JimC wrote:
Jeff, I don't have time to defend lawyers on this ng.

Nobody has *that* much time


JimC wrote:
.... The boat is built to be balanced,
under sail or power, with the motor and a typical crew in the cockpit.

By "balance" I meant that the hull, motor, ballast, and sails work
togther to
cause the boat to to sail and motor as efficiently as possible under a
variety
of applications. In general, it sails and powers well, it doesn't
"pitch" excessively,
and it is fun to sail.


But not as much fun as a boat that sails better.

What is pitching "excessively"? Enough to notice? Enough to
cause ridicule by other sailors?

If the boat's moment of inertia is too high, then the boat
sails slowly and pitches more than it would if the weights
were closer to the hull's center of volume.

In other words, the hull, motor, and ballast, are inherently
flawed in design to enable the big heavy motor. A
compromise, not an efficient or effective design.


JimC wrote:
The 26M is the result of years of development, feedback, and mods. It
does a lot of things most sailboats can't do.

It also doesn't do a few basic things that most sailboats
do; and of things that most sailboats do well, it does poorly.




.... If serves the needs of
most sailors, under the conditions experienced 90% of the time.

Actually, it doesn't. If it did, it would probably be more
popular.


.... It's
relatively inexpensive, if you are willing to compare the costs of new
boats to new boats, or used boats to used boats, and not compare the
costs of 15 year old boats with that of a new Mac 26M similarly
equipped.

It's cheap compared to motorboats of similar cabin size.
*That* is the key selling point, plus the bonus that
trailerable motorboats of similar cabin room require a much
heavier & more expensive towing vehicle.


And, (I almost forgot) it's a lot of fun to sail.


If you're not picky.

DSK