Comments interspersed:

Jim Cate wrote:

If it walks like a duck, and talks like a
duck...................................

You can walk and quack all you want .... that doesn't change the facts.

In other words, the Mac includes an additional liner in the hull
positioned over the lower hull IN EXACTLY THE AREAS MOST LIKELY TO BE
COMPROMISED IF THE BOAT STRIKES A SUBMERGED OBJECT WHEN PLANING.

There's more to operating a boat than just striking submerged objects.
An "additional liner" in some areas, is just that, nothing more. The
main point, is what this "additional liner" is for .... obviously, it's
for improved stability. Some salestype has also come up with the fact
that it could be listed as a "safety" issue in case of grounding or
striking a submerged object,to some extent, as it has been applied to
ships, and you've bought into it, not knowing what they are talking
about or the reality of it's application.





As discussed in detail above, the water ballast extend for some2/3rds
of the length of the vessel and it protects the most vulnerable
(lowermost. central) portion fo the hull. Although you may not want
to call the extra wall a "double hull," it actually serves the same
purpose. - If it walks like a duck, and talks like a ducke....why not
call it a duck.

Because, walk and talk as you will, it's NOT a duck.


Two points:
1. A double hull is exactly that (no duck walks allowed) a double
hull, complete from main deck down around the keel and back to the
main deck, pointy end to blunt end. In boats, this is an important
distinction.
A double bottom hull is an inner an outer hull from the fwd
perpendicular to the after perpendicular, for the full width of the
bottom.
From what I see of the pictures and drawings, your Mac doesn't
qualify for either, unless your a salesman..


Although you may be right technically in questioning whether the term
"double hulled" should be applied, SUBSTANTIVELY, the extra, inner layer
serves the same purpose in the event the boat is compromised along its
central axis.

In that case, it would be a DB hull ...... which it's not .... nor is it
a double hull. If you cannot see and understand this distinction and
it's possible importance, I suggest some serious study.


While your nomentclature might be more precise, if the extra layer
prevents water from entering the cabin, the end result is that your ass,
and that of my passengers, might be saved.

The problem is that some inexperienced sailor such as yourself, might
think that the same would apply in the case of a collision or allision
which compromised the upper hull, or that the entire bottom of the hull
was thusly protected......it is not in either case.



2. Three hundred pounds of permanent ballast, is meaningless, unless
you know how it relates to the vessels initial stability, and since
stability seems to be an issue, I'd suggest you learn what this is,
before you claim it as a positive.

In following this thread, the one factor I'm seeing is a very
inexperienced boater, with a great need of education in many areas.


One factor I'M SEEING is that most contributors to this ng don't have
the basic integrity and intellectual honesty to admit that they are
wrong, and/or, that they have never sailed the26m, or that they really
don't know what they are talking about.

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a
duck.......................................

Jim

BG If you have so much integrity and intellectual honesty, then you
will admit that your walkin talkin duck is wrong. A double hull is
different from a DB hull, which is different from a single hull, which
is different from the MAC hull. I personally don't give a rats ass if
you like my definitions .... they are what they are and yours are BS.
I note that you made no comments on "initial stability" and the 300lbs
of ballast. From this I assume you don't have a clue as to what I was
saying and to be honest, I wouldn't expect you would.
I don't have to have sailed on a Mac26m for my comments to apply or be
correct.

otn