|
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
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*. 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? 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! 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. Perhaps the Mac26 owners have an aversion to beating their 26 foot boat through a 60ft wide slough, brushing the reeds on each turn, or working their way up a larger but busier channel, against a flow/tide, beacon to beacon. But it's a _learnt_ skill, and to do is to learn. Yet that huge motor sits, like some mind-control machine, saying "use me instead", and they do. The learning-to-sail never happens. Meet a schedule? yes, at times we all have to, but the big motor is an extreme. Yesterday, after 3 hours near-becalmed (1.2knots) I gave up with 10miles to go and fired up the (10hp) motor, then proceeded on at about 4knots (sails still up, giving me about 1knot and the motor working gently). And took great interest in watching a Mac26 two miles away, still in light breeze and moving at about 2knots, pull down all sail then use the giant motor to move at ... 3 knots. What was the point, one wonders? And yes, Jim, I know one set of the local Mac owners, who appear highly defensive of their craft even before anyone asks questions (!) and, with the Mac-bashing of this newsgroup to spur my interest, watched closely for some years the pattern of use and sailing of the local Mac26x'ers (all two of them, but numerous serial owners--a new one each year in one case). Alas for human frailty--I've found the newsgroup's cruel and harsh view of Macs to be borne out in local practice. -- Tim & Flying Tadpole ---------------------------------- The Light Schooner Website http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/index.htm SquareBoats! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sbhome.htm Bolger Boats netted! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Taddy, I agree with you 100%. But, they're still butt-ugly and
MacBoy is still dumber than a squirrel in the middle of the road. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Flying Tadpole" wrote in message ... 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*. 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? 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! 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. Perhaps the Mac26 owners have an aversion to beating their 26 foot boat through a 60ft wide slough, brushing the reeds on each turn, or working their way up a larger but busier channel, against a flow/tide, beacon to beacon. But it's a _learnt_ skill, and to do is to learn. Yet that huge motor sits, like some mind-control machine, saying "use me instead", and they do. The learning-to-sail never happens. Meet a schedule? yes, at times we all have to, but the big motor is an extreme. Yesterday, after 3 hours near-becalmed (1.2knots) I gave up with 10miles to go and fired up the (10hp) motor, then proceeded on at about 4knots (sails still up, giving me about 1knot and the motor working gently). And took great interest in watching a Mac26 two miles away, still in light breeze and moving at about 2knots, pull down all sail then use the giant motor to move at ... 3 knots. What was the point, one wonders? And yes, Jim, I know one set of the local Mac owners, who appear highly defensive of their craft even before anyone asks questions (!) and, with the Mac-bashing of this newsgroup to spur my interest, watched closely for some years the pattern of use and sailing of the local Mac26x'ers (all two of them, but numerous serial owners--a new one each year in one case). Alas for human frailty--I've found the newsgroup's cruel and harsh view of Macs to be borne out in local practice. -- Tim & Flying Tadpole ---------------------------------- The Light Schooner Website http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/index.htm SquareBoats! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sbhome.htm Bolger Boats netted! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
"Flying Tadpole" wrote in message ... 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*. -- Tim & Flying Tadpole ---------------------------------- The Light Schooner Website http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/index.htm SquareBoats! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sbhome.htm Bolger Boats netted! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm I have a problem with their looks. While Bolger designs might look ugly and boxy(not saying they do) they look like sailing vessels. The macs look too much like powerboats, especially the new ones. John Cairns |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
John Cairns wrote: "Flying Tadpole" wrote in message ... 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*. -- snip While Bolger designs might look ugly and boxy(not saying they do) they look like sailing vessels. What a diplomatic man you are, Mr Cairns! The macs look too much like powerboats, especially the new ones. The confined-to-cockpit-or-cabin layout of the 26m seems to me to be a real deterrent to forward on-deck movement at any time. Unfortunate, since the boat is conventionally rigged with a headsail providing most of the sail power. But after all, it does have those stylish two-story windows (for want of a more appropriate word). -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
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 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 |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
One thing that's really neat about a Bolger boat, you can make your own
half-hull model by simply cutting a shoe box in half and gluing to a wall. Scotty "DSK" wrote in message . .. 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 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 |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Scott Vernon wrote:
One thing that's really neat about a Bolger boat, you can make your own half-hull model by simply cutting a shoe box in half and gluing to a wall. Now that''s funny! |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Scott Vernon wrote:
