Google proves MacGregor 26 is flimsy
 

Jeff, when the shaved-headed religious cultists come to your
door, do you argue with them too?


JimC wrote:
Jeff, further to my comment above, note, in Figures 4 and 5, that the
cross-hatched elements near the bottom of the hull (the ones you
interpreted as being part of the ballast tank) are of identical
configuration in both FIGS. 4 and 5, further demonstrating that they
are actually linear conduits or passageways rather than part of the
ballast tank itself.


????


Jeff wrote
.... Go back to my
comments, this is about mass in the extremities which increase the
moment of inertia.


Well, JimC pretty much admitted that the ballast was placed
in such a way as to "balance" a load of people in the
cockpit (far aft) and the large heavy motor (even further aft).

I don't think he understands the issue of weight in the ends
increasing the moment of inertia at all.


JimC wrote:
Jeff, you criticise me for making ad hominem attacks, etc. Actually,
my friends and colleagues consider me a courteous, laid-back, amicable
kind of guy willing to listen patiently to all sides of a discussion.


Except when the discussion revolves around whether or not
the Mac26-M is a WONDERFULLY PERFECT HIGH PERFORMANCE
sailboat or whether such claims are, shale we say, just a
bit exaggerated.



Jeff wrote
I'm sure you're one helluva guy. Did I ever mention that my closest
sailing buddy had, as his first boat, a Venture 22? (Its a period he
doesn't like to talk about!)


Why? The Venture 22 is an OK boat. Now, if he'd had a
Venture of Newport, that would be different ;)




- I would be happy to minimize the ad hominems and to treat you and
other Mac-Bashers with all the respect and deference you deserve,


Well there you go.

According to you and the other cultists, anybody who doesn't
actknowledge the INCREDIBLE PERFECTION and the BLAZING SPEED
of the Mac26-M is bashing it.


Jeff wrote
I really don't know why you consider me a "mac basher," all I've tried
to do is honestly consider the attributes of the boat.

-snicker-


In fact, my
involvement in this thread only started with a consideration of how
water ballast affects stability.

Actually, water ballast isn't a problem. The overall design
of the boat has to be appropriate though.

I sailed a water-ballasted boat for years and was quite
happy with it. I didn't try to claim that it was wonderful &
perfect & faster than everything else.

DSK

!!
 

Maxprop wrote:
"CJH" wrote in message
...

Jeff wrote:

Scotty wrote:

"Jeff" wrote

Everyone reading this knows I'm right and that just
makes you look like an asshole in addition to being an

idiot.


We knew that before, but thanks for reinforcing it.

I nominate Scotty as an impartial mediator in this dispute.


Note to self: NEVER, upon pain of death, ask another question about a
Macgregor! Such controversial subjects cause neurological damage and an
utter lack of civility.


Nah. Everyone here, including yours truly, has been brain-damaged/dead for
years. You can thank Capt. Neal and Bubbles for that. As for the utter
lack of civility, what do you expect from sockpuppets?

Max


I'm not a socpuppet..and I don't care for MacGregor's...why can only
sickpuppets hate them? I think it should be an equal opportunity event...

!!
 

"CJH" wrote
Note to self: NEVER, upon pain of death, ask another question about
a Macgregor! Such controversial subjects cause neurological damage
and an utter lack of civility.


Who, us?!?


Maxprop wrote:
Nah. Everyone here, including yours truly, has been
brain-damaged/dead for years. You can thank Capt. Neal and Bubbles
for that.

Speak for yourself.
My conduct is a very model of rationality.


As for the utter lack of civility, what do you expect from
sockpuppets?


katysails wrote:
I'm not a socpuppet..and I don't care for MacGregor's...why can only
sickpuppets hate them? I think it should be an equal opportunity event...

Why hate MacGregors... or Ventures?
They're the Wal-Mart of boats. Not all that good, but hey
they're cheap & readily available.

Fresh Breezes- Doug "not a sockpuppet, either" King

Google proves MacGregor 26 is flimsy
 

DSK wrote:
Jeff, when the shaved-headed religious cultists come to your door, do
you argue with them too?


I sortof enjoy arguing with the like of RB and Jax to the extent that
I get to exercise the techie skills that have been dormant since
retiring. But Jim hasn't been much of a challenge.



