumping over the road;----I'm sure the motor is going to get
pretty rough motion while the boat is under sail. There aren't any paved
highways to sail on.
I'm sorry you have such a hard time launching your boat but maybe you
need to check your mentel ability.
Thom
Mike Pupeza
All of your 'good advice' shows me that you know beans about the 'good old'
Mac 25!
You take the motor off because it is too heavy at the back of the boat. The
tongue weight is too little with it there. It is a WELL KNOWN flaw in the
design of the welded Mac25 trailer! Only major rewelding of the frame will
correct this defect!
NOTHING to do with 'road shock' , alternate drive potential, or whatever!
It does take an hour or so to get rigged enough to 'motor' away from the
launch.
Rigging the lines and sails, add some more time!
Hour and a half seems nominal! As with all endeavours, some people do it in
half the time - others twice!
The boat does sail great - many say that it is far superior to the later
water ballasted versions - I do!
BUY IT - it is a bargain!
Mike Pupeza VE3EQP
1985 Mac25 Air Waves
Georgian Bay, Lake Huron, Canada
Gerald Tayler
<doug...@mindSPAMspring.com> wrote:
>
>Well, first of all, for a small boat you need a small outboard. If you
>want to grossly overpower your boat, that's one of the prices you pay. A
>four-stroke 8hp weighs about 70 pounds. A realistic motor for a Mac 25
>would be more like a 5hp.
A 5 hp outboard would probably push a Mac 25 to near hull spead in
ideal conditions but against a head wind and waves would leave much
to be desired. I own a Mac 25 and my aux power is a 9.9hp Johnson.
(I am replaceing the Mac with a Corsair F28 CC Whoopeee!!!!!!!!)
On normal motor cruising I operate it at between 1/2 and 3/4 throttle.
However on a few occasions I have barely been able to make headway
at full throtle against a strong headwind and breaking waves. If it
were not for the GPS I would not have been sure I was makeing
progress :) I live in Colorado and sail mostly in mountain lakes
where the wind velocity and direction can change drastically in just
a few seconds. In these conditions I feel anything less than 8hp would
be inadequate.
Concerning trailering a Mac 25 with the outboard on the transom:
As I am sure you are aware, the Mac is far from the strongest boat
around so I feel more comfortable keeping as much weight as practical
in the tow vehicle instead of the boat while trailering. With the
factory supplied trailor there is far too little tongue weight. With
the boat loaded normally I can lift the tongue with one hand! With
the boat on the trailor and not hitched to the tow vehicle, if I sit
too far aft in the cockpit the tongue will raise- very disconcerting.
I weigh about 215. While the boat trailors beautifully with the lite
tongue weight I would hate to reduce it further by carrying the
outboard on the transom. I know I could redistribute the weight in
the boat to get more tongue weight but the normal storage areas are
mostly behind the axle or directly over it so removing the outboard is
by far the easiest solution.
To answer the original post about Mac 25 set up time:
I hate to admit it but it takes me over an hour to set up. However in
addition to the 9.9 hp for the Mac I usually also mount a 5 hp motor
on the sailboat transom foruse on inflatable dink I tow. The dink set
up time is included and takes about 10 minutes. ( the floor boards are
a bitch) I am sure looking forward to less set up time on the Corsair.
Jerry
"Jerry Tayler"<gta...@frii.com>
Douglas King
> All of your 'good advice' shows me that you know beans about the 'good old'
> Mac 25!
As opposed to what, knowing peas about it?
> You take the motor off because it is too heavy at the back of the boat. The
> tongue weight is too little with it there. It is a WELL KNOWN flaw in the
> design of the welded Mac25 trailer! Only major rewelding of the frame will
> correct this defect!
> NOTHING to do with 'road shock' , alternate drive potential, or whatever!
Umm, Mike, you might want to try winching the boat all the way forward.
Then it will not be too light on the tongue weight even with a motor on
the back (provided the motor isn't too big to start with).
> Hour and a half seems nominal! As with all endeavours, some people do it in
> half the time - others twice!
Yup. And we call the people who take twice as long, "slow."
> The boat does sail great - many say that it is far superior to the later
> water ballasted versions - I do!
Well, that's a matter of opinion. They are basically the same hull and
rig. I've sailed both, and if the Mac 25 is more stable it's not
dramatically so. The Mac 26c is both lighter to trailer and a bit faster
(if you go by the PHRF ratings).
> BUY IT - it is a bargain!
