Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Nothing substantive to say, Scott?
Scott Vernon wrote: Jimbo has a son? "Veridican" veridican Cate @aol.com wrote... You can sail the Mac 75 miles off shore. A guy went around the world in a 23 foot boat (see the movie The Dove). You can sail any boat 75 miles off shore. But everyone wants to act like one boat is better in a storm than another boat. BS. If I were 75 miles off shore and got into a squall in a Mac, like I would with any damn boat, I'd lower the sails and run with it. Or I'd roll out just a little jib and try to keep head to wind. I mean, you're not really going to ask me to believe that a Valient 40 is better off in 30 ft breaking waves than a Mac are you? Any 26 ft boat should sail the coast line (5-10 miles off shore), not cross the ocean. But if you don't get hit by a storm, it really doesn't matter, does it? The Veridican |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes. You don't have anything substantive to say.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Nothing substantive to say, Scott? Scott Vernon wrote: Jimbo has a son? "Veridican" veridican Cate @aol.com wrote... You can sail the Mac 75 miles off shore. A guy went around the world in a 23 foot boat (see the movie The Dove). You can sail any boat 75 miles off shore. But everyone wants to act like one boat is better in a storm than another boat. BS. If I were 75 miles off shore and got into a squall in a Mac, like I would with any damn boat, I'd lower the sails and run with it. Or I'd roll out just a little jib and try to keep head to wind. I mean, you're not really going to ask me to believe that a Valient 40 is better off in 30 ft breaking waves than a Mac are you? Any 26 ft boat should sail the coast line (5-10 miles off shore), not cross the ocean. But if you don't get hit by a storm, it really doesn't matter, does it? The Veridican |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Jonathan Ganz wrote: Yes. You don't have anything substantive to say. I agree that the discussion seems to have veered off from the topic, and that many of the recent notes are no more than vindictive, personal attacks, and getting more so by the hour. (Of course, if you don't have anything substantive to say in the first place......) There has been lots of bickering about side issues, and little discussion of the underlying thesis. - Which is, that both the MacGregor 26M and the Valiant 40 (or other comparable displacement boats) have good and bad characteristics, and each has capabilities that the other doesn't. The Valiant can sail faster, point higher, and manage heavy seas well, up to a point. On the other hand, it's difficult to navigate through shallow waters, poorly kept channels that are shallow or silting, etc. Its utility is also limited by the fact that it can't sail or motor faster than its hull speed (unless you are surfing down a large wave.) The MacGregor, of course, can motor through very shallow water, and anchor in less than 1.5 feet of water, permitting the grandkids to swim and enjoy playing in the water. Or, it can be beached, for a picnic, or motored through shallow bay waters. One of the more significant advantages of the MacGregor 26M is the fact that it addresses one of the most basic human limitations, limited time. Most of us work for a living, and most of us have many other responsibilities vying for our limited free time. In this respect, the Mac has it all over the Valiant. - As previously mentioned, in our region in the Galveston Bay area northwest of Galveston, it takes around four hours to motor from the marinas to the ship channel and down to Galveston, and even more time to get out to the blue water. (There are very few marinas located near the Gulf, and 99% of boat owners leave their boats in the many marinas in Kemah or Seabrook.) In contrast, the Mac can get from our marinas to the blue water far more quickly, making it feasible to get out to blue water sailing in less than two hours. In one day one can motor down, sail, visit Galveston restaurants and shops if desired, and then return to the Kemah marinas. Thus, time limitations relative to weekend sailing are substantially overcome. Similarly, the design of the boat makes it possible to motor out to other portions of the bays quickly, and sail, fish, swim, picnic, etc., and then return, in one afternoon. Again, time limitations experienced with larger boats are substantially mitigated. Also, although 99% of the displacement sailboats in our area seldom leave the bay, the Mac permits sailing in an entirely different part of the the State, several hundred miles away, because it can be conveniently trailered to the desired area. - Again, time limitations are overcome, and a variety of new sailing areas are made conveniently available. Of course, you can say that you don't care about time limitations, and that you would rather have a large displacement boat despite its shortcomings. However, the fact remains that most of the owners of displacement boats in this area that I have spoken with tell me that they seldom find the time to take their boats out, and almost never have time to take them out to the blue water. My own conclusion is that it's better to sail slightly slower, and point slightly farther off, then to seldom sail at all. I would rather be able to say: "I went sailing yesterday and really enjoyed it, and did lots of interesting things...." Instead of: "Well I didn't have time to go sailing this weekend, but I COULD HAVE, and if I did have the time, I COULD HAVE sailed faster and pointed higher than you." Whether it is more important to point higher or sail more often and more conveniently and with greater variety is, of course, a personal judgment. But there can be no question that the Mac has significant advantages over most displacement boats, for most users. Clearly, obviously, certainly, and without question, except to those whose minds are closed. Jim |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim, you are the funniest thing to hit this NG for a long time. Thanks for
