MacGregor 26x
John E. Lobdell
Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
the MacGregor 26x. I plan to use it in inside reef waters in the
Bahamas, like the shallow draft to get on remote beaches, and 21kn
cruise with a 50hp to get out of trouble in a hurry if necessary...I
would have to make one "dash" for 70 miles across the Florida Straits
(on a nice day, of course, and with other boats around me). The boat
seems to be OK otherwise, but doesn't carry enough water and has very
little room for electronics.
I'm neither already sold or turned off or on by this boat...I'm starting
in neutral so let's not start a brand-loyalty electronic shouting war.
I want honest opinions from owners and people who know of real problems
or benefits of the boat.
M DeMetz
Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
the MacGregor 26x. I plan to use it in inside reef waters in the
Bahamas, like the shallow draft to get on remote beaches, and 21kn
cruise with a 50hp to get out of trouble in a hurry if necessary...I
would have to make one "dash" for 70 miles across the Florida Straits
(on a nice day, of course, and with other boats around me). The boat
seems to be OK otherwise, but doesn't carry enough water and has very
little room for electronics.
I can tell you that you sooner or later will get caught out in bad weather
regardless of it's speed. Do you feel it will bring you and yours back is the
only real question as far as I'm concerned. You can get around the rest one
way or another.
Mike
Jordan Bigel
John E. Lobdell wrote:
>Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
>the MacGregor 26x. I plan to use it in inside reef waters in the
>Bahamas, like the shallow draft to get on remote beaches, and 21kn
>cruise with a 50hp to get out of trouble in a hurry if necessary...I
>would have to make one "dash" for 70 miles across the Florida Straits
>(on a nice day, of course, and with other boats around me). The boat
>seems to be OK otherwise, but doesn't carry enough water and has very
>little room for electronics.
>
>in neutral so let's not start a brand-loyalty electronic shouting war.
>I want honest opinions from owners and people who know of real problems
>or benefits of the boat.
Obviously you have not been following this NG. Try Deja News.
Bill Sparhawk
A 50hp Outboard to get you "out of trouble in a hurry"! I think that an
engine of that size would tend to get you into trouble in a hurry on a small
sailboat.
Learn to sail properly and you'll know how not to get into trouble in the
first place.
Jordan Bigel wrote in message <6jcl6p$f...@lotho.delphi.com>...
>John E. Lobdell wrote:
>>Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
.
macnaughton.com
I normally do not comment directly on particular brands of boats suitability
for particular uses for fear of getting sued. This is why you don't have
professionals responding much to people's questions about particular boats.
However I am personally familiar with a number of MacGregors, have surveyed
them and have repaired them. While these boats have some very real
justification as an introductory boat at the lowest possible price and do
have enough floatation so that you probably won't hurt yourself in coastal
cruising, in my opinion the company would definately not want you to use the
boat in offshore conditions, despite what any salesperson may tell you. This
is both for design and construction reasons. I cannot believe they were ever
intended to be offshore boats.
Tom MacNaughton
http://www.macnaughtongroup.com
John E. Lobdell wrote in message <3559B0C7...@flash.net>...
>Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
MastHed
At the three sailing clubs I have joined, Mac's are usually thought of as very
cheap entry level boats. If a Swan is a BMW and a Catalina/Hunter is Chevy,
then the Mac is the Yugo of boats.
If you are serious about sailing, you could look at a wide variety of more
seaworthy (and fun!) designs. You won't pull a waterskier, but you will learn
about real sailing. Here are some used boats to consider:
C&C, Older Hunters, Catalina, Pearson, J-Boat (primarily the J-30), Cal. This
would be at the cheaper end of the spectrum. There are far more expensive
designs with stronger build and reputations for toughness.
Try to spend some time on other boats before making a choice. Talk to owners
and check out the mag-rags for features you like. There are some nuts out there
who will tell you that a Mac could sail around the world, but you'll find most
educated sailors will warn you away from these boats.
Good Luck,
Robert B.
Cat27/Bayside NY
Paul Kamen
mas...@aol.com (MastHed) writes:
>...If a Swan is a BMW and a Catalina/Hunter is Chevy, then the Mac
>is the Yugo of boats.
Careful, you could be sued for that statement... by Yugo.
Actually it *is* possible to sail a MacGregor 26x offshore, but it would
be something of a stunt. With some structural and hardware upgrades you
could even make a long passage. But it will demand a higher level of skill
and experience than a more conventional boat.