Did the original poster quote a price? Oh, wait, you're the seller,
right?
Scott Vernon
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa. _/)__/)__/)_
Jon bragged....
Mark Weaver
news:390660de...@news.frii.com...
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:32:10 +0100, Douglas King
> <doug...@mindSPAMspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >Well, first of all, for a small boat you need a small outboard. If you
> >want to grossly overpower your boat, that's one of the prices you pay. A
> >four-stroke 8hp weighs about 70 pounds. A realistic motor for a Mac 25
> >would be more like a 5hp.
> Dough,
> A 5 hp outboard would probably push a Mac 25 to near hull spead in
> ideal conditions but against a head wind and waves would leave much
> to be desired. I own a Mac 25 and my aux power is a 9.9hp Johnson.
Gotta agree here. We have a Mac 26C and a Yamaha 9.9 4-stroke. Sure it
weighs about 30# more than an 8hp but compared to the weight of the crew in
the cockpit, it's really not that significant. The boat'll do 6 1/2 knots
into 20 knots of wind and a 2-3 foot chop without straining. It's a great
outboard; I wouldn't cut the HP to save a bit of weight (if I were buying a
new O/B, I might cut the HP to save a bit of money, but that's a different
issue). OTOH, the 26c has a motor well and is designed to tow with the
motor on the transom (which we always do).
> With the
> factory supplied trailor there is far too little tongue weight. With
> the boat loaded normally I can lift the tongue with one hand! With
> the boat on the trailor and not hitched to the tow vehicle, if I sit
> too far aft in the cockpit the tongue will raise- very disconcerting.
> I weigh about 215. While the boat trailors beautifully with the lite
> tongue weight I would hate to reduce it further by carrying the
> outboard on the transom. I know I could redistribute the weight in
> the boat to get more tongue weight but the normal storage areas are
> mostly behind the axle or directly over it so removing the outboard is
> by far the easiest solution.
>
I dunno about that being the easiest solution. When we're heading out on a
long trip, I pack the duffle bags on the v-berth (I also make sure the boom
is loaded as far forward on the v-berth as possible). Anything you load up
there adds pretty directly to the tongue weight. Since the both the luggage
and outboard need to be on the boat eventually, that seems like the easier
solution to me than to take both off and store in the tow vehicle. When I
first started towing, I used a cheap bathroom scale to check the tongue
weight--but now I have a good idea how it should be loaded.
> I am sure looking forward to less set up time on the Corsair.
>
There are lots of things to look forward to with your new boat, but I'll be
real surprised if reduced setup time turns out to be one of 'em.
Mark Weaver
Jon Alvord
over $2k. Actually if you include insurance and adding bowsprit, maintence,
trailering, fuel, registraion, tax deduction as second home interest I still
came out ahead. Yes, my new boat is expensive at twice what the F-27 was, do
I look to make money on it, no. I will be happy if it does. I wanted the
headroom, speed, exhileration of sailing at 25+ kn. The F-27 I did look to
recoup investment. It was the perfect entry level boat, although there is also
the F-24MkII which is also a great boat with rotating mast, it is about $10K
less than the F-27 used.
Jon Alvord
Mark Weaver wrote:
Be Suprised, I have derigged next to a Mac 26x that pulled out 3 boats ahead of
me, and when I left they were still installing lines to lower the mast. I am
not sure how the 26x mast compares to the Mac 25 but I would probably step it
by hand as it looked like a toothpick compared to the mast on the F-27. On the
F-31, with a 42' Mast everything is attached and ready to go, all you have to do
is slide the mast back attach the yoke and raising pole, and mast raising
wires, hook the winch to the spinaker or jib haylard and winch away. Hook the
forestay, back into the water, extend the ama's, tighten the shrouds (hyfield
lever) attach the toping lift to the boom, slide the boom furling into mast,
attach jib to forestay(hank on) or jib is already wound around roller furler and
be off. Most of this can be done while motoring out of the marina. The boom
can be done while waiting in line to launch. All barb haulers are attached to
the boat, sheets are around winches, screacher is in v-berth. Did I mention it
has a 1'9" draft with boards up, sleeps 6 adults, has nice big tramps to lounge
in!