.... Go back to my comments, this is about mass in the extremities
which increase the moment of inertia.


Well, JimC pretty much admitted that the ballast was placed in such a
way as to "balance" a load of people in the cockpit (far aft) and the
large heavy motor (even further aft).

I don't think he understands the issue of weight in the ends increasing
the moment of inertia at all.

No he doesn't. And I'm sure the mention of "metacentric height" just
blew right past him.



I'm sure you're one helluva guy. Did I ever mention that my closest
sailing buddy had, as his first boat, a Venture 22? (Its a period he
doesn't like to talk about!)


Why? The Venture 22 is an OK boat. Now, if he'd had a Venture of
Newport, that would be different ;)

I'll have to ask him which model it was. He was already trying to
live it down when I met him in '73.

....

Jeff wrote
I really don't know why you consider me a "mac basher," all I've tried
to do is honestly consider the attributes of the boat.

-snicker-

no - really - honest



In fact, my involvement in this thread only started with a
consideration of how water ballast affects stability.

Actually, water ballast isn't a problem. The overall design of the boat
has to be appropriate though.

Actually, given the design goals of the boat, I think the 26X/M is
pretty successful. I think that buyers are often naive about their
own needs. For instance, why have water ballast and then leave the
boat in the water all summer? And the water ballast has little to do
with the large engine/high speed powering, so why don't we see other
sailboats with this attribute?


I sailed a water-ballasted boat for years and was quite happy with it. I
didn't try to claim that it was wonderful & perfect & faster than
everything else.


Did your's have a weighted keel?

Google proves MacGregor 26 is flimsy
 

Jeff, when the shaved-headed religious cultists come to your door, do
you argue with them too?


Jeff wrote:
I sortof enjoy arguing with the like of RB and Jax to the extent that I
get to exercise the techie skills that have been dormant since
retiring. But Jim hasn't been much of a challenge.


Neither was Bubbles.

I thought Jax was really funny, most of the time. I wondered
if he was a cleverly-played sockpuppet, or an AI program.
But there's evidence that he was/is a real person.




.... Go back to my comments, this is about mass in the extremities
which increase the moment of inertia.


Well, JimC pretty much admitted that the ballast was placed in such a
way as to "balance" a load of people in the cockpit (far aft) and the
large heavy motor (even further aft).

I don't think he understands the issue of weight in the ends
increasing the moment of inertia at all.


No he doesn't. And I'm sure the mention of "metacentric height" just
blew right past him.


Doesn't really matter, as long he is really happy with the
way his boat sails.

I suspect that, like a lot MacGregor 26X and -M buyers, he
isn't really all that happy with the boat... so he tells
himself all this stuff about how great it is, and gets
offended when anybody "bashes" his wonderful boat.



.... The Venture 22 is an OK boat. Now, if he'd had a Venture of
Newport, that would be different ;)


I'll have to ask him which model it was. He was already trying to live
it down when I met him in '73.


I don't get it. I know a lot of people who have either
started in Ventures, or maybe still have them (or downsized
to one) and are quite happy. The Venture 21 is actually a
pretty nice sailing boat... not very roomy, but especially
considering it's age, it's a mini-sled. The V-22 wasn't a
bad boat at all.

OK, it's not a Hinckley. Unlike the Mac26X/M it was never
claimed to be some kind of incredibly superior do-everything
boat.



Actually, water ballast isn't a problem. The overall design of the
boat has to be appropriate though.


Actually, given the design goals of the boat, I think the 26X/M is
pretty successful. I think that buyers are often naive about their own
needs.

Of course. They can't decide if they want a sailboat or a
motorboat, and are too dumb to realize that for the same
money, they could get both. It's a success in the same way
that "diet soda" is a success.




I sailed a water-ballasted boat for years and was quite happy with it.
I didn't try to claim that it was wonderful & perfect & faster than
everything else.


Did your's have a weighted keel?


Yes, but just barely enough that it would sink when you
released the pennant. The centerboard did not form any
meaningful percentage of the ballast.

FWIW that boat (1994 model Hunter 19) sailed rings around
the Mac 26X in all conditions.... we did so many times while
sailing in company with the ones in our sailing club. And I
have a great deal of confidence it would also sail rings
around the new -M model. It was a practical and fun little boat.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

!!
 

