Capt. JG wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
...

Actually, Neal, that would have been a good choice. To cite just one
factor, if Joe had been sailing a Mac26M, with its positive floatation,
the boat would have survived and wouldn't have been dragged to the bottom
by its keel. And of course, if you had a Mac (instead of your
no-boat-at-all), you could spend more time sailing and less time posting
childish, vacuous notes on this ng. But of course, you didn't make a
decision to get a Mac or a decision to get anything else for that matter,
so we can look forward to more of your never-ending sophistry.

Jim



Neal is an idiot, but besides that, if you were on your Mac in the
conditions Joe described, you would surely be a greater idiot than Neal
(even he isn't suicidal).

Assuming the boat can't sink (which I seriously doubt - given the pounding
it would endure, it would likely break up),


--- Any evidence or proof to back up that statement Capt? No?


it would be dismasted for sure.

Any evidence or proof to support that assertion Capt?.... No?

Then, (not that sailing would have ever been an option), your only chance
for survival would be below decks, while the boat rolled over and over and
over, perhaps even pitchpolling from time to time.

Any evidence or proof to back up that particular assertion Capt? ....No?


It would be like being in
a washing machine with heavy and sharp objects. You'd find yourself in a
non-habitable environment of flying hazards including yourself that would
break your bones into mush.

LOL.

In desperation to escape, you would vacate the
premises, and then either be thrown off the boat by the wave action or you
would remove yourself from the boat deliberately.


That's fascinating piece of fiction Capt. - Have you considered writing
a novel?

Either way, you wouldn't
survive.


Great fiction Capt. Too bad you have no evidence or proof whatsoever to
support it.

Jim

"JimC" wrote in message
...


Capt. JG wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
...

Actually, Neal, that would have been a good choice. To cite just one
factor, if Joe had been sailing a Mac26M, with its positive floatation,
the boat would have survived and wouldn't have been dragged to the bottom
by its keel. And of course, if you had a Mac (instead of your
no-boat-at-all), you could spend more time sailing and less time posting
childish, vacuous notes on this ng. But of course, you didn't make a
decision to get a Mac or a decision to get anything else for that matter,
so we can look forward to more of your never-ending sophistry.

Jim



Neal is an idiot, but besides that, if you were on your Mac in the
conditions Joe described, you would surely be a greater idiot than Neal
(even he isn't suicidal).

Assuming the boat can't sink (which I seriously doubt - given the
pounding it would endure, it would likely break up),


--- Any evidence or proof to back up that statement Capt? No?


it would be dismasted for sure.

Any evidence or proof to support that assertion Capt?.... No?

Then, (not that sailing would have ever been an option), your only chance
for survival would be below decks, while the boat rolled over and over
and over, perhaps even pitchpolling from time to time.

Any evidence or proof to back up that particular assertion Capt? ....No?


It would be like being in
a washing machine with heavy and sharp objects. You'd find yourself in a
non-habitable environment of flying hazards including yourself that would
break your bones into mush.

LOL.

In desperation to escape, you would vacate the
premises, and then either be thrown off the boat by the wave action or
you would remove yourself from the boat deliberately.


That's fascinating piece of fiction Capt. - Have you considered writing a
novel?

Either way, you wouldn't
survive.


Great fiction Capt. Too bad you have no evidence or proof whatsoever to
support it.

Jim

Ganz is a closed-minded fool. You can't expect his like to act rationally.
His mind is made up so don't confuse him with the facts.

Macgregor 26s are great little boats. Thousands of people get a whole lot of
enjoyment out of them and I've not heard about one single solitary
foundering to date. And with thousands of Macs out there on the water a
sinking would be a daily event if Jon Boy was right.

--
Gregory Hall

Gregory Hall wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
...


Capt. JG wrote:


"JimC" wrote in message
.. .