One thing that's really neat about a Bolger boat, you can make your own half-hull model by simply cutting a shoe box in half and gluing to a wall. Would it be better to have a boat that you could make a model of by taking a shoe, instead of the box? DSK |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Scott Vernon wrote: One thing that's really neat about a Bolger boat, you can make your own half-hull model by simply cutting a shoe box in half and gluing to a wall. Wrong!!! A shoebox has insufficient rocker. -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 07:39:24 -0400, DSK wrote:
snip 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 Which reminds me of the following: "The most dangerous words in sailing are a lot of boat for the money.":) I'm not sure who originated this, but it strikes a chord of truthfulness with me. In fairness to Jim, though, if my dominant criteria for selecting a boat were the ability to motor swiftly in water less than 2' deep, well...I guess I would be depressed, but I still wouldn't pick a Mac. He should have just gone ahead and bought a pontoon motor boat with a grill on the back. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
"Flying Tadpole" wrote in message ... John Cairns wrote: "Flying Tadpole" wrote in message ... 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*. -- snip While Bolger designs might look ugly and boxy(not saying they do) they look like sailing vessels. What a diplomatic man you are, Mr Cairns! The macs look too much like powerboats, especially the new ones. The confined-to-cockpit-or-cabin layout of the 26m seems to me to be a real deterrent to forward on-deck movement at any time. Unfortunate, since the boat is conventionally rigged with a headsail providing most of the sail power. But after all, it does have those stylish two-story windows (for want of a more appropriate word). -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com Double windows are mac's crude attempt at eurostyling, which seems to be popular in new powerboats built over here. Hunter does the same thing with their small sailboats, all cabin and no deck. http://www.huntermarine.com/models/260/index.html Ironic, old "jim" could probably own something that can sail properly for close to what he's going to pay for a mac, and it seems to meet all of the other requirements, light weight, water ballast. John Cairns |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
I'd say it would still be recognizable -especiually if the backing board
were cheap ply covered in lots of epoxy. Cheers Flying Tadpole wrote: Scott Vernon wrote: One thing that's really neat about a Bolger boat, you can make your own half-hull model by simply cutting a shoe box in half and gluing to a wall. Wrong!!! A shoebox has insufficient rocker. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
It's alright Taddy, you don't need to justify your choice of boat. I
uderstand the compromises you live with. Cheers 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*. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Navigator wrote: It's alright Taddy, you don't need to justify your choice of boat. I uderstand the compromises you live with. Indeed, you're one of them. -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
I always thought those small (2-4 seater) Yamaha jet-drive boats looked like
fun, if one were into that sort of thing. Scotty, if I wanna go fast, I'll ride my motorcycle. "felton" wrote "The most dangerous words in sailing are a lot of boat for the money.":) I'm not sure who originated this, but it strikes a chord of truthfulness with me. In fairness to Jim, though, if my dominant criteria for selecting a boat were the ability to motor swiftly in water less than 2' deep, well...I guess I would be depressed, but I still wouldn't pick a Mac. He should have just gone ahead and bought a pontoon motor boat with a grill on the back. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
"jlrogers" wrote in message om... Scott Vernon wrote: One thing that's really neat about a Bolger boat, you can make your own half-hull model by simply cutting a shoe box in half and gluing to a wall. Now that''s funny! and practical. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
I'm not a compromise -I'm not Australian.
Cheers Flying Tadpole wrote: Navigator wrote: It's alright Taddy, you don't need to justify your choice of boat. I uderstand the compromises you live with. Indeed, you're one of them. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
:o
"Navigator" wrote ... I'm not a criminal -I'm not Australian. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
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 |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
felton wrote: On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 07:39:24 -0400, DSK wrote: snip 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 Which reminds me of the following: "The most dangerous words in sailing are a lot of boat for the money.":) I'm not sure who originated this, but it strikes a chord of truthfulness with me. In fairness to Jim, though, if my dominant criteria for selecting a boat were the ability to motor swiftly in water less than 2' deep, well...I guess I would be depressed, but I still wouldn't pick a Mac. He should have just gone ahead and bought a pontoon motor boat with a grill on the back. You have it bass-ass backwards. The Mac 26M has the ability to quickly motor out to the best sailing waters. The motor is a means of getting better sailing in an afternoon,or a weekend, rather than a week. Jim |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Can it sail? - Yes. Will it be sailed? - Yes. Jim |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Is that some kind of fish or just the part of the fish you prefer??
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... You have it bass-ass backwards. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Liar. Prove it.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Can it sail? - Yes. Will it be sailed? - Yes. Jim |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Ah well, we can't _all_be hobbits, you know...