--
fish...@netcom.com
http://www.well.com/~pk/fishmeal.html
-"Call me Fishmeal"-
John E. Lobdell
I think what I wanted was "honest opinions from owners and people who know of
real problems or benefits of the boat". I got some very good ones, but not from
you. I'm not sure what I got from you was anything other than the underscoring
of a general lack a civility and skewed, worthless, sense of personal
superiority that seems to permeate this NG from a very minuscule percentage of
its' participants.
Are you an owner of a MacGregor 26x? Are you an owner of anything? Do you have
any specific knowledge of this (or any) boat? Can you recommend any another
boat (Hunter, Catalina, Morgan, multihull, Essex Class Destroyer
Escort...anything?) for the conditions I stated or others I might foreseeably
want to explore (as others very kindly have and I can now look in new
directions)? Do you really know anything or have anything of value to offer?
If not, do you have anything better to do? I'd really like to hear an informed
opinion, negative or positive, about a specific boat on the market, not an
unsolicited and completely unwarranted admonishment to "Learn to sail
properly..." ad nauseum.
You have no knowledge of me, what I can or can't do, where I've been/sailed not
been/not sailed and the experience I have or may not have, whether I can "sail
properly" (whatever that means) or even sail at all, or even swim for that
matter. I might be a recently retired Admiral of the Fleet from a recently
separated state of the former Soviet Union for all you know. And you don't
know.
For a person who doesn't seem to know fulmar shit from apple butter, I trust you
enjoy both sailing solo and opinionated a considerable amount of the time. Of
course, that's just another unsolicited opinion and hasn't contributed anything
to the greater good of humanity's potential survival at sea, now has it? Are
you starting to get the picture here?
How about if you please start all over? Let me rephrase some questions just for
you so there is no misunderstanding about the information I am seeking. Since
you found time to flippantly responded to begin with, I'm convinced you won't
mind being just a little more specific:
#1 Question:
Concerning the MacGregor 26x, do you know of real problems or benefits of the
boat? Please be specific.
#2 Bonus Question (since I am already, from the gracious advice of others,
looking at other products):
Do you have another recommendation (e.g. make, size, crew accommodation,
features, rigging, auxiliary power) for the shallow, in-reef, Bahamas conditions
as aforementioned? Please be specific.
This really is quite straightforward and rather simple.
j
Bill Sparhawk wrote:
> A 50hp Outboard to get you "out of trouble in a hurry"! I think that an
> engine of that size would tend to get you into trouble in a hurry on a small
> sailboat.
>
> Learn to sail properly and you'll know how not to get into trouble in the
> first place.
>
> Jordan Bigel wrote in message <6jcl6p$f...@lotho.delphi.com>...
> >John E. Lobdell wrote:
> >>Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
> .
MastHed
<< I'd really like to hear an informed
opinion, negative or positive, about a specific boat on the market, not an
unsolicited and completely unwarranted admonishment to "Learn to sail
properly..." ad nauseum.>>
I don't think he was trying to be insulting. It's just that the Mac's don't
have a very good reputation among sailors who've raced/cruised for more than a
few years....That's here in NY. Perhaps Macs are well regarded elsewhere, but I
really think you'd be better off with a boat built to sail without squeezing in
a motor boat. I see Mac's out on the Sound once in a while. They are poor
sailing vessels and are passed by everything except for the odd Bucaneer. Even
my Catalina 27 (a boat of moderate qualities) seems dull after an afternoon on
my freinds very fast J-30.
I doubt many experienced yard workers/surveyors or owners would tell you that
the Mac is a solid boat, but I admit that I have yet to sail on one...
I guess a good question would be: Do you intend to sail or motor? The blending
of these two ideas is succesful in a Mac, but with some serious limitations for
sailing.
In any case...don't get hot blooded about this stuff! It's sailing. It's
supposed to calm us down...unless you're racing J-35's!
Robert B.
Cat27/Bayside NY
Mike Smith
John E. Lobdell wrote in message <355B7516...@flash.net>...
>I think what I wanted was "honest opinions from owners and people who know
of
>real problems or benefits of the boat". I got some very good ones, but not
from
>you. I'm not sure what I got from you was anything other than the
underscoring
>of a general lack a civility and skewed, worthless, sense of personal
>superiority that seems to permeate this NG from a very minuscule percentage
of
>its' participants.
Bill Sparhawk wrote entirely sensibly when he suggested that a 50hp engine
would not necessarily save you from trouble. Weather conditions can change
before you know it, and there is no way that you will plane at about 20
knots in a rough sea. You would be lucky to maintain displacement speed as
the prop will be out of the water.
Plan for heavy weather whenever you go out, regardless of the forecast, and
learn to cope with it under both sail and engine. Thats seamanship.
