Like many ppl who own "Real" sailboats, I have long considered the Mac
26 to be a toy sold to gullible first time buyers but may be changing
my mind. Currently I own a 28' S2 and all of my sailing is coastal
cruising. When I really analyse my sailing needs, the Mac 26 comes
close to filling them.

Consider:

1. I think that in Florida having extreme shoal draft capability is a
real safety issue because so much of the state is seriously shallow.
From Carabelle, Fl to Tarpon Springs, there are not many places where
one can get close (within a half mile)to shore with more than 5' of
water. When cruising, most of my dangerous incidents happened either
while anchored or trying to reach a safe anchorage. With extreme
shoal draft ability, the number of anchorages would easily quadruple.
When a 70 knot thunderstorm sweeps an anchorage, deep draft boats
anchored in deeper water tend to drag while a Mac 26 in shallow water
protected by shore or even beached would be safer.

2. Shoal draft ability greatly enhances ones ability to see
interesting places both in Florida and in the Bahamas. Most of the
places I want to see are in shallow water. The Mac 26 has less than
2' draft with board up.

3. Face it, sailboats are slugs, even under power. Because they
typically cannot outrun weather, they have to be overbuilt to "take
it". However, while the conventional sailboat is slugging his way
through unexpectedly rough weather, the Mac 26 owner has turned on his
motor and gone to port at 15 kts and is having coffee and watching
the lightning show.

4. Trailerability, do I need to say more? Not having to pay slip
fees, not having to rush to the coast just before a hurricane hits to
tie things down, not worrying about the cost of a bottom job, etc.
The ability to trailer to the Keys, to the Chesapeake, etc.

5. Safety at sea. Apparently they have a range of stability greater
than many more traditional boats. They are also intrinsically
righting unlike multihulls and some more traditional monohulls. They
have positive flotation unlike most monohulls.

6. Sailing ability. From what I hear, they sail better than some
more traditional boats, certainly better than a Morgan OI.

Perceived problems:

1. Quality. I suspect that the engineering of the Mac26 is better
than of a Pearson of 1970 considering advances in materials. Part of
this is due to lighter materials that causes the perceived low
quality. But you have to remember that the Mac 26 is made for
trailerability and it should not have to be caught out in really bad
weather.

2. Spartan interior. This is actually a plus for me. I am used to
tent camping so even a spartan interior seems luxurious and I hate
gadgets that break down and cause problems.

3. Any others?

So, would they be ok to sail across the stream to the Bahamas? Across
the Northern Gulf back and forth to N or S. Florida? Down island to
the Caribbean? What are the limits?

I'd like to hear from Mac 26 owners.

Parallax wrote:
Like many ppl who own "Real" sailboats, I have long considered the Mac
26 to be a toy sold to gullible first time buyers but may be changing
my mind. Currently I own a 28' S2 and all of my sailing is coastal
cruising. When I really analyse my sailing needs, the Mac 26 comes
close to filling them.

If that is really true, then the list should probably not be "sailing."

Consider this instead
http://community.webshots.com/photo/...39013024ncOIjH


Consider:

1. I think that in Florida having extreme shoal draft capability is a
real safety issue because so much of the state is seriously shallow.

Agreed. It a twofold improvement to have shallow draft... better
shelter, a wider range of options with regard to holding ground, and
more effective scope (you can even set the anchor by hand).


2. Shoal draft ability greatly enhances ones ability to see
interesting places both in Florida and in the Bahamas. Most of the
places I want to see are in shallow water. The Mac 26 has less than
2' draft with board up.

http://community.webshots.com/photo/...39014035lhmlmJ


3. Face it, sailboats are slugs, even under power.

The boat in these pictures will sail rings around a Mac26X


4. Trailerability, do I need to say more? Not having to pay slip
fees, not having to rush to the coast just before a hurricane hits to
tie things down, not worrying about the cost of a bottom job, etc.
The ability to trailer to the Keys, to the Chesapeake, etc.

Agreed.

But if you are seriously considering a Mac 26X (or the makeover 26M)
then why not just get a motorboat and skip the farce of trying to sail one?


