DSK wrote:

Jim Cate wrote:

My note listed some eight differnces betweent the M and the X. - In
addition, there are changes in the standing rigging, and the rotating
mast. - In other words, at least ten differences. - You are
apparently claiming that they are all bogus Mac propoganda.


Umm, no.

Just that the hulls are the same shape, no "deeper V",


Wrong. The "V" configuration of the 26M, in the forward portion of the
hull, is 15 degrees, compared with 8 degrees on the 26X. (I have
personally examined both boats and seen the difference. - Check it out
yourself with a level and protractor if you don't believe me. )

the deck shape is the same, the rig is pretty much the same


Agreed that the deck shap is similar. The chainplates are modified.
However, the rig is substantially different, being Y-shaped, in top plan
view, and it does not include a backstay. This is to accommodate the
rotatable mast, which also includes bearing upper and lower bearing
structures. - Another substantive difference.


(why does the "longer mast" not stick up any higher?),

It does.

and that they don't really sail very well compared to a "real" boat...
but hey, they don't have to! You can motor!


As previously discussed, I haven't claimed that the Macs sail better
(sail faster or point higher) than some heavier displacement boats.



.... And on what do you base your assertion? - And, have YOU
compared the two boats?


I'm not the one who introduced these issues. - Most of them were
Johnathan's assertions, or yours. I'm still waiting for the two of you
to back up your own assertions.



Yep. And sailed them myself a few times. A couple of friends have
owned them and were determined to prove what great boats they were,
until the realization slowly crept over them that they were not.


And which Mac models were they?


But they are a pretty cool water toy, if you don't mind the cost.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King


As mentioned in my initial note on this topic, I don't claim that the
Macs are "better" boats, or faster under sail, or well-suited for
extended ocean crossings, etc. If your interest is in racing or in going
faster than other boats, or in making ocean crossings, then the Mac is
obviously not the right choice for you.

What I did say was that the Macs are fun to sail, and that they offer a
lot of advantages and capabilities that most boats don't offer. They
are a good choice for the conditions and usage experienced by most
sailboat owners.

What I have tried to do in this discussion is to provide a degree of
balance between the Mac-bashers, who would be embarrased if their
buddies even saw them on a Mac, and the Mac lovers who think they are
the greatest boats ever made. - I personally would rather have a Valiant
40. I love their handling, their speed, and their stability and balance
as the wind picks up. However, I'm not sure I would have more fun on a
Valiant than I do on the Mac, and I'm pretty sure that I'll be getting
in more sailing on the Mac. Now, sailing one of the Mac 65's at 15
knots might be a different story.

You approve of a balanced discussion, don't you DK? After all, a long
series of repetitive notes telling everyone that the Macs are just a
pile of junk gets kind of monotonous after a few months, don't you think?

Jim