Actually, Neal, that would have been a good choice. To cite just one
factor, if Joe had been sailing a Mac26M, with its positive floatation,
the boat would have survived and wouldn't have been dragged to the bottom
by its keel. And of course, if you had a Mac (instead of your
no-boat-at-all), you could spend more time sailing and less time posting
childish, vacuous notes on this ng. But of course, you didn't make a
decision to get a Mac or a decision to get anything else for that matter,
so we can look forward to more of your never-ending sophistry.

Jim



Neal is an idiot, but besides that, if you were on your Mac in the
conditions Joe described, you would surely be a greater idiot than Neal
(even he isn't suicidal).

Assuming the boat can't sink (which I seriously doubt - given the
pounding it would endure, it would likely break up),


--- Any evidence or proof to back up that statement Capt? No?


it would be dismasted for sure.

Any evidence or proof to support that assertion Capt?.... No?


Then, (not that sailing would have ever been an option), your only chance
for survival would be below decks, while the boat rolled over and over
and over, perhaps even pitchpolling from time to time.

Any evidence or proof to back up that particular assertion Capt? ....No?


It would be like being in

a washing machine with heavy and sharp objects. You'd find yourself in a
non-habitable environment of flying hazards including yourself that would
break your bones into mush.

LOL.

In desperation to escape, you would vacate the

premises, and then either be thrown off the boat by the wave action or
you would remove yourself from the boat deliberately.


That's fascinating piece of fiction Capt. - Have you considered writing a
novel?

Either way, you wouldn't

survive.


Great fiction Capt. Too bad you have no evidence or proof whatsoever to
support it.

Jim


Ganz is a closed-minded fool. You can't expect his like to act rationally.
His mind is made up so don't confuse him with the facts.

Macgregor 26s are great little boats. Thousands of people get a whole lot of
enjoyment out of them and I've not heard about one single solitary
foundering to date. And with thousands of Macs out there on the water a
sinking would be a daily event if Jon Boy was right.

--
Gregory Hall


Out of curiosity, I asked the MacGregor discussion group whether anyone
had heard of a Mac 26 breaking up and/or sinking in heavy seas. (Many of
the Mac owners have taken their boats offshore.) No one had heard of any
such incidence. As you say, there are thousands out there, all over the
world and in all types of conditions.

I enjoy sailing the Mac26M, but I am aware that larger, heavier boats
have certain advantages and are more comfortable. (I sailed a number of
larger boats, including Valiants, O'Days, Beneteaux, Catalinas,
Ericksons, Endeavors, and Cals in the 30 ft to 40 ft range, before I
bought the Mac.) The Macs are fun to sail and have advantages of their
own, provided you aren't racing or trying to transport coffee from
Belize to Galveston.

Jim

"JimC" wrote in message
...

Out of curiosity, I asked the MacGregor discussion group whether anyone
had heard of a Mac 26 breaking up and/or sinking in heavy seas. (Many of
the Mac owners have taken their boats offshore.) No one had heard of any
such incidence. As you say, there are thousands out there, all over the
world and in all types of conditions.

I enjoy sailing the Mac26M, but I am aware that larger, heavier boats have
certain advantages and are more comfortable. (I sailed a number of larger
boats, including Valiants, O'Days, Beneteaux, Catalinas, Ericksons,
Endeavors, and Cals in the 30 ft to 40 ft range, before I bought the Mac.)
The Macs are fun to sail and have advantages of their own, provided you
aren't racing or trying to transport coffee from Belize to Galveston.

Jim


You must be desperate. Now you're replying to a known liar and stalker.

Well, come on... what are the advantages of heavier boats? You claim they're
more comfortable. Is this just at the dock or perhaps it includes offshore.
Yes, it's a rhetorial question.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Capt. JG wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
...

Out of curiosity, I asked the MacGregor discussion group whether anyone
had heard of a Mac 26 breaking up and/or sinking in heavy seas. (Many of
the Mac owners have taken their boats offshore.) No one had heard of any
such incidence. As you say, there are thousands out there, all over the
world and in all types of conditions.