Mike Smith
MastHed wrote in message
<199805141611...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>
>At the three sailing clubs I have joined, Mac's are usually thought of as
very
>cheap entry level boats. If a Swan is a BMW and a Catalina/Hunter is Chevy,
>then the Mac is the Yugo of boats.
Whoa, careful! I'd rather sail a Yugo offshore- its much better made
Jonathan Klopman
macnaughton.com wrote:
>
> I normally do not comment directly on particular brands of boats suitability
> for particular uses for fear of getting sued. This is why you don't have
> professionals responding much to people's questions about particular boats.
> However I am personally familiar with a number of MacGregors, have surveyed
> them and have repaired them. While these boats have some very real
> justification as an introductory boat at the lowest possible price and do
> have enough floatation so that you probably won't hurt yourself in coastal
> cruising, in my opinion the company would definately not want you to use the
> boat in offshore conditions, despite what any salesperson may tell you. This
> is both for design and construction reasons. I cannot believe they were ever
> intended to be offshore boats.
>
> Tom MacNaughton
> http://www.macnaughtongroup.com
>
> >Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
> >Bahamas, like the shallow draft to get on remote beaches, and 21kn
> >cruise with a 50hp to get out of trouble in a hurry if necessary...I
> >would have to make one "dash" for 70 miles across the Florida Straits
> >(on a nice day, of course, and with other boats around me). The boat
> >seems to be OK otherwise, but doesn't carry enough water and has very
> >little room for electronics.
> >
> >I'm neither already sold or turned off or on by this boat...I'm starting
> >in neutral so let's not start a brand-loyalty electronic shouting war.
> >or benefits of the boat.
> >
I have to commend you for a very carefully worded reply. i can't say
that I've shown the same restraint when I wrote in to Prac. Sailor on
the same topic. I can't add much to what you said, but how about the
following...
One of my distresses with this type of boat (does everyone here remember
the Lancer Power sailer?) Is that it leads folks to believe that there
are boats out there that can do everything. Yacht design is not like
Burger King - many times you just cannot have it your way. Good yacht
design is about thoughtful compromise, and engineering a boat for a
specific range of use. "Do everything" craft tend to be fair to
middling at everything. To tackle all of this within a tight budget is
just asking too much.
JKK
Anders Svensson
John:
The attitude you are expressing is, IMHO, one of the reasons for so many
people to keep their (valuable) opinions and information disclosed. Few
things are as unpleasant as to get a thorough bashing because you have
given freely of your knowledge base.
I think it is good for this NG and the exchange of information on it that
very few people have the kind of self esteem and arrogance that you display
- especially when asking (and receiving) instead of contributing.
(Besides, the MacGregor is a fairly lousy offshore cruiser, 21 knots and 50
HP WILL take you into trouble as fast (or faster) as it will bail you out
AND you should consider learning to sail instead of incompetently referring
to horsepower as the better solution for sailboat crisis managment...)
Anders Svensson
John E. Lobdell <jlob...@flash.net> wrote (snipped)
> ... Do you really know anything or have anything of value to offer?
> If not, do you have anything better to do? I'd really like to hear an
Sander Wissing
On Thu, 14 May 1998 16:49:59 -0600, "John E. Lobdell"
<jlob...@flash.net> wrote:
>I think what I wanted was "honest opinions from owners and people who know of
>real problems or benefits of the boat". I got some very good ones, but not from
>you. I'm not sure what I got from you was anything other than the underscoring
>of a general lack a civility and skewed, worthless, sense of personal
>superiority that seems to permeate this NG from a very minuscule percentage of
>its' participants.
Sorry I had to cut the rest of your post. I think you did put it
fairly well. Most of us have asked honest questions here and got
flamedl for an answer. Some people just have to answer every question
even if they don't have a clue.
Every now and then I get pissed off enough with this newsgroup to
leave for a couple of weeks. BUT there are real nice and
knowledgeable people here too, so I always come back.
What I would like to see is a moderated group where the mud slinging
gets filtered out. That means a lot of work for someone, however...
Cheers
Sander
Bill Bannon
John E. Lobdell wrote:
>
> Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
> the MacGregor 26x.
Snipped
I was considering the 26X for a while myself. So, I joined the Mac
owners forum through Sailnet. I read the owner messages for about three
weeks. Most of them (several hundred in that time) had to do with
making modifications to very basic boat systems which were underdesigned
or underbuilt by the manufacturer. Though no one in that forum "bashed"
the Mac 26, there were enough things that needed upgrading or
modification that I began to question the very basic design and
construction of the boat.