"katy" wrote in message
...
Maxprop wrote:
"CJH" wrote in message
...

Jeff wrote:

Scotty wrote:

"Jeff" wrote

Everyone reading this knows I'm right and that just
makes you look like an asshole in addition to being an

idiot.


We knew that before, but thanks for reinforcing it.

I nominate Scotty as an impartial mediator in this dispute.


Note to self: NEVER, upon pain of death, ask another question about a
Macgregor! Such controversial subjects cause neurological damage and an
utter lack of civility.


Nah. Everyone here, including yours truly, has been brain-damaged/dead
for years. You can thank Capt. Neal and Bubbles for that. As for the
utter lack of civility, what do you expect from sockpuppets?

Max
I'm not a socpuppet..and I don't care for MacGregor's...why can only
sickpuppets hate them? I think it should be an equal opportunity event...

I know you're not a "sickpuppet" (sic) but you weren't uncivil, either.

Max

!!
 

"DSK" wrote in message
...
"CJH" wrote
Note to self: NEVER, upon pain of death, ask another question about a
Macgregor! Such controversial subjects cause neurological damage and
an utter lack of civility.


Who, us?!?


Maxprop wrote:
Nah. Everyone here, including yours truly, has been brain-damaged/dead
for years. You can thank Capt. Neal and Bubbles for that.

Speak for yourself.
My conduct is a very model of rationality.

Most of the time, yes. Then occasionally you become completely irrational
while accosting "right-wing fascists."

As for the utter lack of civility, what do you expect from sockpuppets?


katysails wrote:
I'm not a socpuppet..and I don't care for MacGregor's...why can only
sickpuppets hate them? I think it should be an equal opportunity
event...

Why hate MacGregors... or Ventures?
They're the Wal-Mart of boats. Not all that good, but hey they're cheap &
readily available.

One can generally obtain an aging, but well-cared for Catalina or Hunter for
the same money. Better value, and you don't have to be ashamed to sail one.

Max

!!
 

DSK wrote:
"CJH" wrote

Note to self: NEVER, upon pain of death, ask another question about
a Macgregor! Such controversial subjects cause neurological damage
and an utter lack of civility.



Who, us?!?


Maxprop wrote:

Nah. Everyone here, including yours truly, has been
brain-damaged/dead for years. You can thank Capt. Neal and Bubbles
for that.


Speak for yourself.
My conduct is a very model of rationality.


As for the utter lack of civility, what do you expect from sockpuppets?



katysails wrote:

I'm not a socpuppet..and I don't care for MacGregor's...why can only
sickpuppets hate them? I think it should be an equal opportunity
event...


Why hate MacGregors... or Ventures?
They're the Wal-Mart of boats. Not all that good, but hey they're cheap
& readily available.

Fresh Breezes- Doug "not a sockpuppet, either" King

I should qualify that...I only include the Mac 26 lines....Ventures and
the little daysailor MacGregor's are ok learning boats...

!!
 

Maxprop wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Maxprop wrote:

"CJH" wrote in message
...


Jeff wrote:


Scotty wrote:


"Jeff" wrote


Everyone reading this knows I'm right and that just
makes you look like an asshole in addition to being an

idiot.


We knew that before, but thanks for reinforcing it.

I nominate Scotty as an impartial mediator in this dispute.


Note to self: NEVER, upon pain of death, ask another question about a
Macgregor! Such controversial subjects cause neurological damage and an
utter lack of civility.


Nah. Everyone here, including yours truly, has been brain-damaged/dead
for years. You can thank Capt. Neal and Bubbles for that. As for the
utter lack of civility, what do you expect from sockpuppets?

Max

I'm not a socpuppet..and I don't care for MacGregor's...why can only
sickpuppets hate them? I think it should be an equal opportunity event...


I know you're not a "sickpuppet" (sic) but you weren't uncivil, either.

Max


hic

!!
 

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...
Why hate MacGregors... or Ventures?
They're the Wal-Mart of boats. Not all that good, but
hey they're cheap &
readily available.

One can generally obtain an aging, but well-cared for
Catalina or Hunter for
the same money. Better value, and you don't have to be
ashamed to sail one.


a new 26 x is around $30k, there are lots of used, but nicer
*real* boats for that kind of cash.

SBV