I enjoy sailing the Mac26M, but I am aware that larger, heavier boats have
certain advantages and are more comfortable. (I sailed a number of larger
boats, including Valiants, O'Days, Beneteaux, Catalinas, Ericksons,
Endeavors, and Cals in the 30 ft to 40 ft range, before I bought the Mac.)
The Macs are fun to sail and have advantages of their own, provided you
aren't racing or trying to transport coffee from Belize to Galveston.

Jim



You must be desperate. Now you're replying to a known liar and stalker.

Well, come on... what are the advantages of heavier boats? You claim they're
more comfortable. Is this just at the dock or perhaps it includes offshore.
Yes, it's a rhetorial question.


I've discussed those advantages many times in prior discussions, Ganz,
but you apparently prefer to forget such comments and stick with your
caricatures (what you like to consider as inexperienced, naive Mac
owners). - In answer to your "rhetorial" question, larger, conventional
keeled sailboats are heavier and usually more comfortable in heavy
weather; they can be faster under sail, due to their longer water lines;
and they have greater storage capacity suitable for provisioning for
extended crossings. With a deep keel, they can normally point higher.
And there's usually more room on their deck for sexy girls to see and be
seen. Also, don't forget that if the skipper has inferiority problems,
they can be a good ego booster.

Jim

"JimC" wrote in message
...

Well, come on... what are the advantages of heavier boats? You claim
they're more comfortable. Is this just at the dock or perhaps it includes
offshore. Yes, it's a rhetorial question.


I've discussed those advantages many times in prior discussions, Ganz, but
you apparently prefer to forget such comments and stick with your
caricatures (what you like to consider as inexperienced, naive Mac
owners). - In answer to your "rhetorial" question, larger, conventional
keeled sailboats are heavier and usually more comfortable in heavy
weather; they can be faster under sail, due to their longer water lines;
and they have greater storage capacity suitable for provisioning for
extended crossings. With a deep keel, they can normally point higher. And
there's usually more room on their deck for sexy girls to see and be seen.
Also, don't forget that if the skipper has inferiority problems, they can
be a good ego booster.

Jim


Yep. I like the answer. Now, take a look at your Mac. What do you see?
(answer: none of the above) LOL

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Capt. JG wrote:
"JimC" wrote in message
...

Well, come on... what are the advantages of heavier boats? You claim
they're more comfortable. Is this just at the dock or perhaps it includes
offshore. Yes, it's a rhetorial question.


I've discussed those advantages many times in prior discussions, Ganz, but
you apparently prefer to forget such comments and stick with your
caricatures (what you like to consider as inexperienced, naive Mac
owners). - In answer to your "rhetorial" question, larger, conventional
keeled sailboats are heavier and usually more comfortable in heavy
weather; they can be faster under sail, due to their longer water lines;
and they have greater storage capacity suitable for provisioning for
extended crossings. With a deep keel, they can normally point higher. And
there's usually more room on their deck for sexy girls to see and be seen.
Also, don't forget that if the skipper has inferiority problems, they can
be a good ego booster.

Jim



Yep. I like the answer. Now, take a look at your Mac. What do you see?
(answer: none of the above) LOL



There are two Macs (a 25D and 26D) in my local racing circle that have
been to the Bahamas several times.

Does that count?


Richard

Capt. JG wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
...

Well, come on... what are the advantages of heavier boats? You claim
they're more comfortable. Is this just at the dock or perhaps it includes
offshore. Yes, it's a rhetorial question.


I've discussed those advantages many times in prior discussions, Ganz, but
you apparently prefer to forget such comments and stick with your
caricatures (what you like to consider as inexperienced, naive Mac
owners). - In answer to your "rhetorial" question, larger, conventional
keeled sailboats are heavier and usually more comfortable in heavy
weather; they can be faster under sail, due to their longer water lines;
and they have greater storage capacity suitable for provisioning for
extended crossings. With a deep keel, they can normally point higher. And
there's usually more room on their deck for sexy girls to see and be seen.
Also, don't forget that if the skipper has inferiority problems, they can
be a good ego booster.