You may want to join that forum for a while yourself.
Bill Bannon
Advo...@midstate.tds.net
Brent Dowell
Ok,
Having been around this newsgroup for a while, I know that it is risky
for us Mac owners to participate in any of these threads due to the
amount of flames that are typically directed at us.
However, I thought I would just add my 2 cents as to why I like my Mac
and why it suits my needs.
1) I like to travel to a variety of large western lakes and cruise
around for a week or so at a time. The Mac, being lightly built,
trailers easy, is easy to load and unload. In addition, it has a fair
amount of room inside and out that makes it comfortable to stay on for
that period of time.
2) When I'm not trailering it somewhere, I sail on a river/delta
system with variable currents, in both velocity and direction, as well
as some potentially very stiff winds. With this boat, I can get to
any anchorage I want to go in as little a time as possible, regardless
of wind or current. Ok, so maybe that part goes against the purity of
the sailing community, but I can get out and stay overnight, have a
mini vacation, and use the entire next day to sail wherever I want to
go.
3) I really don't have a desire to go offshore at this point in my
life. If I wanted to, I would agree with the statement that Macs are
not built for longterm offshore use. They just don't have the
pluming, rigging, and amenities to make that a practical use for the
boat.
What I tend to believe, and I think that the marketing and design of
the boat bear this out, is that the Mac is a great trailer sailer.
Are there trailerable boats that are faster? Yes. Easier to load and
unload? Probably not. People who are looking at the Mac and
comparing it to offshore and racing type craft are really comparing
apples to oranges.
My reccomendation is that people should buy the boat that is
appropriate for their needs. I really don't care what people think
about me and my boat at this point since it performs quite adequately
for my needs. If my needs change, then yes I would trade up to a
heavy keel boat in a second. I mean lets keep things in perspective.
The boat is a TRAILER SAILOR that fills a particular market niche.
Sure there are some people pushing the boat up to and past what it was
probably designed for. I would wager that the majority of Mac owners
use it within the design limits, in protected lakes and rivers and
have a great time doing so.
Well I hope this makes sense to some of us. As so many of us have
pointed out, the important thing is to get out there and have fun.
Consider me putting on my Flame Proof Long Johns,
Brent
---------------------------------------------------------------
Better living and Lower Productivity
through the use of Technology
T1543
Didn't the original poster ask a question much more subtle than the responses
to date would indicate?
I took his question to zero in on the issue of whether there is an increased
capability in Mac 26X's based on the duality of the boat - sail boat and power
boat.
In effect, he asked if the sum of the boat is greater than its parts. It is
credibly advanced that each of a Mac's parts - sail & power - is substandard
in performance. But what about the totality, in the setting in which he asks
his question - use in Florida to Bahamas passages and local Bahamas
sailing? Aren't "powersailers" hybrids that deserve particularized
consideration?
Consider this: sailboats are notoriously slow which makes their passages
particularly weather sensitive; Florida to Bahamas @ 5kts is 14+ hrs; weather
can change radically en route. But suppose you had a boat that could do it
in 3 hrs? Wouldn't the reduction in sensitivity to weather changes radically
change the boat's capability, even if it were not a particularly good sailboat?
Add this: the boat has the ability to hove to in cases of miscalculation.
Wouldn't that increase capability over a standard power boat?
It is commonplace to read of power boats, smaller than the Mac 26X and lacking
ability to hove to without using fuel, regularly making this run during the
summer, sometimes just for a weekend and then zipping back. Naturally, it is
always with a watchful eye on the weather but nonetheless done all the time. I
know of no prosperity among Florida morticians attributable to this widespread
practice. Most people make the trip ok. So why not in a Mac? I view with
skepticism the nasty remarks about Mac's construction, a lot of standard power
boats seem pretty flimsy to me but they to get the job done, maybe not as well
as a high quality sailboat but sufficiently well for this type of short hop
passage.
Once there, consider cruising - say - to the Abacos. It's often to
windward, over treacherously shallow waters at points and another trip of two
digit duration. When the conditions are right, a Mac can sail it; otherwise,
crank up the engine and zip on over, reserving your sailing for sheltered
waters. Beach the boat when you like. Sail in thin water. Power when you
feel like it. Isn't it the simple truth that much "cruising" is under power
but at a snail's pace compared to Mac capability? It seems to me that a case
can be made that Mac is truly a boat whose sum exceeds its parts. That it is
not a good sailboat, nor a good powerboat, does not mean it is not a good
powersailer, a wholly distinct type of creature with wholly distinct
capabilities and potentials.
