rhys wrote:
Stephen Trapani wrote:

I have a Hunter 33', stronger than a MacGregor, but I would
never venture out into the ocean with it. On the other hand,
I crewed numerous times on a Blanchard 33' in very heavy
seas and felt as safe as a bug in a rug.

There's a Hunter 33 down the dock from me, and while it looks
roomy as hell below, with all that windage and the high boom,
it gets slapped around on windy days on Lake Ontario.

These days not all boats are designed to be seaworthy, but
rather "daysail in 15 knots max."-worthy. There's no harm in
that, if that's what you want.

And most people do.

Ocean-going boats, for reasons of stability, safety and
comfort, are frequently narrow and occasionally dark below...
the expectation is that you'll be on deck most of the time,
anyway. There's exceptions to this, of course, but we can't
all afford Moody and Swan models.

As for the original poster, I smell troll. A good way to get
sailors to pitch fits in type is to suggest first a Bayliner and
then a MacGregor 26 as ocean-crossing boats. What's next,
a C&C Mega?

I'm not the original poster and I only brought up the MacGregor
for the purpose of comparing it to the Bayliner.

However, now I'm getting more curious because the consensus
seems to be that the length of the boat is not an issue.

So please tell me if you know of any trailerable bluewater or
ocean-going sailboat (under 30' LOA and 8.5' beam) that has
a water ballast and a retractable keel.

Or do you think it's not possible to build one because a heavier
ballast or keel is needed for stability ?