Navigator wrote: I'm not a compromise -I'm not Australian. Cheers Flying Tadpole wrote: Navigator wrote: It's alright Taddy, you don't need to justify your choice of boat. I uderstand the compromises you live with. Indeed, you're one of them. -- Tim & Flying Tadpole ---------------------------------- The Light Schooner Website http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/index.htm SquareBoats! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sbhome.htm Bolger Boats netted! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
MC commiserated: It's alright Taddy, you don't need to justify your choice
of boat. I uderstand the compromises you live with But we love you anyway.... -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Scotty wondered:
I always thought those small (2-4 seater) Yamaha jet-drive boats looked like fun, if one were into that sort of thing. A couple of people at our former marina have them. They are fun...lots of fun....when you're not sailing and have extra money to blow on all the gas... -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Jim said:
You have it bass-ass backwards. Jim, I hate to chide you on yet one more thing, but if you're going to use the expression, use it correctly: It is "bass ackwards"... -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Jonathan Ganz wrote: Liar. Prove it. Joe has challenged me to a race on Galveston Bay. He will be sailing his ultra fast steel-hulled vessel, Red Cloud. The plan is for us to race a prescribed course on the bay, and for him to take pictures of the Mac 26M under sail which he will post to the ng along with his report on the race. Also, he wants to do some water-skiing behind the Mac under power. I'll show Joe the purchase order for my boat verifying that I placed the order on March 25. - We should be able to schedule this event sometime in May. The loser of the race will pay the tab for a steak dinner and bottle of Bordeaux to be shared with the winner at one of the nicer waterfront restaurants in the Kemah area. So, you'll get your "proof" in a few weeks. (Are you prepared to admit you were wrong, John?) Jim |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Here's a helpfull tip, so you won't get lost, jim; follow the trail of
rust. Scotty "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Jonathan Ganz wrote: Liar. Prove it. Joe has challenged me to a race on Galveston Bay. He will be sailing his ultra fast steel-hulled vessel, Red Cloud. The plan is for us to race a prescribed course on the bay, and for him to take pictures of the Mac 26M under sail which he will post to the ng along with his report on the race. Also, he wants to do some water-skiing behind the Mac under power. I'll show Joe the purchase order for my boat verifying that I placed the order on March 25. - We should be able to schedule this event sometime in May. The loser of the race will pay the tab for a steak dinner and bottle of Bordeaux to be shared with the winner at one of the nicer waterfront restaurants in the Kemah area. So, you'll get your "proof" in a few weeks. (Are you prepared to admit you were wrong, John?) Jim |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Jim Cate wrote:
Joe has challenged me to a race on Galveston Bay. He will be sailing his ultra fast steel-hulled vessel, Red Cloud. There's a thing - what's your 26M going to be called? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk/music |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 22:58:22 -0500, Jim Cate wrote:
felton wrote: I'm not sure who originated this, but it strikes a chord of truthfulness with me. In fairness to Jim, though, if my dominant criteria for selecting a boat were the ability to motor swiftly in water less than 2' deep, well...I guess I would be depressed, but I still wouldn't pick a Mac. He should have just gone ahead and bought a pontoon motor boat with a grill on the back. You have it bass-ass backwards. The Mac 26M has the ability to quickly motor out to the best sailing waters. The motor is a means of getting better sailing in an afternoon,or a weekend, rather than a week. Jim You are obviously unconcerned with the poor sailing characteristics, the "build quality" and the aesthetics of the boat. You seem entranced by the "advantages" of the Mac 26MX, as you perceive them. Suffice it to say that the vast majority of sailors, as evidenced by this newsgroup, don't share your priorities. A sailor would rather sail than motor. There is nothing quite like sailing a well tuned boat to weather with the helm balanced and the sails well trimmed. That is something that can't be experienced on a Mac 26MX. If you are in a hurry to get somewhere, then sailing is probably a poor choice of transportation. If you want to "sail", then a Mac 26MX is a poor choice of a boat. Don't get your feelings hurt. People around here just don't share your views. The same would probably be true if someone dropped in extolling the advantages of Cigarette boats or jetskis. By and large this is a group of sailors who appreciate sailing. Unfortunately for you, the Mac 26M(X) is pretty much universally agreed upon as being the low water mark in the sailboat world. I think there might be a few Lancers and Buccaneers that would compete for the title but they mercifully went out of business, leaving few current alternatives for the naive and uninformed. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
"Wally" wrote in message | There's a thing - what's your 26M going to be called? Butter Cup??? CM |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