Macs aren't Swans in performance, but neither are they Swans in complexity.
Their simplicity may be their greatest virtue. My personal observation is that
purists spend an inordinate amount of time tinkering with their greatly
superior boats but not sailing them a whole lot. On the bay where I sail your
Mac-types are out all the time. Maybe they are just plodding along but they
seem to be having a great time, oblivious to the disdain of their shorebound
brethern. Lots of people like it that way - simplicity and plenty of
sailing.
Anyway, I'd recommend to the original poster that he digest all these brilliant
observations, sage opinions and learned advice and then ultimately heed the
words of the great one:
"To young men contemplating a voyage I would say
go. The tales of rough usage are for the most part
exaggerations, as also are the tales of sea danger."
It's true that Mr. Slocum met a watery end, but it's equally true he wasn't in
a Mac.
T.
Anders Svensson
T1543 <t1...@aol.com> wrote...
(Interesting and sensible reasoning snipped)
> Consider this: sailboats are notoriously slow which makes their passages
> particularly weather sensitive; Florida to Bahamas @ 5kts is 14+ hrs;
weather
> can change radically en route. But suppose you had a boat that could
do it
> in 3 hrs? Wouldn't the reduction in sensitivity to weather changes
radically
> change the boat's capability, even if it were not a particularly good
sailboat?
> Add this: the boat has the ability to hove to in cases of
miscalculation.
> Wouldn't that increase capability over a standard power boat?
I may be conservative, but I do not share this view completely.
I think that it is correct to point out that "proper" motorboats usually
have better and more reliable engine arrangements and that "proper"
sailboats have better sail performance. If a boat like the Mac is built to
be both, and being low cost into the bargain, these vital safety and
performance issues may be adressed in a way that makes it lesser, not
better. It's a little bit like saying that someone is perfectly good
athlete, because he can outrun the weight lifter and outlift the marathon
runner...
On another note, and maybe a more generic discussion:
Any boat can have trouble with their propulsion system, engines do break
down sometimes (as do sails). Even if the Mac can make 23 knot at it's
best, any small mishap will convert it to a "slow" sailing boat. It is also
quite possible that this boat (almost any boat, rather...) will not be able
to go at full speed in anything but calm weather. So the three hours may be
more than that, even if it won't be 14 hours. Besides, conditions at
journeys end can make it the only sensible decision to turn back - I think
we have all seen nice harbours inaccessible in onshore wind. I am sure,
however, that there are lots of alternate harbours at this particular
destination and it is also quite possible that the return trip would be
more prone to this risc.
I therefore think that anyone contemplating even a "short" 70 mile trip on
unsheltered waters should define "worst case" as a 70 + 70 mile trip, under
the assumption that it is quite possible to need to turn quite close to the
destination because of navigational or weather problems. Also, calculating
with the scenario that for some reason or other, this trip cannot be made
at flank speed, but at the rater slow 4-6 knots (hull speed for a 26
footer) makes the time frame larger than three to four hours - more like
24-30 hours.
I do not say that it is impossible or insensible to plan and make the trip
in a few hours and have a good time, but proper seamanship sometimes mean
hoping for (and expecting) the best but preparing for the worst - "worst"
maybe being nothing more than quite different weather and sea conditions
than expected together with a slight mishap. I am not talking serious
accidents, just applying Murphy's sailing laws.
--
Anders "Murphy" Svensson
----------------------------------------
Terry Spragg
Spoken like a true sailor at heart. Your independence is laudable. who cares
about what the world thinks, when your intentions are pure? Those who want
'the best' usually want it to satisfy their need for recognition, whereas
those who know what they like don't give a damn what others think, not that
there's anything wrong with that.
Nothing's perfect. Enjoy.
Terry K
In article <355c9764...@nnrp2.crl.com>,
macnaughton.com
A very good exposition of the benefits of the "Mac". You are quite right if
people will just accept what their boats are good at (or for) and forget
trying to do something unsuitable they will be a lot happier and have a lot
of fun.
Tom MacNaughton
http://www.macnaughtongroup.com
Brent Dowell wrote in message <355c9764...@nnrp2.crl.com>...
>Ok,
>
>Having been around this newsgroup for a while, I know that it is risky
>for us Mac owners to participate in any of these threads due to the
>amount of flames that are typically directed at us.
>
>However, I thought I would just add my 2 cents as to why I like my Mac
>and why it suits my needs.
>
Mark Weaver
>
>I think that it is correct to point out that "proper" motorboats usually
>have better and more reliable engine arrangements
I normally stay out of these Mac debates as well, but...does a new, 4-stroke
50hp Honda (a typical motor for the 26x) somehow suddenly become less
reliable because it's bolted to the transom of a Mac?
