When a car ad claims 'top speed' and 'zero to 60' speeds, do you think
they're testing them with 4 adults , a full gas tank and a trunk full of
luggage?

SV


"Bobsprit" wrote ...
Where did you read or hear that
MacGregor claimed the boat would make 25 mph with four adults, or with
water ballast? Again, honesty, rationality? - Or would being honest
take away all the fun?

"Bobsprit" wrote


Jim, I saw the M at the AC boat show. It's the same junk, built just as
lightly
as the original 26X. It's slightly reformed Junk.


and yet, Macs have sailed to the Bahamas and to Hawaii. How far have you
sailed Bob?

Scott Vernon wrote:

Saweeeet! Love those fenders.

Scotty


My wife would get all cranky when I showed her how much
brightwork she had to look after.

Cheers
Marty

and yet, Macs have sailed to the Bahamas and to Hawaii. How far have you
sailed Bob?


Dugout canoes and make-shift rafts have made those trips. Please explain to
everyone why you find the 26M and X so appealing. Outside of Jim you're the
only one who thinks this way.
As far as distance sailed, I did get to the Thimble Islands last summer, did
some of the Jersey Coast, logged plenty of daysails, overnighters and so on.
Pretty much what most people do. Let the group understand why you think this
has any bearing on the quality of the Mac sailboats.

We're all awaiting your thoughtful answers.

RB

which was the predecessor to the older water ballast 26, has left many a
more expensive & prestigious yacht in it's wake.

Meaning what exactly? A Mac 25 will outrun a Dana 24 as well.
I guess you'd call the Mac a "better" boat.

RB

Xtually the Mac26 PowR-SailR isn't a bad boat if you understand it's limit

How PC is this comment? Let's look at these so called "limits."

Mac 26X or M

Ugly design
Very light build quality
Poor sailing performance
Poor power boat performance
Not cheap compared to better used boats

Yeah...I guess if you're okay with that, then the Mac26 is GREAT! I also have a
1983 OMC saildrive for sale...great if you understand it's limits.

RB

RB

When a car ad claims 'top speed' and 'zero to 60' speeds, do you think
they're testing them with 4 adults , a full gas tank and a trunk full of
luggage?

Most cars don't lose half of their speed potential when passengers are added.
With three passengers the Mac26m dropped to 13 knots in tests. See the website!
Try again, Scotty. Still, you should look into becoming a Mac dealer.

RB

Please repost where I wrote that.

You've been defending the Mac X and M. Fact.
Sorry. Both sides of the rail doesn't suit you.

RB

which was the predecessor to the older water ballast 26, has left many a
more expensive & prestigious yacht in it's wake.


Bobsprit wrote:
Meaning what exactly? A Mac 25 will outrun a Dana 24 as well.
I guess you'd call the Mac a "better" boat.

For some purposes, it is definitely a better boat. For others, it may not
be. You got a problem with that?

Is the Mac25 a better boat than a C&C 32 that never sails and has a host of
long term structural problems?

Maybe you should argue about it with Marc and BittyBill. Jax could referee
it.

DSK

Isn't the M25 in the Sail hall of fame? Ever seen a Mac/Venture 23' cutter
rigged? Cool looking boat.

Scotty

SV

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Scott Vernon wrote:

Careful Jon, the older Macs (pre X ) were pretty good little boats.

Yeah, what he said!

Xtually the Mac26 PowR-SailR isn't a bad boat if you understand it's
limits and
agree with the basic design philosophy. MacGregor has always built their
boats
to be very inexpensive but that doesn't necessarily make them bad, or
flimsy.
There are a heck of a lot of 20 and 30 year old Ventures & MacGregors out
there
sailing.

Most of the older MacGregor models sail fairly well. Some are quite good,
the
Mac 25, which was the predecessor to the older water ballast 26, has left
many a
more expensive & prestigious yacht in it's wake.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King