Jon
Mark Weaver
Well, we have a Mac 26C, but what I'm saying is that if the 25 is like the
26C (and I'm pretty sure it is), you certainly weren't trying very hard if
took you an hour. As you say, the mast is light, so we don't use the mast
raising system, just the baby-stays for lateral support (which remain
attached). The procedure is--slide the mast back, raise it by hand and
attach the forestay (no yoke, gin pole raising wires, winch). The shrouds
don't need adjustment--amas either ;). Boom can be attached and jib hanked
on after launching if we want to do it that way. And since the mast can be
stepped by hand, when returning we sometimes pack away the boom and sail,
unstep the mast, and get it all set for trailering before we ever get back
to the ramp.
In short, there are steps that required to rig an F-31 that are not required
on a Mac 25, but as far as I can tell, the reverse is not true. Also,
everything on a Mac 25 is smaller and lighter (and easier to handle) --
mast, boom, sails, etc. The F-31 certainly has its advantages, but the
notion that it takes 1/3 the time to rig as a Mac 25 (20 minutes vs an hour)
doesn't make any sense to me.
> Jon
>
>
Scott Vernon
push a button. Takes about 2 minutes for the mast to raise itself.
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa. _/)__/)__/)_
Jon Alvord wrote in message <3907408B...@Valley.net>...
>Jon
>
>
Jon Alvord
Mark Weaver wrote:
> Well, we have a Mac 26C, but what I'm saying is that if the 25 is like the
> 26C (and I'm pretty sure it is), you certainly weren't trying very hard if
> took you an hour. As you say, the mast is light, so we don't use the mast
> raising system, just the baby-stays for lateral support (which remain
> attached). The procedure is--slide the mast back, raise it by hand and
> attach the forestay (no yoke, gin pole raising wires, winch). The shrouds
> don't need adjustment--amas either ;). Boom can be attached and jib hanked
> on after launching if we want to do it that way. And since the mast can be
> stepped by hand, when returning we sometimes pack away the boom and sail,
> unstep the mast, and get it all set for trailering before we ever get back
> to the ramp.
>
> In short, there are steps that required to rig an F-31 that are not required
> on a Mac 25, but as far as I can tell, the reverse is not true. Also,
> everything on a Mac 25 is smaller and lighter (and easier to handle) --
> mast, boom, sails, etc. The F-31 certainly has its advantages, but the
> notion that it takes 1/3 the time to rig as a Mac 25 (20 minutes vs an hour)
> doesn't make any sense to me.
>
> > Jon
> >
> >
I think it is all in the operator, for instance I know of people that spent 3
hours rigging an F31, They would tie everything, wrap everything, put
everything away. Then there are others that step the mast, lash it down, secure
lines and leave. I have never been on a Mac, let alone a leaner, but the mast
has to be bigger and stronger than that of a Mac as the forces are much greater
when sailing into 20kn at 11-15kn, or downwind on a reach at 25-30kn. As for
the yoke and pole, they are needed because the mast is a rotating wing mast, on
the F-27 it was not and had a bar that was in place across the aka's of the
folded boat to add leverage. The mast on the F-28, 24, and 31 can all be
stepped while unfolded, if you have the equipment with you, just use the winch
on the boat. So if you have the eternal wait it can be done on mooring or at the
dock, just have to be carefull not to use a nylon anchor line(long story, but
not my story and no damage).
Jon F31R
Triceratops
Mike Pupeza
NOT A FLAME - but directed argumentative points, from someone who has a
life, owns a MAC 25, and doesn't
have 526 references to his name in http://www.deja.com
"Douglas King" <doug...@mindSPAMspring.com> wrote in message
news:3906B3...@mindSPAMspring.com...
> Mike Pupeza wrote:
> > All of your 'good advice' shows me that you know beans about the 'good
old'
> > Mac 25!
>
> As opposed to what, knowing peas about it?
>
Aha - you see!
Everyone knows that Beans are BETTER than Peas! Think about Jack and the
what - Pea Stalk! Not Likely!
> > You take the motor off because it is too heavy at the back of the boat.
The
> > tongue weight is too little with it there. It is a WELL KNOWN flaw in
the
> > design of the welded Mac25 trailer! Only major rewelding of the frame
will
> > correct this defect!
> > NOTHING to do with 'road shock' , alternate drive potential, or
whatever!
>
> Umm, Mike, you might want to try winching the boat all the way forward.
> Then it will not be too light on the tongue weight even with a motor on
> the back (provided the motor isn't too big to start with).
Duh, you are obviously right Doug, I must have left a foot or so from my bow
to the winch! Silly of me, duh!
I will try to make sure that I don't do that again! Aha! (BOZO!- of course I
pull it forward! - but they are ALL like that - tongue light - ask around!)