Anders Svensson
No, I don't think so either.
I do look at sailboats with a keener eye than motorboats, but it seems to
me that inboard engines are more suited for the open sea (if only due to
the engine and propeller being located at the extreme aft and hitting air
in a seaway). I don't think that the Mac would be worse than other
outboards, rather the opposite (it has, after all a useful rig and can sail
pretty good). I would, however (a very personal opinion) hesitate to take a
26-footer for a 70+ mile golf stream crossing with just one outboard motor.
We were talking ocean travel with hybrid boats, weren't we ?
--
Anders Svensson
----------------------------------------
Mark Weaver <wea...@nospam-corvusdev.com> skrev i inlägg
<6jkbej$grt$1...@nntp0.detroit.mi.ameritech.net>...
TMJ
>>
>>I think that it is correct to point out that "proper" motorboats usually
>>have better and more reliable engine arrangements
>
>I normally stay out of these Mac debates as well, but...does a new, 4-stroke
>50hp Honda (a typical motor for the 26x) somehow suddenly become less
>reliable because it's bolted to the transom of a Mac?
>
>
>
>
Not the engine, but the mounting mechanism. The steering/rudder/motor
assembly of the 26x is a kludge, and a poorly designed one at that.
When I owned a 26x I had the joy of having the steering system fail
completely. Once it froze I had no control over the motor or the
rudders and no auxiliary steerage. We were close to shore in
moderate winds, with no sail up. The high freeboard combined with the
very light displacement saw us beached within a minute, no time to
jury rig anything, or even get sails up. The stock steering system on
the 26x is really poorly done. Anyone considering taking a 26x into
the ocean, even coastally, should replace the entire mechanism, not to
mention building new rudders (the rudders are WAY to small). A system
for controlling the rudders with an emergency tiller is also a must.
Todd
-----------------------------------
Todd M. Johnson
to...@amcyber.com
(remove the underscores (_) from my address if replying by email)
TMJ
>>
>>I think that it is correct to point out that "proper" motorboats usually
>>have better and more reliable engine arrangements
>
>I normally stay out of these Mac debates as well, but...does a new, 4-stroke
>50hp Honda (a typical motor for the 26x) somehow suddenly become less
>reliable because it's bolted to the transom of a Mac?
>
One other thing I forgot to mention: In even moderate chop the Mac
will cease to be able to hold a plane, and you will have cavitation
problems. You will be down to hull speed just like any other
displacement boat.
Robert Bethune
Boat design is indeed about "thoughtful compromise, and engineering a boat
for a
specific range of use." That's why I like my Mac26X so much--it suits the
uses I want to make of the boat very well. I'm a trailer-sailor, and the
Mac does that better than anything else I know of, particularly for
overnighting aboard--lots more room in a 26 foot boat than in anything
18-22.
So I'm always a little amused when people advise those considering the Mac
to look at used keelboats in the same price range. Ever try to trailer one
of those?
--
-------------------------
Robert Bethune of Ann Arbor, MI
Freshwater Seas (http://www.freshwaterseas.com), serving those who sail in
Great Lakes waters.
"The more you know, the more you can imagine."(TM)
Jonathan Klopman <jklo...@erols.com> wrote in article
<355C25...@erols.com>...
> macnaughton.com wrote:
> >
> > I normally do not comment directly on particular brands of boats
suitability
> > for particular uses for fear of getting sued. This is why you don't
have
> > professionals responding much to people's questions about particular
boats.
> > However I am personally familiar with a number of MacGregors, have
surveyed
> > them and have repaired them. While these boats have some very real
> > justification as an introductory boat at the lowest possible price and
do
> > have enough floatation so that you probably won't hurt yourself in
coastal
> > cruising, in my opinion the company would definately not want you to
use the
> > boat in offshore conditions, despite what any salesperson may tell you.
This
> > is both for design and construction reasons. I cannot believe they were
ever
> > intended to be offshore boats.
> >
> > Tom MacNaughton
> > http://www.macnaughtongroup.com
> >
> > John E. Lobdell wrote in message <3559B0C7...@flash.net>...
> > >Rather than listen to anymore dealer hype, I wanted group opinions on
> > >the MacGregor 26x. I plan to use it in inside reef waters in the
> > >Bahamas, like the shallow draft to get on remote beaches, and 21kn
> > >cruise with a 50hp to get out of trouble in a hurry if necessary...I
> > >would have to make one "dash" for 70 miles across the Florida Straits
> > >(on a nice day, of course, and with other boats around me). The boat
> > >seems to be OK otherwise, but doesn't carry enough water and has very
> > >little room for electronics.
