MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Bobsprit wrote:

My particular boat would go for above the average due to extremely
good condition and equipment.


In addition to the 26M's, I'm looking at C&C's, Cals, O'Days, etc., in
the 30 to 34-foot range. I noticed that the water line lenght of the
O'Day is several feet longer than the C&C and others of similar overall
length. Would his mean that, if I multiplied the wL by a factor of 1.4
or 1.3, that the cruising speed of the boats that the speed of the
O'Day would usually be be proportionatly higher than that of the C&C or
Cal? It's a substantial difference, something like 25 feet vs. 29 feet.

Thanks,
Jim

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Why would you care if its "competitive"? Would you really race it?

The original 65 was avail. in 2 versions. The "race" version had a tall rig,
deep keel etc. Cost a little over a hundred grand new. That's unheard of for
a new 65' ULDB. Problem was owners had to put over a hundred and fifty more in
the boat to make it work. Yea, I'd like to race one if I had it. I would
imagine it would be a hoot going down wind on a 20kt night with the chute up.
Should hit 20kts on the right angle. At least mid teens easy. I wouldn't want
the responsibility of a 65' boat though.
Later 65s had raised salons and other stupid stuff. Problem was anybody
who could afford to keep a 65' boat wouldn't want to be seen arriving on a Mac.
S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
"No shirt, no skirt, full service"

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Just to give you some more perspective on the MacGregor 26 line...

While I haven't sailed on any of them, I've seen a few out on the bay
(sans my friend who has one, who I know is a good sailor). All have
been sailed very poorly. The rigging is light weight compared to other
boats of a similar size. For the bay, they're mostly inappropriate in my
opinion.

Also, I have a family friend who owns the largest (I believe) MacGregor
dealership in Northern Cal. They sell a lot of them. Even his wife thinks
there's trash and the only reason they sail them at all is so they can sell
them. They don't really push them. People come in and basically tell
them to sell it to them.

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...


DSK wrote:

Jim Cate wrote:


And how many times have you sailed on the 26M, DK? - Was it five times,
ten times, fifteen? I seem to have forgotten.


Gosh, you're so right... it's gotta be better than the old one... it's
NEW & IMPROVED!!

BTW it does not not have a new hull design. Exactly the same, only
painted darker colors
which does not improve sailng characteristics as far as anybody has been
able to
determine.

It has "Exactly the same hull, except for the dark paint"??? DK, you are
either confused or hung over. The M model is definitely a "new hull
design." The M model includes a deep, 15-degree V-hull, as compared with
the X model's much flatter, 8-degree hull. Additionally, the boat has a
vertically retractable, relatively dagger board instead of the pivotable
fin keel of the older boat, which nested in an a rearwardly extending
groove in the hull. Whether or not these changes make the boat "better"
or "improved, there is no question that the hull is, in fact,
substantially different. In the interests of logic, intellectual
honesty, and plain old truthfullness, you shouln't post false assertions
concerning matters about which you really don't know what you are
talking about.


And the ones I have seen certainly don't have rotating masts
either.... anyway
that would be a waste of time on a boat with a PHRF rating of 216.


Again, the M model does has a rotating mast. If the one you are
describing doesn't, it's further evidence that you really don't know
which model it is. Again, in the interest of plain old logic and
intellectual honesty, you ought to do your homework and get your facts
straight.

The two Mac26Ms at our marina I have seen out sailing a dozen times or
so. They are not
even a match for the San Juan 21, of which there is a strong local
class, which rates
252. The SJ21 literally sails rings around the M26M. Figure it out.

The point, Jim, is to enjoy your time on the water. If you happen to not
care about
sailing other than to have some sails up and hear the wake gurgling,
then go for it. If
you enjoy really *sailing* then you'll be disappointed. Doesn't matter
to me one way or
the other.


I may get one of the 26M's. However, I'm not sure I can afford one, and
my budget may dictate that I have to settle for a 34-foot O'Day, Cal, or
C&C.

