DSK wrote:

Flying Tadpole wrote:

As a cruiser of a design known to have split the civilised world
in two, I don't have a problem with the looks of the Mac26*.


Let's first acknowledge that there are two very different water
ballasted MacGregor 26s... the old "sailboat" ones built from approx
1988 (and were a development from the Mac 25)... and the Mac 26 X (now
labelled the "M") Pow-R-Sail-R which was a development of the Mac 19
motorsailer. Very very different boats. The older Mac 26s have built a
reputation as good sailing boats, tender but fast & weatherly.


For those who sail in desperately thin water, there is a great
deal to be said for swing keels, extreme shallow draught, hard
bilges and, to a much lesser extent, high sides if one must have
sizeable accommodations. But the ultimate question has to be,
how does the boat sail, and...how _is_ it sailed?


Very good point. I can address the issue on both series and from both
directions. Since there were three or four of each type in our sailing
club, I got a chance to sail them and observe them sailing under a
variety of conditions. Only on of the "X" type owners was an experienced
sailor, a guy who could (say just for example) take out a racing class
dinghy and handle it well in a breeze. The others were novices. Didn't
make much difference. The "X" boats go downwind OK, but they aren't fast
relative to anything except the doggiest crab-crusher, and they don't
like to go upwind (in fact there is a wide range of conditions where
they cannot make any progress to windward). They are a PITA to steer,
the rudders & steering were prone to breakage. They pound miserably in a
chop.

The "older" Mac to which you refer had a dagger board keel instead of
the wider, swing keel of the Mac 26x. From discussions with those who
have sailed the new 26M (which has a narrow dagger board and a draft of
almost 6 feet) the new boat is much better under sail, particularly
going upwind.


The older Mac 26 has a respectable handicap and sails to it often. On
fleet cruises, they often were circling back to let the other boats
catch up. The Mac 26X boats were always motoring to keep up.

When I see a boat that I can sail rings around in a Hunter 19, and do it
consistently in a wide range of conditions, that is not a factor that
leads me to say it is a good sailing boat.


That big motor is a trap, and my objection to the Mac26 series is
not the looks, not the light construction, not even the
observably poor sailing qalities other than well off the wind,
but the role which that motor plays in seducing the owners away
from sailing!


But it's main marketing strategy is to guys who want a motorboat. That's
what it is, a cheap motorboat. The sailing rig is an afterthought
(plumage?). If you go to a boat show and compare prices of new boats
with similar accomodation, most of them cost about twice what the Mac 26
X or M does. Most of them also displace significantly more and have
bigger motors. IMHO it doesn't "seduce" anybody away from sailing,
nobody who likes to sail would want one.



Jim the Deafer makes much play of motoring at speed to get
through the narrow, thin waters and out into "blue water" sailing
grounds, no more than 70 miles offshore, or was it 100? ie out of
the shallow, near coastal waters for which one uses swing keels,
extreme shallow draught, hard bilges etc etc. Yet, leaving aside
the pointlessness of taking a light shallow-water craft way out
to sea, the very business of motoring at speed through the narrow
thin waters misses totally the pleasures and the skills to be
gained in learning to handle a sailing craft skilfully and
deftly. It is just too easy to open the motor up and rush away,
never committing to the discipline of learning to sail in such
waters.


Tadpole, you are a poet.

... Alas for human
frailty--I've found the newsgroup's cruel and harsh view of Macs
to be borne out in local practice.


I hope that the things I have said about the Mac 26 X and/or M isn't
"bashing" since I have friends who own them. They have their good
points. In the new boat market, they are a lot of boat for the money.
They are a lot more practical to trailer than a lot of other boats
marketed as "trailerable." But if they want to argue about whether or
not we've sailed rings around them, there's no point... not only has the
whole sailing seen it many times... I have pictures!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King