I've had occasion to speak with someone who, among other things, reviews new
boats for a US based magazine. We discussed this issue, he mentioned that
you can generally tell when he is not enamored of a particular boat. He also
mentioned a test sail of a model produced by a major US manufacturer, there
were some serious technical issues with this boat, the magazine didn't run
the review. The only review of the Mac26X that appeared in a magazine that
could be characterized as unbiased was the one that ran in "Practical
Sailor", you have to wonder what they were trying to say, they didn't
actually sail the boat. Hell, it doesn't make any difference to me, I have
no plans on buying a new boat, and there are enough resources out there to
get a fairly decent evaluation of just about any used boat out there should
I decide to change boats.
John Cairns
"Ozzy's Oz Moh sis" wrote in message
...

"John Cairns" wrote in message
...
I thought the juxtaposition was funny, read the very kind Mac review,
turn
the page, read the Malo review. It seems the Malo story was copied
verbatim
from the print edition minus the photography.

I always get the impression that these "reviews" are written with
advertising revenues in mind. I've never seen a review that said "This is
a
crap boat, with no redeeming features whatsoever." Yet, such boats exist.

The Mac26X could be kindly described as "The perfect boat for the poverty
stricken person who would like to go sailing, but who knows nothing at
all
about sailing."


Equally, the Coronado 27 should be described as "The perfect boat for the
poverty stricken person who would like to go sailing."

I've almost given up reading sailing mags.


Regards


Donal
--