SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

katysails wrote:

Jax cried:
SPAM!!

I'm of the opinion that the guy is a MacGregor infiltrate, sent by the
company to turn the attention of the group on their sorry product...

Katy, the following note lists five advantages of the Mac 26M, while
recognizing some of its limitations and disadvantages. How about
addressing some of these substantive issues, rather than posting more
ridiculous, childish personal attacks?

Whether or not the Valiant is a "better" boat depends on your particular
criteria, however. With respect to safety for coastal cruising, the Mac
seems to have several advantages.

(1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains.

(2) If both hulls are compromised, or if the side hull is penetrated as
in a collision, the integrated flotation keeps the Mac afloat. By
contrast, if the hull of the Valiant (or other keep boats) is
compromised, or if the through-hulls leak, or if substantial water
enters the boat for some other reason, the keel of the Valiant will
quickly pull it to the bottom. In this respect, the MacGregor is a
"better" boat. (Galveston-Houston has its share of drunk red-necks
racing around the bays at 60 mph while downing another six-pack.)

(3) Regarding access to good sailing areas, the MacGregor can plane out
to the desired sailing are at around 15-18 knots, whereas the Valiant,
while considered relatively fast, only make around 7-8 knots under
power. So, with respect to convenience, and ability to get to a
preferred sailing area within a given day or weekend, the MacGregor is a
"better" boat.

(4) The ability to return to port quickly, ahead of impending weather,
is also a safety factor in the Mac. When we sailed the Valiant, there
were several channels in the Galveston area that weren't clearly marked
and in which we could not maneuver safely at low tide. So, we had to
turn back from a preferred anchorage we were trying to reach. In
contrast, the dagger board of the MacGregor can be raised incrementally
as desired, with a minimum draft of around 18 inches. Again, with
respect to its ability to maneuver in shallow or unmarked channels, or
to anchor in shallow water, or beach on shore to permit grandkids to
play on the sand, the MacGregor is a "better" boat, since the Valiant
must be kept in much deeper water and doesn't have the versatility of
the Mac for such shallow water activities.

I have no doubt that the Valiant has better sailing characteristics,
will point higher, and would be more comfortable in heavy weather. - In
that sense, it is a "better" boat than the MacGregor (although I
understand that the MacGregor can actually plane under sail and may
therefore be faster under sail in some conditions).

(5) However, if I can't get out to the blue water on weekends because of
the requisite hours of motoring time it takes to get from our area to
the blue water, then the fine sailing characteristics of the Valiant
wouldn't be of much benefit to me. (With the exception of being able to
talk about it on the newsgroup.) Under those circumstances, if I could
only get out once or twice a year, it may make more sense to charter a
larger boat for extended cruising when I can time off for a week or so.

Again, an evaluation of the quality of the boat depends on the criteria
used in the evaluation, and how the boat will be used.

Jim

SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Jimbo, did you ask your silly questions on the Mac list, like I suggested?

SV


Yes. The great majority on the Mac lists have one of the the older
models. I did correspond with and speak with some 26M owners.

Jim

SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Johathan, the following note lists five advantages of the Mac 26M, while
recognizing some of its limitations and disadvantages. How about
addressing some of such substantive issues, rather than posting more
ridiculous personal attacks?

Whether or not the Valiant is a "better" boat depends on your particular
criteria, however. With respect to safety for coastal cruising, the Mac
seems to have several advantages.

(1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains.

(2) If both hulls are compromised, or if the side hull is penetrated as
in a collision, the integrated flotation keeps the Mac afloat. By
contrast, if the hull of the Valiant (or other keep boats) is
compromised, or if the through-hulls leak, or if substantial water
enters the boat for some other reason, the keel of the Valiant will
quickly pull it to the bottom. In this respect, the MacGregor is a
"better" boat. (Galveston-Houston has its share of drunk red-necks
racing around the bays at 60 mph while downing another six-pack.)

(3) Regarding access to good sailing areas, the MacGregor can plane out
to the desired sailing are at around 15-18 knots, whereas the Valiant,
while considered relatively fast, only make around 7-8 knots under
power. So, with respect to convenience, and ability to get to a
preferred sailing area within a given day or weekend, the MacGregor is a
"better" boat.

