On Tue, 18 May 2004 16:02:41 -0400, DSK wrote:

AFAIK nobody has *criticised* the sailing performance of the Mac 26X,
only pointed out that it is not at all what it is often claimed to be.

Well, even looking at grainy pictures of it I can tell it will point
like a barge. "Can sail" and "can sail well" are relative.

If you saw Porta-Bote advertising that their sailing rig option will
beat Tornado Cats and is by far the most aerodynamically advanced vessel
yet produced by Western civilization, you might shake your head a bit.

Like a junkie with Parkinson's, yes.

Is the Macgregor 26X a badly built boat? Separate issue entirely. Is
it the ******* offspring of a powerboat and a dinghy? Oh, probably,
but so what? Many people like that sort of thing, and as long as they
understand COLREGs, it's irrelevant to my sailing experience.

Agreed. But would you let your brother buy one?

Sure, if he was picking it over a powerboat...but I'd take the thing
under tow if the wind picked up. G

Seriously, they look like nothing I'd enjoy, but one more sailboat,
even a Macgregor, instead of one more jetski, has *got* to be the
lesser of two evils, wouldn't you agree?

I try not to sneer at trimarans and cats, either, because they provide
a *different*, but equally valid and perfectly enjoyable alternative
to my preferred monohull. Where I tend to get snotty is on the issue
of seaworthiness: if you accept that a cat with a big flat sliding
glass door on its bridge is going to have issues in a following sea,
then you understand my objections are not to catamarans, but to
catamarans that want to be patio sunrooms. South Africa builds some
apparently incredibly tough blue-water cats (they'd have to, given the
conditions there), and while I'd personally have to learn to sail 'em,
I'd let the brother buy one.

Over a Macgregor, even.

R.