the laughs. SV "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Jonathan Ganz wrote: Yes. You don't have anything substantive to say. I agree that the discussion seems to have veered off from the topic, and that many of the recent notes are no more than vindictive, personal attacks, and getting more so by the hour. (Of course, if you don't have anything substantive to say in the first place......) There has been lots of bickering about side issues, and little discussion of the underlying thesis. - Which is, that both the MacGregor 26M and the Valiant 40 (or other comparable displacement boats) have good and bad characteristics, and each has capabilities that the other doesn't. The Valiant can sail faster, point higher, and manage heavy seas well, up to a point. On the other hand, it's difficult to navigate through shallow waters, poorly kept channels that are shallow or silting, etc. Its utility is also limited by the fact that it can't sail or motor faster than its hull speed (unless you are surfing down a large wave.) The MacGregor, of course, can motor through very shallow water, and anchor in less than 1.5 feet of water, permitting the grandkids to swim and enjoy playing in the water. Or, it can be beached, for a picnic, or motored through shallow bay waters. One of the more significant advantages of the MacGregor 26M is the fact that it addresses one of the most basic human limitations, limited time. Most of us work for a living, and most of us have many other responsibilities vying for our limited free time. In this respect, the Mac has it all over the Valiant. - As previously mentioned, in our region in the Galveston Bay area northwest of Galveston, it takes around four hours to motor from the marinas to the ship channel and down to Galveston, and even more time to get out to the blue water. (There are very few marinas located near the Gulf, and 99% of boat owners leave their boats in the many marinas in Kemah or Seabrook.) In contrast, the Mac can get from our marinas to the blue water far more quickly, making it feasible to get out to blue water sailing in less than two hours. In one day one can motor down, sail, visit Galveston restaurants and shops if desired, and then return to the Kemah marinas. Thus, time limitations relative to weekend sailing are substantially overcome. Similarly, the design of the boat makes it possible to motor out to other portions of the bays quickly, and sail, fish, swim, picnic, etc., and then return, in one afternoon. Again, time limitations experienced with larger boats are substantially mitigated. Also, although 99% of the displacement sailboats in our area seldom leave the bay, the Mac permits sailing in an entirely different part of the the State, several hundred miles away, because it can be conveniently trailered to the desired area. - Again, time limitations are overcome, and a variety of new sailing areas are made conveniently available. Of course, you can say that you don't care about time limitations, and that you would rather have a large displacement boat despite its shortcomings. However, the fact remains that most of the owners of displacement boats in this area that I have spoken with tell me that they seldom find the time to take their boats out, and almost never have time to take them out to the blue water. My own conclusion is that it's better to sail slightly slower, and point slightly farther off, then to seldom sail at all. I would rather be able to say: "I went sailing yesterday and really enjoyed it, and did lots of interesting things...." Instead of: "Well I didn't have time to go sailing this weekend, but I COULD HAVE, and if I did have the time, I COULD HAVE sailed faster and pointed higher than you." Whether it is more important to point higher or sail more often and more conveniently and with greater variety is, of course, a personal judgment. But there can be no question that the Mac has significant advantages over most displacement boats, for most users. Clearly, obviously, certainly, and without question, except to those whose minds are closed. Jim |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Scott Vernon wrote: Jim, you are the funniest thing to hit this NG for a long time. Thanks for the laughs. In other words, you can't come up with a substantve response to my note. Is that what you're trying to tell us, Scott? Jim SV "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Jonathan Ganz wrote: Yes. You don't have anything substantive to say. I agree that the discussion seems to have veered off from the topic, and that many of the recent notes are no more than vindictive, personal attacks, and getting more so by the hour. (Of course, if you don't have anything substantive to say in the first place......) There has been lots of bickering about side issues, and little discussion of the underlying thesis. - Which is, that both the MacGregor 26M and the Valiant 40 (or other comparable displacement boats) have good and bad characteristics, and each has capabilities that the other doesn't. The Valiant can sail faster, point higher, and manage heavy seas well, up to a point. On the other hand, it's difficult to navigate through shallow waters, poorly kept channels that are shallow or silting, etc. Its utility is also limited by the fact that it can't sail or motor faster than its hull speed (unless you are surfing down a large wave.) The MacGregor, of course, can motor through very shallow water, and anchor in less than 1.5 feet