5. Safety at sea. Apparently they have a range of stability greater
than many more traditional boats.

That is utterly false. These boats are topheavy and have less stabilty,
which is why you can find (if you look) several news articels about them
capsizing... in at least one case, with fatalities.

I'm sure that MacGregor advertising is very carefully worded to avoid
false claims while presenting a rosy picture of stability... sort of
like the way they make it appear the boats actually sail...


6. Sailing ability. From what I hear, they sail better than some
more traditional boats, certainly better than a Morgan OI.

Uh huh.


Perceived problems:

1. Quality. I suspect that the engineering of the Mac26 is better
than of a Pearson of 1970 considering advances in materials.

I suspect you'd be wrong.

2. Spartan interior.

Actually it's quite roomy.


3. Any others?

So, would they be ok to sail across the stream to the Bahamas?

Sure, if you pick the weather carefully enough. There used to be a race
for Sunfish across to Bimini, so this ain't saying much though.


I'd like to hear from Mac 26 owners.

http://bbs.trailersailor.com/forums/macgregor/index.cgi

Actually, what you want is to hear from *former* MacGregor owners. I
know several. Most of them eventually move on after one or another
ongoing frustration with the boat. It's a great staging platform for
playing in/on the water, and a decent camper trailer. But it's not
really a sailboat IMHO (stunts such as racing one PHRF unballasted with
trapezes notwithstanding)

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

The folks I know in FL with a Mac 26 are very satisfied with them. I don't
know that any of them have gone to the Bahamas yet (they are on the west
coast), but why not? Most folks motor over anyway and the Mac 26 is much
faster than most so if you watch your weather window and maybe buddy boat it
should be OK.

In article ,
(Parallax) wrote:

Like many ppl who own "Real" sailboats, I have long considered the Mac
26 to be a toy sold to gullible first time buyers but may be changing
my mind. Currently I own a 28' S2 and all of my sailing is coastal
cruising. When I really analyse my sailing needs, the Mac 26 comes
close to filling them.

Our previous boat was a Mac 21, which is quite similar to the 26, given
enough power. It drew 12" and floated in 6" if the bottom was mud. VERY
nice for getting in towards the shore, and it cranked along pretty well.

We also cruise an area where the water can be a bit skinny quite a
distance out.

I think you'll eventually find that the S2 is more what you want long
term -- or you should have gotten a powerboat in the first place.

The Mac 26 doesn't do either job well and it really is designed for
light duty. They can be kept going, but the stays will need replacing
fairly regularly. Not much of a problem as they're built with Nicro
press swages, but an annoyance. Other stress points will need rebuilding
or beefing up every decade or so.

Trailing a boat *does* open up the cruising range, and I wouldn't
hesitate to take a 26 to the Bahamas (after a thorough check-out and
replacement of weak items), but its performance will suffer if you carry
very much.

These days, almost every case where we'd have enjoyed getting in closer
to shore with the shoal draft, we get just about the same enjoyment by
taking the dink in. Being on the Chesapeake and dedicated gunkholers,
we've run both boats aground. The Mac "broke" a couple of times, the
rudder downhaul block ripping out. The Tanzer has been less bothered,
not yet requiring a repair, and we've bounced quite a bit harder than we
did with the Mac.

Once, the Mac was 'brushed' by a bigger boat while on a mooring. Took
out most of our port side -- pulpits and stanchions and two stays --
(didn't notice the backstay was damaged for a month). The real sailboat
was essentially undamaged other than cosmetics.

The Macs are good boats for what they are, but the S2 will carry more,
last longer, and be more comfortable.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

So, would they be ok to sail across the stream to the Bahamas? Across
the Northern Gulf back and forth to N or S. Florida? Down island to
the Caribbean? What are the limits?


Many have done it very successfully.
Your reasoning is sound, the only thing
missing in the Mac 26x is the ability to sail
a wide variety of conditions, weather needs to
fit more narrow parameters for good performance
and sailing pleasure.
But then it's a motorsailer NOT a sailboat.

Glenn

(Quest0029) wrote in message ...
So, would they be ok to sail across the stream to the Bahamas? Across
the Northern Gulf back and forth to N or S. Florida? Down island to
the Caribbean? What are the limits?