Jim



Yep. I like the answer. Now, take a look at your Mac. What do you see?
(answer: none of the above) LOL



What do I see? Among other things, I see the following:

1) A boat that is not essentially limited to being sailed in the
immediate area. - The Mac26M can be quickly and easily transported by
the owner (with a pickup or SUV) in one weekend to waters hundreds of
miles from it's berth or storage area, thereby making available hundreds
of sailing areas that wouldn't be conveniently available with a larger,
keeled vessel. (Without having it hauled out of the water and hiring a
truck to transport the boat to a distant sailing area.) - Practically
speaking, most large, conventional keeled boats are limited to sailing
within a day or so of their marinas unless the owners are retired or
want to spend several weeks of vacation. (Of course, you can always
point to exceptions, but they ARE the exceptions, not the usual practice
for most owners, most of the time.)

2) A boat that doesn't have to be berthed in a marina. Thus, the storage
fees are substantially less than most marina fees, and ongoing lease and
maintenance fees can be substantially reduced. Or, if desired, I can
(and do) choose to keep it in a Marina, at a relatively modest fee
because of its size and limited draft.

3) A coastal cruiser that can be sailed in a variety of waters,
including offshore, with the understanding that it isn't recommended for
extended ocean crossings and isn't as comfortable in heavy weather. The
boat has plenty of ballast and plenty of righting forces. Also, it's
suitable for sailing and/or motoring in shallow or restricted waters
that aren't available to large, fixed keel vessels.

4} A boat that incorporates a number of safety features, including
positive floatation that will keep the boat afloat even if the hull is
compromised. The boat is also designed to accommodate a large outboard
which gives the skipper more options in the event of heavy weather,
e.g., for returning to port quickly.

5) A boat that, despite its relatively modest size, has substantial
cabin space and berths for five people, including a queen-size aft berth.

6) A boat that is small and light enough to permit easy handling and
docking by one person.

7) A boat that is priced substantially lower than conventional larger
boats (comparing new prices with new prices and used prices with used
prices, of course). This permits getting a fully equipped vessel (with
accessories such as autopilot, chart reader, roller reefing, 50-hp
motor, lines led aft, radio, stereo, etc., etc.), still within an
affordable total cost.

8) A boat that can be sailed or motored with or without the ballast, and
that can be trailord without the ballast, making it a substantially
lighter load when trailoring.

9) A boat that can have a 5.5 feet draft for sailing (with dagger-board
down) but that can be converted to one with only 1.5-ft draft in
shallow waters or waters with variable depth, or for anchoring in
shallow waters, or for bringing it up a ramp for trailoring, or for
simply bringing the boat ashore on a beach for a picnic or the like.
Or, the dagger board can be only partially retracted for increased speed
on a reach or a run, or completely retracted for motoring on a plane.

10) A sailboat that, unlike 90 percent of the boats discussed on this
ng, isn't limited to hull speed. With the (typical) 50-hp to 60-hp
outboard, the Mac 26M can be motored on a plane at two or three times
hull speed. While some on this ng have ridiculed this feature, it
offers a number of rather important advantages. - For example, the
skipper can get the boat out to a preferred sailing area substantially
sooner, PERMITTING MORE SAILING TIME in the desired area. Similarly, at
the end of the day, he can get the boat back more quickly, regardless of
wind direction, again PERMITTING MORE SAILING TIME (since he can stay
out later and still get the family home in time for dinner or other
activities). Practically speaking, it's also an advantage of the wife or
kids or guests are getting tired of sailing and want to get back ASAP.
This capability is also a safety factor, as mentioned above, in the
event the skipper wants to bring the boat in quickly to avoid heavy
weather, or move down the coast to avoid a squall, etc.