> > >
> > >I'm neither already sold or turned off or on by this boat...I'm
starting
> > >in neutral so let's not start a brand-loyalty electronic shouting war.
> > >I want honest opinions from owners and people who know of real
problems
Robert Bethune
You know, I've seen this posted before, and I've always wondered what
broke. Never seen the details on it.
I've also always wondered about this story why the skipper didn't anchor. I
think that's the first thing I'd do if I had a steering problem.
--
-------------------------
Robert Bethune of Ann Arbor, MI
Freshwater Seas (http://www.freshwaterseas.com), serving those who sail in
Great Lakes waters.
"The more you know, the more you can imagine."(TM)
> Not the engine, but the mounting mechanism. The steering/rudder/motor
Mark Weaver
>I would, however (a very personal opinion) hesitate to take a
>26-footer for a 70+ mile golf stream crossing with just one outboard motor.
>
>
So would I--but as somebody else pointed out, small single-engine boats
(with *no* sails as a backup) make the run often. It seems to me that, more
than any thing else, making such a crossing safely in a small boat like a
26x requires *time*--potentially lots of it...as in retired, unemployed, or
taking several months off to cruise. You have to be prepared to wait a
couple of weeks to leave, AND ALSO TO COME BACK. If you're on any kind of
schedule, you're going to end up taking risks you probably shouldn't...
Mark Weaver
Terry Schell
"macnaughton.com" <mcn...@nemaine.com> writes:
>A very good exposition of the benefits of the "Mac". You are quite right if
>people will just accept what their boats are good at (or for) and forget
>trying to do something unsuitable they will be a lot happier and have a lot
>of fun.
I basically agree with you. I would probably word your statement as
"...accept the limitations of their boat given their level of skill and
comfort and forget trying..." With a healthy dose of caution,
mechanical skills, and seamanship you can take a crappy boat a long,
long way in relative safety. The question becomes why would you want to
(if not simply as a stunt)?
Anders Svensson
A perfectly good reason is when funds are low and the urge to cruise is
great. In that case it can be a question of "go crappy"or not go at all...
My "crappy" boats was as fun as the solid one of today and I have really
never seen the crappyness as a limiting factor for traveling. Keeping a
firm schedule and doing long unsheltered passages was impossible, time,
patience and distance were required to balance the equation - trading time
for money, one can say.
Lack of skill and experience is really something that you are never aware
of yourself, it is mostly a problem for others....
--
Anders Svensson
----------------------------------------
Terry Schell <tsc...@s.psych.uiuc.edu> skrev i inlägg
<6jn9r5$nnr$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
TMJ
On 16 May 1998 23:05:25 GMT, "Robert Bethune"
<reply.in....@please.net> wrote:
>You know, I've seen this posted before, and I've always wondered what
>broke. Never seen the details on it.
>
>I've also always wondered about this story why the skipper didn't anchor. I
>think that's the first thing I'd do if I had a steering problem.
Actually two different things were failing simultaneously. The cheap
steering helm "warped". This would appear to be due to the fact that
it is designed for small power boats, and is NOT designed to handle
the stress of feedback from rudders. This did not, of course, happen
instantly, but when it finally died it did it big time. This problem
can be remedied by replacing the stock helm with a good steel one,
available from a number of marine supply houses. You have to replace
both the helm and the cable. The mechanic who did the installation
for me could not believe that Macgreggor had used such inadequate
hardware. The second problem related to having non-stainless mounting
hardware that corroded. A side item that we discovered later is that
one of the rudder brackets was cracking. There are numerous other
problems relating to the whole arrangement, including an inabliltiy to
get an adequate range of motion from the engine. The system needs a
complete redesign.
To answer your other question, we did drop an anchor. That was what
prevented us from slamming into the rocks that were just up the pebble
beach that we hit. This failure occurred at one of the worst possible
times: coming through a narrow channel heading back to the launch
ramp in 20-25 mph cross winds. If at had occurred further from shore
then we could have simply called for a tow. One other note, we did
hit a rock when we grounded and ended up needing quite a bit of
fiberglass repair. However, the hull did not puncture.
Terry Schell
"Anders Svensson" <andrs.-.eiv...@swipnet.se> writes:
<snip>
>Lack of skill and experience is really something that you are never aware
>of yourself, it is mostly a problem for others....
<snip>
I have certainly found that to be the case... at least until I did
something that was stupid.