MacBoy, I don't believe a word of it. Until I see proof, you're
a liar. After I see proof, I'll reconsider. I doubt that'll have to happen. Why don't you just take a picture of it now and call me a liar? Use a simple photo editing tool to blank out the address or whatever. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Jonathan Ganz wrote: Liar. Prove it. Joe has challenged me to a race on Galveston Bay. He will be sailing his ultra fast steel-hulled vessel, Red Cloud. The plan is for us to race a prescribed course on the bay, and for him to take pictures of the Mac 26M under sail which he will post to the ng along with his report on the race. Also, he wants to do some water-skiing behind the Mac under power. I'll show Joe the purchase order for my boat verifying that I placed the order on March 25. - We should be able to schedule this event sometime in May. The loser of the race will pay the tab for a steak dinner and bottle of Bordeaux to be shared with the winner at one of the nicer waterfront restaurants in the Kemah area. So, you'll get your "proof" in a few weeks. (Are you prepared to admit you were wrong, John?) Jim |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
I'll show Joe the purchase order for my boat verifying that I
placed the order on March 25. - We should be able to schedule this event sometime in May. Jim, good luck with the 26M. I hope it works out for you and meets and even exceeds your expectations. While some people here continue to troll, others will be interested to hear how such an odd vessel performs from an actual owner. RB |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Gag Me with a fork...... Bob, I've seen you rip prospective Mac buyers and
destroy current Mac owners on this group for years. You were much worse in your attacks than anyone here to date! I just hate it when the "reformed" begin to preach to the masses. What hypocrisy! At least we are being honest in our opinion of the Mac26..... CM "Bobsprit" wrote in message ... | I'll show Joe the purchase order for my boat verifying that I | placed the order on March 25. - We should be able to schedule this event | sometime in May. | | Jim, good luck with the 26M. I hope it works out for you and meets and even | exceeds your expectations. While some people here continue to troll, others | will be interested to hear how such an odd vessel performs from an actual | owner. | | RB |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
The hobbit is the hero! Shame about the orcs though. Bit like occers
being misled by Sauron Bush. Cheers Flying Tadpole wrote: Ah well, we can't _all_be hobbits, you know... Navigator wrote: I'm not a compromise -I'm not Australian. Cheers Flying Tadpole wrote: Navigator wrote: It's alright Taddy, you don't need to justify your choice of boat. I uderstand the compromises you live with. Indeed, you're one of them. |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Of course we do. He just needs a kick to keep the tyres inflated.
Cheers katysails wrote: MC commiserated: It's alright Taddy, you don't need to justify your choice of boat. I uderstand the compromises you live with But we love you anyway.... |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Gag Me with a fork...... Bob, I've seen you rip prospective Mac buyers and
destroy current Mac owners on this group for years. You were much worse in your attacks than anyone here to date! I've spoken to Jim off-group and he made his decision on the Mac based on his specific requirements. He appears to understand what the limits are and certainly knows he'll lose out when he sells. It's his money. The rest was just a world class beating that he administered to all of you. The hooks were well baited and you gorged yourselves, especially Ganz, who really got played..Do you expect me to do the same thing? Nope. RB |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
A beating he gave us? A what prize did he win?
"Bobsprit" wrote in message ... Gag Me with a fork...... Bob, I've seen you rip prospective Mac buyers and destroy current Mac owners on this group for years. You were much worse in your attacks than anyone here to date! I've spoken to Jim off-group and he made his decision on the Mac based on his specific requirements. He appears to understand what the limits are and certainly knows he'll lose out when he sells. It's his money. The rest was just a world class beating that he administered to all of you. The hooks were well baited and you gorged yourselves, especially Ganz, who really got played..Do you expect me to do the same thing? Nope. RB |
Ignore the aesthetics, can it sail, and...WILL it be sailed?
Bobsprit wrote: I've spoken to Jim off-group and he made his decision on the Mac based on his specific requirements. He appears to understand what the limits are and certainly knows he'll lose out when he sells. It's his money. The rest was just a world class beating that he administered to all of you. The hooks were well baited and you gorged yourselves, especially Ganz, who really got played..Do you expect me to do the same thing? Nope. So my original unworthy suspicions that it was Bobsprit trolling were totally unfounded, silly me. Instead, it was Bobsprit coaching Jim the Deafer in expert trolling? I'll look for a faux plastic trophy for Bobsprit to add to his collection. (Always good to see a world-class player, retired from actual competition due to infirmity, still making a weighty contribution from the bench.) -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:15 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com