11) A boat that has clean lines and a modern, streamlined design. -
Admittedly, this is a matter of taste. - (I also like the looks of some
of the large conventional boats, particularly if they are long enough.)
But if we are comparing apples to apples, consider the looks of other
boats of 26-foot length. - For example, the smaller Island Packets look
something like a tug boat to me. All I know is that it looks good to me
and my guests. - Every time I see him, the owner of the boat in the next
slip compliments me on what a good-looking boat it is. Again, I
ALREADY STATED THAT THIS IS A MATTER OF PERSONAL TASTE, DIDN'T I? So
there's really no need to tell me that you don't like the Mac, and
prefer something else. - More power to you.

12) Finally, I see a boat that is FUN TO SAIL! On my Mac 26M, when I get
to the sailing area, raise the sails, turn off the motor, and sense the
boat moving under sail, it's an amazing, almost magical experience. In
contrast to some of the heavier, conventional boats that I have sailed,
the Mac is sufficiently light that it gives you a 'kick in the pants' as
it accelerates under sail. Although larger boats are steadier, and more
comfortable in choppy waters (sort of like a large, heavy Lincoln Town
Car or equivalent) the Macs are responsive enough to give you more of a
feel of the changing conditions (sort of like the feel of a sports car,
such as a Porsche (a car that is fun to drive but not quite as smooth or
comfortable on long trips as the Lincoln). Also, in moderate conditions,
I sometimes like to set the boat on autopilot and sit on the deck
watching the boat gliding silently through the water. - Again, it's an
ethereal, almost magical experience.

- - - Does that answer your question Ganz? - Or do you want a few more?

Jim

JimC wrote:

Out of curiosity, I asked the MacGregor discussion group whether anyone
had heard of a Mac 26 breaking up and/or sinking in heavy seas. (Many of
the Mac owners have taken their boats offshore.) No one had heard of any
such incidence. As you say, there are thousands out there, all over the
world and in all types of conditions.


Really? I'd love to see an account of a Mac 26X/M doing a real offshore
passage. I don't doubt that there have been a few, but most of the
comments I see are more like "I take my Mac out on the open ocean and it
does quite well, especially since I can power in before it get too
rough. But I wouldn't want to do a real ocean crossing." The fact that
Macs are taken out in the open ocean, such as a crossing to Catalina (or
Boston to P'town, or even crossing to the Bahamas) does not mean they
have been "offshore."

I'm a fair weather cruiser with little ambition to do long passages, but
every year or two I get "caught out" in 30-40 knots, or maybe 8-10 foot
seas. My boat handles this with no problem, and these conditions should
be survivable by a Mac, assuming a competent skipper. But when you say
"offshore" you're implying the possibility of much worse conditions, 50+
knots, large breaking seas, and storms lasting several days. I'm just a
bit skeptical that Macs have endured such conditions on many occasions.

jeff wrote:
JimC wrote:

Out of curiosity, I asked the MacGregor discussion group whether
anyone had heard of a Mac 26 breaking up and/or sinking in heavy seas.
(Many of the Mac owners have taken their boats offshore.) No one had
heard of any such incidence. As you say, there are thousands out
there, all over the world and in all types of conditions.


Really? I'd love to see an account of a Mac 26X/M doing a real offshore
passage. I don't doubt that there have been a few, but most of the
comments I see are more like "I take my Mac out on the open ocean and it
does quite well, especially since I can power in before it get too
rough. But I wouldn't want to do a real ocean crossing." The fact that
Macs are taken out in the open ocean, such as a crossing to Catalina (or
Boston to P'town, or even crossing to the Bahamas) does not mean they
have been "offshore."

I'm a fair weather cruiser with little ambition to do long passages, but
every year or two I get "caught out" in 30-40 knots, or maybe 8-10 foot
seas. My boat handles this with no problem, and these conditions should
be survivable by a Mac, assuming a competent skipper. But when you say
"offshore" you're implying the possibility of much worse conditions, 50+
knots, large breaking seas, and storms lasting several days. I'm just a
bit skeptical that Macs have endured such conditions on many occasions.

Puhleeze....

Mac 26X/M are unsafe in the presence of air. A long passage for a Mac
should be from one end of the marina lot to the other.

No competent skipper would consider taking a Mac 26X/M on a long passage.