of water, permitting the grandkids to swim and enjoy playing in the water. Or, it can be beached, for a picnic, or motored through shallow bay waters. One of the more significant advantages of the MacGregor 26M is the fact that it addresses one of the most basic human limitations, limited time. Most of us work for a living, and most of us have many other responsibilities vying for our limited free time. In this respect, the Mac has it all over the Valiant. - As previously mentioned, in our region in the Galveston Bay area northwest of Galveston, it takes around four hours to motor from the marinas to the ship channel and down to Galveston, and even more time to get out to the blue water. (There are very few marinas located near the Gulf, and 99% of boat owners leave their boats in the many marinas in Kemah or Seabrook.) In contrast, the Mac can get from our marinas to the blue water far more quickly, making it feasible to get out to blue water sailing in less than two hours. In one day one can motor down, sail, visit Galveston restaurants and shops if desired, and then return to the Kemah marinas. Thus, time limitations relative to weekend sailing are substantially overcome. Similarly, the design of the boat makes it possible to motor out to other portions of the bays quickly, and sail, fish, swim, picnic, etc., and then return, in one afternoon. Again, time limitations experienced with larger boats are substantially mitigated. Also, although 99% of the displacement sailboats in our area seldom leave the bay, the Mac permits sailing in an entirely different part of the the State, several hundred miles away, because it can be conveniently trailered to the desired area. - Again, time limitations are overcome, and a variety of new sailing areas are made conveniently available. Of course, you can say that you don't care about time limitations, and that you would rather have a large displacement boat despite its shortcomings. However, the fact remains that most of the owners of displacement boats in this area that I have spoken with tell me that they seldom find the time to take their boats out, and almost never have time to take them out to the blue water. My own conclusion is that it's better to sail slightly slower, and point slightly farther off, then to seldom sail at all. I would rather be able to say: "I went sailing yesterday and really enjoyed it, and did lots of interesting things...." Instead of: "Well I didn't have time to go sailing this weekend, but I COULD HAVE, and if I did have the time, I COULD HAVE sailed faster and pointed higher than you." Whether it is more important to point higher or sail more often and more conveniently and with greater variety is, of course, a personal judgment. But there can be no question that the Mac has significant advantages over most displacement boats, for most users. Clearly, obviously, certainly, and without question, except to those whose minds are closed. Jim |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't mean to speak for Scott, but what he's trying to tell you
is that you're stupid. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Scott Vernon wrote: Jim, you are the funniest thing to hit this NG for a long time. Thanks for the laughs. In other words, you can't come up with a substantve response to my note. Is that what you're trying to tell us, Scott? Jim |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 08:11:31 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap: I don't mean to speak for Scott, but what he's trying to tell you is that you're stupid. And when it comes to stupidity, Jon-boy, you're the expert. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Scott Vernon wrote: Jim, you are the funniest thing to hit this NG for a long time. Thanks for the laughs. In other words, you can't come up with a substantve response to my note. Is that what you're trying to tell us, Scott? Not very humorous. C'mon, try harder. SV |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
sane people would rather sail a Valiant 40 once a month than a MacGregor
26Mx every day. Scotty "Jimbo Mac" wrote ... seldom sail at all. I would rather be able to say: "I went sailing yesterday and really enjoyed it, and did lots of interesting things...." Instead of: "Well I didn't have time to go sailing this weekend, but I COULD HAVE, and if I did have the time, I COULD HAVE sailed faster and pointed higher than you." Whether it is more important to point higher or sail more often and more conveniently and with greater variety is, of course, a personal judgment. But there can be no question that the Mac has significant advantages over most displacement boats, for most users. Clearly, obviously, certainly, and without question, except to those whose minds are closed. Jim |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Is it possible to sail one everyday... I doubt they would
last for more than a week of the rough treatment. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... sane people would rather sail a Valiant 40 once a month than a MacGregor 26Mx every day. Scotty "Jimbo Mac" wrote ... seldom sail at all. I would rather be able to say: "I went sailing yesterday and really enjoyed it, and did lots of interesting things...." Instead of: "Well I didn't have time to go sailing this weekend, but I COULD HAVE, and if I did have the time, I COULD HAVE sailed faster and pointed higher than you." Whether it is more important to point higher or sail more often and more conveniently and with greater variety is, of course, a personal judgment. But there can be no question that the Mac has significant advantages over most displacement boats, for most users. Clearly, obviously, certainly, and without question, except to those whose minds are closed. Jim |