(4) The ability to return to port quickly, ahead of impending weather,
is also a safety factor in the Mac. When we sailed the Valiant, there
were several channels in the Galveston area that weren't clearly marked
and in which we could not maneuver safely at low tide. So, we had to
turn back from a preferred anchorage we were trying to reach. In
contrast, the dagger board of the MacGregor can be raised incrementally
as desired, with a minimum draft of around 18 inches. Again, with
respect to its ability to maneuver in shallow or unmarked channels, or
to anchor in shallow water, or beach on shore to permit grandkids to
play on the sand, the MacGregor is a "better" boat, since the Valiant
must be kept in much deeper water and doesn't have the versatility of
the Mac for such shallow water activities.

I have no doubt that the Valiant has better sailing characteristics,
will point higher, and would be more comfortable in heavy weather. - In
that sense, it is a "better" boat than the MacGregor (although I
understand that the MacGregor can actually plane under sail and may
therefore be faster under sail in some conditions).

(5) However, if I can't get out to the blue water on weekends because of
the requisite hours of motoring time it takes to get from our area to
the blue water, then the fine sailing characteristics of the Valiant
wouldn't be of much benefit to me. (With the exception of being able to
talk about it on the newsgroup.) Under those circumstances, if I could
only get out once or twice a year, it may make more sense to charter a
larger boat for extended cruising when I can time off for a week or so.

Again, an evaluation of the quality of the boat depends on the criteria
used in the evaluation, and how the boat will be used.

Jim

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

wrote


It seemed to throw me.


And that's why
wrote in message
...

It is double hulled,


You're sinking fast.
SV

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 23:49:36 -0400, "Scott Vernon"
wrote:

are you under the impression that a mac26 is double hulled?

SV

He may be thinking that a liner is a second hull, which will prevent
him from sinking if one of those drunken powerboaters hits him doing
60mph. Perhaps Macs have foam floatation, as most of them would
otherwise be on the bottom. If I make it up to the Valiant yard in
the next few days, perhaps I will suggest that they may want to
"improve" their boats with some of these innovations:)

Here is a question for Jim...a drunken powerboater is heading towards
you. You can elect to be in a Valiant or a Mac. Which do you
choose?:) If you are really so naive as to think that a Mac 26 is a
more survivable boat in any scenario than a Valiant or any other
"real" sailboat, then thanks for the comic relief.

The obvious solution to your dilemma was to have chosen a marina
closer to where you wish to sail. You can drive a car faster than
even the motorboat you have chosen will go. I will grant you that if
your only criteria was how fast you can motor in your "sailboat", then
you have probably chosen wisely. For $30k you could have bought a
pretty decent powerboat instead. Live and learn.



"Jim Cate" wrote 6 times...

(1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains.

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

I think you guys need to get a room...

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 09:23:34 -0400, "Scott Vernon"
wrote:

wrote


It seemed to throw me.


And that's why
wrote in message
.. .

It is double hulled,


You're sinking fast.
SV


The problem here, portly one, is that you are not thinking fast.

BB

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

I try not to speculate too much.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Martin Baxter" wrote in message
...
Jonathan Ganz wrote:
Because he's either stupid, a troll, or trying to justify his poor
choice.


All three?

Cheers
Marty

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

"katysails" wrote in message
...
Jim boasted:
I'll be here for whatever time it takes for you to come to the
realization that you aren't going to intimidate me or drive me away.

Time to call in Bertie and troop.....


Oh gawd ... I hope that Oz doesn't read that.




Regards


Donal
--

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Jim Cate wrote:

This isn't what happened at all. I posted my questions several times
on this an on the cruising ng and scanned the reponses for over a
month hoping to get some factual or substantive information regarding
the 26M. It was only after weeks of "Mac bashings" ...

What, you came into a sailing newsgroup to enquire about about a boat you
knew little about, it's gets slagged off something rotten for a month...

....and then you go and *buy* one?

Nobody is that stupid.


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk/music

MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
 

Jim Cate wrote:

Would I be permitted to buy a chart plotter, depth-knot, autosteering,
or VHF?

What's a "depth-knot"?


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk/music