Terry
Anders Svensson
Well, that could be defined as a sudden and brutal leap forward up the
learning curve. Experience is often measured by the number of mistakes you
have been able to survive...
Anders
Terry Schell <tsc...@s.psych.uiuc.edu> skrev i inlägg
<6jnn33$5fh$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
John E. Lobdell
to Everybody: I first started looking at the Mac26x because I was in a 21'
power skiff with a 150hp that failed a couple of miles out of Marsh Harbour,
Abacos. Had we had sails, I would have had the family back to harbour in a
short time. So I began to contemplate whether this boat would be a good
choice for the Bahamas.
Again, I am neutral on this boat (although beginning to lean toward other
choices), although not so neutral on the "dash" from Ft. Lauderdale. I would
certainly choose good weather and dash with a crowd IN ANY BOAT...some of the
power skiffs like I got stuck in make the trip. The person I rented the skiff
from buys them in Ft. Lauderdale and zips over on his own...He does take a
kicker with him.
I also have received many comments from folks on "heavy-duty" steering. My
first look at my local dealer showed me that such an upgrade was probably a
necessity in just about any conditions for a Mac26x.
So next and final question....Has anyone sailed the Bahamas in a Mac26x and
did you dash? Oops, that's really 2 questions.....
Thanks again to everyone who has taken the time to give my requests some
thought and respond to me.
j
No More Mr. Nice Guy!
I don't anything about these boats but I saw one today at Ft. Pierce Muni.
Marina. I don't care what your opinion of them is. I think they're UGLY!!!!!
They look like a dinghy that could go 40 mph! High freeboard and horrible
transom with a monster Honda outboard looking as if it will tip the boat
over backwards at any moment! One of the best parts of sailing is doing it
in a pretty boat. I don't think it is sailing in one of these Schizophrenic
things! More like driving a Mini- wagon and calling that a sports car.
Robert Bethune
Pretty is in the eye of the beholder. I think the Mac looks just fine,
especially when it's under me on a beautiful day on the water.
When you say
"I don't know anything about these boats"
and then go on to say
"I don't think it is sailing in one of these schizophrenic things"
you make the truth of your first statement very clear.
Get some knowledge of what you're talking about, then give us your INFORMED
opinion.
--
-------------------------
Robert Bethune of Ann Arbor, MI
Freshwater Seas (http://www.freshwaterseas.com), serving those who sail in
Great Lakes waters.
"The more you know, the more you can imagine."(TM)
No More Mr. Nice Guy! <can...@iu.net> wrote in article
<h%181.363$HH4.1...@news1.atlantic.net>...
MastHed
<<Get some knowledge of what you're talking about, then give us your INFORMED
opinion.>>
His OPINION had nothing to do with anything, but the looks of the boat...and I
agree. The Mac looks awful on the water. Here on the LI Sound, they are laughed
at by anything above a Bucaneer! This not a reflection on their relative
seakeeping qualities. The Mac breaks almost every visual cue of "classic" boat
design. Most sailors can see that.
To be fair, even my chubby Catalina breaks some of those rules for the eye.
It's very hard to make a person comfortable on a small boat using a narrow
sleek hull and tiny cabin trunk! The best compromise is usually in boats over
35 feet in length....
Robert B.
Cat27/Bayside NY
John E. Lobdell
Hey, wait a second...there are a lot of really butt-ugly boats out there...for many
reasons. Have an ugly contest if you want to, but what sails nice and trim is
always a pretty sight. Hey some boats make speed, some carry cargo. I happen to
think that a stout sailor that carries everything you need for a couple of weeks
beats a skinny pretty maybe one-day boat anytime. But it is just an opinion...I'm
also perfectly happy sailing for an afternoon on a real screamer that barely fits a
couple of people. Ugly? What's ugly?
j
rkth...@mail.cqr.wiscnet.net
> Actually two different things were failing simultaneously. The cheap
> steering helm "warped". This would appear to be due to the fact that
> it is designed for small power boats, and is NOT designed to handle
> the stress of feedback from rudders. This did not, of course, happen
> instantly, but when it finally died it did it big time. This problem
> can be remedied by replacing the stock helm with a good steel one,
> available from a number of marine supply houses.
As a short-term solution, I would suggest replacing the wheel steering
with a propoer tiller.
As a long-term solution, I would suggest replacing the MacGregor.
R.K. Thompson
Spam-blocking: remove
"cqr" from e-mail address
Allen Perrins
rkth...@mail.cqr.wiscnet.net wrote in article
<1104_89...@WN173-034.wiscnet.net>...
Hi now the last suggestion was on the mark, and the sooner
the better.