> > Hour and a half seems nominal! As with all endeavours, some people do it
in
> > half the time - others twice!
>
> Yup. And we call the people who take twice as long, "slow."
>
So, some of us 'disadvantaged' persons are SLOW! Nice choice of words,
Dougy!
In reality, counting the time to park the car and trailer, move 'stuff', get
watered up (Oh, you drive around with the water
tank full too!), and ready to go is usually 2 hours!
> > The boat does sail great - many say that it is far superior to the later
> > water ballasted versions - I do!
>
> Well, that's a matter of opinion. They are basically the same hull and
> rig. I've sailed both, and if the Mac 25 is more stable it's not
> dramatically so. The Mac 26c is both lighter to trailer and a bit faster
> (if you go by the PHRF ratings).
Trailering weight wasn't the question, Doug!
Didn't I say that that the sailing quality was an opinion? It is, but I have
sailed a fair bit, and find the M25 sails similarly to my old Shark 24,
number 189. Not so strange, since the keel weight and overall specs are not
that far off.
I sail in Georgian Bay, where we do have large open spaces - I feel good in
the Mac25. And enjoy it!
>
> > BUY IT - it is a bargain!
>
> Did the original poster quote a price? Oh, wait, you're the seller,
> right?
No Doug, I'm not selling! Only suggesting that the Mac25 is usually a GOOD
BARGAIN! For a Trailer Sailor, with full floatation, proper ballasting, good
performance, fair workmanship, Weekender Cruising Capability, in a boat
manufactured up to 1987, this a a fine product! Don't rig it for a trip to
New Zealand from NA, but trailer it, use it, love it!
Bang for the Buck - EXCELLENT (Mike Pupeza - 1985 Mac25 - Air Waves)
Douglas King
>
> I must say that this is a Rebuttal to Douglas King;
>
> NOT A FLAME - but directed argumentative points, from someone who has a
> life, owns a MAC 25, and doesn't
> have 526 references to his name in http://www.deja.com
Congrats on all points.
> Duh, you are obviously right Doug, I must have left a foot or so from my bow
> to the winch! Silly of me, duh!
> I will try to make sure that I don't do that again! Aha! (BOZO!- of course I
> pull it forward! - but they are ALL like that - tongue light - ask around!)
OK, I'll ask around. Funny how the dozen or so I know of don't have that
problem, though.
> In reality, counting the time to park the car and trailer, move 'stuff', get
> watered up (Oh, you drive around with the water
> tank full too!), and ready to go is usually 2 hours!
Well, I'm not trying to be insulting here, it's just that I would rather
spend more of that two hours sailing. With our boat, it rarely takes
more than thirty minutes to accomplish everything necessary from driving
to sailing; we've been timed (by my doubtful cousin) at 'just under
eleven minutes.' We were admittedly rushing to catch a tide.
Now, a Mac 25 takes a few extra steps and bit more work, but 11 minutes
vs 2 hours is a really steep differential.
> > > The boat does sail great - many say that it is far superior to the later
> > > water ballasted versions - I do!
> >
> > Well, that's a matter of opinion. They are basically the same hull and
> > rig. I've sailed both, and if the Mac 25 is more stable it's not
> > dramatically so. The Mac 26c is both lighter to trailer and a bit faster
> > (if you go by the PHRF ratings).
>
> Trailering weight wasn't the question, Doug!
> Didn't I say that that the sailing quality was an opinion? It is, but I have
> sailed a fair bit, and find the M25 sails similarly to my old Shark 24,
> number 189. Not so strange, since the keel weight and overall specs are not
> that far off.
Well, you said "far superior to the later water ballasted versions." In
what way is it so far superior? Again, not trying to be insulting, just
curious. Having spent a fair bit of time sailing both, I'd like to know
what I missed.
> > > BUY IT - it is a bargain!
> >
> > Did the original poster quote a price? Oh, wait, you're the seller,
> > right?
>
> No Doug, I'm not selling! Only suggesting that the Mac25 is usually a GOOD
> BARGAIN!
And my point is that it being a BARGAIN rather depends on the price,
which was never mentioned.
> .... For a Trailer Sailor, with full floatation, proper ballasting, good
> performance, fair workmanship, Weekender Cruising Capability, in a boat
> manufactured up to 1987, this a a fine product! Don't rig it for a trip to
> New Zealand from NA, but trailer it, use it, love it!
>
> Bang for the Buck - EXCELLENT
Agreed.
