katysails wrote:
Jim...MacGregor's have a poor reputation. They have made some very bad
boats. Most of us here have experience sailing many different brands of
boats and have been around sailors and sailboats for years and years. Your
analogy about intellectual honesty is bunkum. Fact of the matter is, if a
product gets negative brand recognition because of lack of quality, it will
take 75% more effort to convince the knowledgeable that that company might
then, out of the blue, produce a good product. If you were in the market
for a subcompact car, and you read the history of the Yugo, spoke with
people who had purchased Yugo's, and seen the statistics about their rate of
repair and other problems, would you then include Yugo in the cars you are
planning to test drive? I think not. Time is money, and wating time is
wasting money. Yes, there are flukes...once in a while a company with a bad
reputation comes up with a single good item...Hunter comes to mind
here...but for the most part, Hunter's are crap, and that is based on
comparison of facts. macGregor's , for the most part, are crap. Now quit
wasting everyone's time with your specious arguments and go learn how to
sail.

Katy, first regarding your comment that I need to go learn to sail, as
previously mentioned, I have sailed a 37-ft O'Day, 40-ft Valiant (weeks
charter), Cal 34, Cat 30 Endeavor 32, etc., etc. I'm seeking to extend
my sailing experience.

Regarding the reputation of the MacGregors, I realize that it isn't the
same type of boat as fixed keel boats such as the Valiant and the O'Day.
However, they entail certain obvious advantages for sailing in bay
areas and with respect to their ability to get to a desired sailing area
quickly, and to return quickly, and to getting through marginal channels
and limited deep water sailing areas such as we have in he Galveston bay
area. My note concerned the new model, in which the hull is
significantly different from previous models, as previously described. I
don't see news reports of hundreds of MacGregor sailors killed or
injured, actually. If someone who has actually sailed the 26M under
differing weather conditions tells me that it has minimal sailing
capability, or that it is likely to fall apart in a force three wind, or
that MacGregor owners are being routinely lost at sea because of defects
in the boat, then that information would be meaningful and relevant. But
so far I haven't seen such a report, and, from speaking with several who
have sailed it, the boat seems to be faster and more responsive and more
stable in chop under power than the previous models.

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

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. 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). 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