Jim
Fresh Breezes- Doug King

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

From someone who's opinion I trust, and from my own experience. I've run
these boats down like they were standing still, in one case, the wind was
4kts. and the Mac did appear to be standing still. This person also told me
that the Mac26x would not move in winds much below 8kts., and couldn't sail
upwind in winds much above 10. Like I said, you should be able to find a Mac
broker who's willing to take you out on a test sail, hell, that's how they
sell them in these parts. No store, the broker rents a slip in our marina
and keeps a boat there. BTW, I own a Catalina 28, not exactly a greyhound on
the water if you get my drift.
John Cairns
"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...


John Cairns wrote:

The new boat is probably only slightly less of a pig under sail than the
old
boat, if you want to verify this, I'm sure you'll find at least one Mac
broker that has an M in stock and will be happy to take you out for a
test
sail. I have one of the NE phrf lists, it rates this boat(26X) at 216
which
is probably charitable. You do the math. If it is indeed 20 to 30%
faster
than the old model, what would it's rating be?
John Cairns


Interesting. When I look at their video of the 26M racing the 26X with
identical sails, the 26M is passing the X model as if the X model is
standing still. Speaking with owners of the M model, they say that it is
significantly faster, making around 6.5 on a reach. Maybe it's
something like the comparisons of the Cal, Catalina, and O'Day 34's I
have also been looking at. It seems like there are lots of factors other
than full speed, etc., that affect the speed of the boats.

Jim



"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...

The "M" model has a new deep V- hull, an adjustable dagger board keel,
a rotatable mast, additional layers of fiberglass in the hull, SS chain
plates, partial fixed lead ballast, and a number of other changes. -
Whether these changes bring the boat up to acceptable off-shore sailing
standards or not, they ARE substantive differences relative to the
previous model. From discussing the boat with owners and previous
owners, it seems that it's speed and handling under both sail and motor
are significantly improved relative to the previous model. It is
apparently 20-30% faster under similar sails than the X model,

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Later 65s had raised salons and other stupid stuff. Problem was anybody
who could afford to keep a 65' boat wouldn't want to be seen arriving on a
Mac.


Sort of like a Yugo Limo.

RB

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

From your
particular bias regarding their looks, you don't like them.


Jim, Scotty's bias is well founded. Anyone who's grown to love the shape of
sailboats is offended by the looks of the Mac.

RB

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Interesting. When I look at their video of the 26M racing the 26X with
identical sails, the 26M is passing the X model as if the X model is
standing still.

Jim, I watched the video. Something is VERY wrong there. Sailboats don't show
such a wide variant in speed from design improvements. The results are
significant, but still subtle overall. A J35 which is FAR faster than my C&C 32
doesn't pass a Catalina 30 "like it's standing still." The M & X models are
still pretty close in their performance envelope and I'm doubtful that the
video was done honestly.

RB

RB

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

donny, you got suckered. pay attention to the " ID in the
address line. that is the id of the imposter clown.

notice also that I don't post from a @yahoo.com address.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
. com...
Don't pay no never mind to what ....

Huh?

Regards


Donal
--

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Jim Cate wrote:
It has "Exactly the same hull, except for the dark paint"??? DK, you are
either confused or hung over.

Umm, no. Either the boat(s) that I have seen as "Mac26M"s were not, or
they are the same hull. It might have 15 degree deadrise up near the
bow, but the transom looks like the letter "U". A wide one. Nor did the
old one have 8 degrees of deadrise (except maybe up near the bow).

Before you suggest that I don't know what I'm talking about, when you
are the one asking me for advice, you check around some other sources.
For starters, park a "new" Mac26 next to an old one, and look carefully
at the hull shape.

It looks to me like you've been sold a bill of goods, and aren't going
to listen to the truth. If your sailing happiness is based on
self-delusion (and these days it seems like a lot of people base quite a
lot on this) then it would be most honorable for me to not try and
enlighten you.

DSK

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Doug, while I wouldn't want a Mac26 in my worst nightmare, you're wrong about
the hull, though Macgregor says the performance edge was for POWERING. The
daggerboard is the other big whoop along with the larger "rotating" rig. It's
improved...like New Coke.

http://www.macgregor26.com/comparison_26x_and_26m.htm

RB