Michael
<wea...@nospam-corvusdev.com> wrote:
>Well, we have a Mac 26C, but what I'm saying is that if the 25 is like the
>26C (and I'm pretty sure it is), you certainly weren't trying very hard if
>took you an hour. As you say, the mast is light, so we don't use the mast
>raising system, just the baby-stays for lateral support (which remain
>attached). The procedure is--slide the mast back, raise it by hand and
>attach the forestay (no yoke, gin pole raising wires, winch). The shrouds
>don't need adjustment--amas either ;). Boom can be attached and jib hanked
>on after launching if we want to do it that way. And since the mast can be
>stepped by hand, when returning we sometimes pack away the boom and sail,
>unstep the mast, and get it all set for trailering before we ever get back
>to the ramp.
>
>In short, there are steps that required to rig an F-31 that are not required
>on a Mac 25, but as far as I can tell, the reverse is not true. Also,
>everything on a Mac 25 is smaller and lighter (and easier to handle) --
>mast, boom, sails, etc. The F-31 certainly has its advantages, but the
>notion that it takes 1/3 the time to rig as a Mac 25 (20 minutes vs an hour)
>doesn't make any sense to me.
>
>> Jon
>>
>>
>
You are saying you can pull into launch bay, step the mast, mount the
engine, (I know there is some disagreement here but I have not seen an
engine mount that does not say "do not travel with engine mounted"
Granted I have only installed 4 and owned 3 more and no two were the
same model but it seems to be the standard manufacturers statement so
we will assume you abide by the design limits of your equipment.)
Rig the boom and run the sheets, bend the sails on, launch the boat,
get tht engine running, park the trailer, walk back to the boat and
leave the dock in 20 minutes? or do you mean you can get the mast up
period in 20 minutes?
When I answered originally I assumed all of the above steps, if you
stop counting when you step the mast and get the boat wet without all
of the other stuff involved you are sort of cheating, like cutting
across the track instead of going all the way around.
Michael
Jon Alvord
with both batten main and batten jib(replacing with a roller furling similar to
beach cat for ease of trailering)) ama's extended, launched jib hanked on
sheets attached and ready for sail in 20 min, with 2 people and not answering any
questions from everyone (kinda a fun I usually ask them to help), 30-40 with one
person, securing the boat at the dock and parking truck and trailer is the
neccessary evil. Motor is not removed for trailering.. If I am cruising for
extended periods it takes bit longer as I have to load odds and ends. If it took
me 1 1\2 to launch a boat I would not buy it. When you have to drive 2 hours to
the nearest large body of water in any direction it pretty much rules out a day
sail if you are spending 4 hours traveling to and setting up now, doesn't it?
There are many people that will take you out and let you try these boats. If you
like or are in the NE area check them out, I would, and I am sure the Dealers
would!
Mark Weaver
Michael <nospa...@gvi.net> wrote in message
news:2vhjgs8oruhkibb4e...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 22:09:56 GMT, "Mark Weaver"
> <wea...@nospam-corvusdev.com> wrote:
>
> >
> You are saying you can pull into launch bay, step the mast, mount the
> engine, (I know there is some disagreement here but I have not seen an
> engine mount that does not say "do not travel with engine mounted"
> Granted I have only installed 4 and owned 3 more and no two were the
> same model but it seems to be the standard manufacturers statement so
> we will assume you abide by the design limits of your equipment.)
No, the engine stays bolted onto the transom motor well -- the owner's
manual suggests making sure the engine is firmly attached to the boat; it
doesn't suggest removing it storing it in the tow vehicle.
> Rig the boom and run the sheets, bend the sails on, launch the boat,
> get tht engine running, park the trailer, walk back to the boat and
> leave the dock in 20 minutes? or do you mean you can get the mast up
> period in 20 minutes?
>
No the whole thing can be done in 20 minutes. It's not always that
fast--depends on whether the kids and/or dog are along (and if so, if they
are behaving), whether we have a lot of groceries and other stuff to
transfer from the tow vehicle to the boat, whether we've brought our sea
kayak/dingy along, etc.
> When I answered originally I assumed all of the above steps, if you
> stop counting when you step the mast and get the boat wet without all
> of the other stuff involved you are sort of cheating, like cutting
> across the track instead of going all the way around.
>
Well, we don't always bend on the jib, before leaving the dock, for
example--depends on how much motoring we've got to do to get out of the
harbor.
Mark
>
> Michael