JimC wrote:
wrote:
JimC wrote:
BTW, from the Macgregor site, we also have:
"IF THE CABIN OF THE BOAT IS ENTIRELY FILLED WITH WATER, AND THE BOAT
IS DEPENDENT ON THE FOAM FLOTATION TO KEEP IT AFLOAT, IT WILL BE VERY
UNSTABLE, AND MAY TURN UPSIDE DOWN."
Where in the world did you get that verbage, Keith? Apparently you are
deliberately misquoting the Mac site.- The actual statements regarding
the floatation system a
Here it is, so if you can't find it now, that's your deficiency, not
mine. The verbiage is cut and pasted verbatim. Hence the quotation
marks (and yes, it's in CAPS on the website):
http://www.macgregor26.com/safety/safety.htm
"The boat has built-in solid foam flotation to keep it afloat in the
event of damage. It won’t sail well when fully flooded, and it will be
unstable, but it beats swimming. Most competing boats do not offer this
essential safety protection, and their heavy keels can pull them
straight to the bottom. Don't get a boat without solid flotation!"
-Nothing about the boat becoming "very unstable" or that it "may turn
upside down." - Keith, don't try that BS with me again.
Look, I've been trying to be polite, but if you're too lazy or dumb to
actually read the manufacturer's site, that's not my BS, that's *your*
malfunction. Accusing people of dishonesty, without checking your
references first, is the province of fools. As is attempting
intimidation over Usenet.
It's quite evident from this statement that when flooded, in heavy
seas, the Mac can be expected to turn turtle, or roll.
Nope. That's your statement, not MacGregor's.
********. *READ* the pertinent disclaimers on the website, not *just*
the marketing crap that you think supports your position.
So why the desperate need to defend the Mac as something it's not?
I'm not defending it as something it's not. I have stated over and over
again that it isn't suibable for extended crossings or blue water
cruisings. I have also listed a number of advantages of conventional
boats over the Macs. What I'm doing is providing a degree of balance in
this discussion (typical of many other discussions on this ng) in which
the Macs are totally bashed, usually by guys who have never even sailed
one of the current models (the 26M). They have never sailed one, yet
they feel no hesitation in telling everyone else what they are like and
what they will and will not do.
I've been on a 26X, and I sail around 26M's, so I have an idea of their
performance. There are several in my marina. And if you think that
"Macs are fine for their intended use" is Mac bashing, your English
comprehension is clearly suspect.
It's
a trailerable boat (big compromise #1), at a low price point (big
compromise #2), with a targeted audience and type of use. It does
what it's designed to do, and works great for a lot of people for whom
the design compromises are unimportant, or considered acceptable. It's
also wholly unsuitable to uses for which it is not designed, as are
most boats.
Many folks have sailed Catalina 30's on blue water passages, but I
wouldn't do that in mine. It's designed, built, and rigged to be a
coastal cruiser, and just like the Mac, operated outside of its design
parameters, is *much* more prone to catastrophic failure. Plain and
simple - you operate within the confines of the engineering design
space, or you're at risk.
Well, that's your assesment. And I don't know whether you have sailed a
26M or not. Can I safely assume that you have not?. (I have sailed the
Mac26M, in addition to a number of other boats in the 30 to 40 foot range.)
No, that's everyones assessment - everyone knowledgeable that is.
You're now arguing that operating boats outside their design envelopes
*doesn't* make them more prone to failure? I assume you must be, since
that's all my preceding two paragraphs say (except that obvious, that
trailerability and low cost require design compromises).
Here's my assesment:
1) A boat that is FUN TO SAIL!
And I disputed this *when* exactly?
2) A boat that is not essentially limited to being sailed in the
immediate area.
And I disputed this *when* exactly?
3) A boat that doesn't have to be berthed in a marina.
And I disputed this *when* exactly? I sailed a San Juan 26 for ten
years. It was a shoal draft keel/centerboarder, and was trailerable.
The San Juan, like the Mac26, and all other trailerable boats, share
this feature. So...
4) A coastal cruiser that can be sailed in a variety of waters,
For which is designed and constructed. Blue water isn't it, per the
designer.
5} A boat that incorporates a number of safety features, including
positive floatation that will keep the boat afloat even if the hull is
compromised.
Not with any serious payload. Another of the compromises.
6) A boat that, despite its relatively modest size, has substantial
cabin space and berths for five people, including a queen-size aft berth.
And I disputed this *when* exactly?
7) A boat that is small and light enough to permit easy handling and
docking by one person.
And I disputed this *when* exactly?
8) A boat that is priced substantially lower than conventional larger
boats
And I disputed this *when* exactly?
9) A boat that can be sailed or motored with or without the ballast, and
that can be trailord without the ballast, making it a substantially
lighter load when trailoring.
And I disputed this *when* exactly?
10) A boat that can have a 5.5 feet draft for sailing (with dagger-board
down) but that can be converted to one with only 1.5-ft draft in shallow
And I disputed this *when* exactly?
11) A sailboat that, unlike 90 percent of the boats discussed on this
ng, isn't limited to hull speed.
And I disputed this *when* exactly?
12) A boat that has clean lines and a modern, streamlined design. -
Admittedly, this is a matter of taste. -
Well, actually I think they are quite ugly. But yes that's clearly a
matter of personal preference. C30's are not particularly lovely either,
but mine is clean-lined enough to suit me.
On the downside, I've previously noted that the Macs aren't as
comfortable in chop or heavy weather, that they don't have sufficient
storage for a long voyage, that they don't point as well as larger
boats, and that they have a shorter waterline, that limits their hull
speed under sail.
A result of the many compromises necessary to create a light,
inexpensive, trailerable boat.
For someone who has whined incessantly, in this thread, about people
misreading your posts, and misquoting or misrepresenting *you*, you
clearly have no compunction about doing the same to others.
Keith Hughes