Many have done it very successfully.
Your reasoning is sound, the only thing
missing in the Mac 26x is the ability to sail
a wide variety of conditions, weather needs to
fit more narrow parameters for good performance
and sailing pleasure.
But then it's a motorsailer NOT a sailboat.

Glenn

I have had my S2 for 14 yrs now and have recently upgraded and
replaced most things on it including engine, sails, standing rigging
and lifelines so probably will not make a change anytime soon.

While I enjoy sailing, my real interest is low cost cruising so I
would be happy with a cold fusion power source if it was cheap and
give up the sails. All cruising power boats are expensive to operate
compared to a sailboat. I gave serious consideration to a motorsailor
(a Nauticat) but all I see have too deep a draft. I have also
considered a trailerable trimaran (F31) but the cost really bothers me
($140,000). For what it does, the Mac26 seems to be a bargain.

My only experience with a Mac26 was in 1992 sailing from Carabelle to
Steinhatchee, Fl (about 70 miles) on my S2 when late in afternoon I
saw a mast on horizon behind me. Was no wind so we were motoring with
the old 7 hp Yanmar diesel. Boat behind was obviously catching up and
I assumed it had to be a larger vessel to be doing so well under power
as I was doing about 5.2 kts. As it passed, I was shocked to see it
was an ugly Mac26. They easily made it into Steinhatchee long before
dark where around dark as we finally entered the 5 mile long channel
the fog closed in suddenly. We spent a scary night in the fog not
knowing if we were in the channel or not but trying to stay in deep
water and not hit oyster bars. They later told us of the good meal
they had that night. They also told us by radio later how they
stopped at various interesting places on the coast that are too
shallow for me.

My experience with coastal cruising is that I spend at least 40% of
the time motoring due to lack of wind. Much time is also spent
waiting because we dont want to try to incessantly tack into a
headwind. This means that while cruising, at least 60% of the time, I
am not able to sail where I want to go. My cruising philosophy is
that I will use the diesel to motor when wind is unfavorable and if
the wind is favorable I will use sail. For this reason, I have
upgraded my engine to the 13 hp yanmar 2GM.

I suspect the real problem many ppl have with the mac26 is that it
does not support the self supporting long range cruising dream since
it is intended for more limited cruising. Buying a Mac26 is an
admission that you are not going to sail around the world or something
similar. I suspect that more experienced Mac 26 buyers are ppl who
have become more realistic about their cruising goals.

I would be curious to know the motoring range of the Mac26 for times
when there is no wind..

I suspect the real problem many ppl have with the mac26 is that it
does not support the self supporting long range cruising dream

Yes and that it is a boat that can sail
and power which is better than a boat that
can only sail (and has deep draft to boot).
The Mac is all compromise and many people
a problem getting their minds around something
like that.
BTW the boat will need upgrades in hardware
before going to the Bahamas and such.
It also sounds like you could be happy with a
pocket trawler but the Mac can still go in
much thinner water.

This site may be of interest-
http://www.eskimo.com/%7Emighetto/murrelet.htm

In article ,
Quest0029 wrote:
This site may be of interest-
http://www.eskimo.com/%7Emighetto/murrelet.htm

Yeah, mullet's site. A standing joke on sailing anarchy. Read this
thread on the SA forums, "The future of yacht design"

http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums...showtopic=2833

-steve

(Steven Fisher) wrote in message ...
In article ,
Quest0029 wrote:
This site may be of interest-
http://www.eskimo.com/%7Emighetto/murrelet.htm

Yeah, mullet's site. A standing joke on sailing anarchy. Read this
thread on the SA forums, "The future of yacht design"

http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums...showtopic=2833

-steve

Well, I dont really expect to be invited to your "Yacht Club" cuz with
my ratty Tasmanian Devil flip flops, paint stained t-shirt and ragged
shorts I wouldnt fit in. All y'all REAL sailors can adjust your
captains hats and ascots and go back to the yacht club bar muttering
about how the common riff-raff just dont know their places.
Meanwhile, I'll be sailin one way r nuther.