felton wrote:

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:16:19 -0500, Jim Cate wrote:



felton wrote:


On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 23:49:36 -0400, "Scott Vernon"
wrote:



are you under the impression that a mac26 is double hulled?

SV


He may be thinking that a liner is a second hull, which will prevent
him from sinking if one of those drunken powerboaters hits him doing
60mph. Perhaps Macs have foam floatation, as most of them would
otherwise be on the bottom. If I make it up to the Valiant yard in
the next few days, perhaps I will suggest that they may want to
"improve" their boats with some of these innovations

Here is a question for Jim...a drunken powerboater is heading towards
you. You can elect to be in a Valiant or a Mac. Which do you
choose? If you are really so naive as to think that a Mac 26 is a
more survivable boat in any scenario than a Valiant or any other
"real" sailboat, then thanks for the comic relief.


If I could anticipate that a drunken powerboater were going to hit me
going 50 mph, I would prefer a Valiant, although even then, I don't
think you could predict what would happen. (It's possible that the hull
of the Valiant would be compromised, in which case its keel would
quickly pull it to the bottom.) But a new Valiant would cost around
$400,000, normally equiped, or more than 10 times the cost of the Mac
loaded with navigation and autosteering. - You can't always get what you
want, but sometimes, if you try real hard, you just might get what you
need. - Which in my case is the 26M.


Hmmm. Moving the goalposts it would seem. Of course a Valiant is a
vastly more expensive boat that frankly is "overkill" for the kind of
sailing that you or I do. I am unclear why you keep choosing to
compare the Mac to the Valiant,

The reason I refer to the 40-ft. Valiant is that I had experience
sailing one on a charter situation and learned to appreciate what a
great boat it is. If I were going to make a crossing or an extended blue
water cruise, I would prefer the Valiant.


but since you do I keep pointing out
the obvious. The fact that no Valiant has ever gone to the bottom but
have logged many a circumnavigation should put your mind at ease,

What is your source for that assertion? - No Valiant has ever sunk?


but
yet the fact that you still cling to the belief that a 3500lb clorox
bottle is somehow "safer" than a Valiant, or any "real" sailboat,
speaks volumes to any real sailor.


Actually, a closed bottle is going to survive a storm that would sink a
Valiant.


Now, let me ask you a question. - If you were sailing in a displacemenet
boat in unexpected high winds, and you had your son tethered to the boat
for safety, and it became obvious that the boat was going to founder,
would you prefer that the boat have positive foam flotation, as in the
MacGregor, or would you prefer that your son be on a discplacement boat
with a heavy keel that would drag the boat and its occupants to the
bottom within a few minutes?


I would absolutely prefer to be on a displacement boat than rely on
foam floatation in a lightly built clorox bottle. There is absolutely
no doubt in my mind which would be the safer boat. My boat has a real
rig, unlike the Mac. I can depower my rig, shorten sail, or even go
bare poles if need be. Anyone on a Mac 26 is going to be SOL. It
really doesn't give me much comfort knowing that there may be some
foam floatation on which I can cling waiting for rescue.


The obvious solution to your dilemma was to have chosen a marina
closer to where you wish to sail. You can drive a car faster than
even the motorboat you have chosen will go. I will grant you that if
your only criteria was how fast you can motor in your "sailboat", then
you have probably chosen wisely. For $30k you could have bought a
pretty decent powerboat instead. Live and learn.


Felton, I don't like power boats. I want the power capabilities of the Mac
because it will enable us to get to good blue water sailing areas more
quickly, and also
permit us to fish, and let our grandkids play safely in shallow water,
or beach the boat. It will also permit us to motor out, do some sailing
and some fishing and/or some swimming, and motor back within a few
hours, rather than taking the entire weekend.

Jim


While I am not a fan of powerboats either, given your objectives, you
should have bought one. A Mac 26 is the worst of both worlds.
Something for everyone, I suppose. Someone even married my ex-wife


p,


"Jim Cate" wrote 6 times...


(1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains.