I dont consider many ULDB ocean racers I have seen to be seaworthy but
that isnt the question. Since I happen to like the Mac26 concept, I
wonder if it can be modified to be seaworthy. I also cannot resist
any temptation to experiment. I confess, I have never examined a
Mac26 up close.
Upsize the winches, no biggie as winches of all sizes are readily
available surplus.
Better sails is no biggie as good second hand sails are available.
The CDI furler is fairly good for that size boat (PS review and my own
experience).
Smaller cockpit by filling it with extra water and fuel properly
fastened down.
Better cockpit drains retrofitted (almost all boats need this).
If it has a cutaway transom, put a cover over it.
Lock down bottom hatch boards so they cannot be removed.
Back up any deck hardware that looks insecure.
Jacklines
Check into hatch security
eliminate thru-hulls
Look into security of rudder
Security of centerboard
Knowing nothing of her rigging, I can say nothing except I get the
impression she has small sails so perhaps her small rigging is ok.
I cannot evaluate the hull construction except for what PS says which
seems ok. However, I will note that fibreglas construction has
advanced so well that today making a very good hull is easy. A
lightweight hull today can easily be stronger than a very thick hull
of yesteryear.
Any other ideas?

BTW, a web site I checked said a Pearson Triton had a much worse PHRF
than the Mac26, I dunno.

I used to know a homeless guy who lived on a trashed out Venture 21.
He lived on it and cruised all over this part of FL. He did more
sailing on that gawdawful boat than I did on my S2.

A question, is the Macgregor of Mac26 fame the same Macgregor who
built large multihulls?

I've only been up close and personal with a MAC26 a couple of
times. I seem to recall that the basic construction of the hull and
deck was not all that substantial. A couple of years ago a MAC26
owner had one on a trailer with the mast up just moving it in the
marina. Didn't see the power line across one of the roads. Busted
off the mast at the spreader (no surprise there). But it also damaged
the hull at the chainplates and the deck at the step. Not a good
sign.

Doug
s/v Callista

"Parallax" wrote in message
m...
I dont consider many ULDB ocean racers I have seen to be seaworthy but
that isnt the question. Since I happen to like the Mac26 concept, I
wonder if it can be modified to be seaworthy. I also cannot resist
any temptation to experiment. I confess, I have never examined a
Mac26 up close.
Upsize the winches, no biggie as winches of all sizes are readily
available surplus.
Better sails is no biggie as good second hand sails are available.
The CDI furler is fairly good for that size boat (PS review and my own
experience).
Smaller cockpit by filling it with extra water and fuel properly
fastened down.
Better cockpit drains retrofitted (almost all boats need this).
If it has a cutaway transom, put a cover over it.
Lock down bottom hatch boards so they cannot be removed.
Back up any deck hardware that looks insecure.
Jacklines
Check into hatch security
eliminate thru-hulls
Look into security of rudder
Security of centerboard
Knowing nothing of her rigging, I can say nothing except I get the
impression she has small sails so perhaps her small rigging is ok.
I cannot evaluate the hull construction except for what PS says which
seems ok. However, I will note that fibreglas construction has
advanced so well that today making a very good hull is easy. A
lightweight hull today can easily be stronger than a very thick hull
of yesteryear.
Any other ideas?

BTW, a web site I checked said a Pearson Triton had a much worse PHRF
than the Mac26, I dunno.

I used to know a homeless guy who lived on a trashed out Venture 21.
He lived on it and cruised all over this part of FL. He did more
sailing on that gawdawful boat than I did on my S2.

A question, is the Macgregor of Mac26 fame the same Macgregor who
built large multihulls?

Since I happen to like the Mac26 concept, I
wonder if it can be modified to be seaworthy.

are you ready to reinforce the entire hull, the entire deck, the hull/deck
joint? are you ready to replace the mast, boom, standing rigging and running
rigging with gear of appropriate strength? Are you willing to pile a couple
thousand pounds of lead low in the boat to improve its stiffness and limit of
positive stability? are you ready to replace all ports and hatches with gear
of appropriate strength? Are you ready to replace all the winches? are you
ready to build in internal bulkheads to reduce hull twisting in a seaway?

seems to me to be a lot like trying to turn a Yugo into touring sedan.

I expect there are ways that you could improve the seaworthiness of a Mac 26 X
or M, but there is a fundamental problem:

If the desirable aspect you want to preserve is the speed under power, this is
completely dependent on keeping the weight very low. For instance the
advertised top speed of the 26M is 18 knots, but that is completely stripping
down - no ballast, no rigging, no gear, no crew. In the builder and dealer
sites, they say that adding water ballast (required if the seas are over 1
foot!) cost 3 mph, and then every 100 pound cost another mph. While you might
find someone who echoes the claim of 17 knots that's not realistic for a fully
setup boat. If you scan the boards, you'll find a number of people saying 12
mph is more typical. So now the question becomes, how much additional weight
will it cost to make the boat "seaworthy," and more significantly, how much
additional gear and supplies would you want to carry to take advantage of this,
say by taking a 2 or 3 week cruise? 200 pounds? 300? Do you add an second
anchor? Another battery? More fuel? How much would a week's worth of water
weigh? (Hint: I take on about 600 pounds of water for a cruise.) If the
added weight turns the boat into a normal displacement boat when powering,
wouldn't you be better off with a vessel that was built for that? What it comes
down to is that the boat is suited for short cruises in protected waters.

Its true that the rating of a Mac might be about the same as a Pearson Triton
(255 in the NE fleet), but you must remember that the Triton is one of the very
first (1959) fiberglass boats built and is rather heavy and slow. Even so, I'd
feel a lot better weathering a blow in the Alberg design. Rather than scouring
the PHRF list for the one or two boats that a Mac might be able to beat, if its
not too choppy, why not consider that you'd be hard pressed to find a boat built
in the last 20 years that can't beat the Mac handily?

MacGregor has built a number of interesting boats, including a catamaran. I
wouldn't cal it "large" compared to a cruising cat, but its design is more that
of a beach cat. BTW, when people talk of how easy it is to flip a catamaran
this is the type they're talking about, not a modern cruising cat.
http://www.ne-ts.com/mac/bb/76brop7.html

"Parallax" wrote in message
m...
I dont consider many ULDB ocean racers I have seen to be seaworthy but
that isnt the question. Since I happen to like the Mac26 concept, I
wonder if it can be modified to be seaworthy. I also cannot resist
any temptation to experiment. I confess, I have never examined a
Mac26 up close.
Upsize the winches, no biggie as winches of all sizes are readily
available surplus.
Better sails is no biggie as good second hand sails are available.
The CDI furler is fairly good for that size boat (PS review and my own
experience).
Smaller cockpit by filling it with extra water and fuel properly
fastened down.
Better cockpit drains retrofitted (almost all boats need this).
If it has a cutaway transom, put a cover over it.
Lock down bottom hatch boards so they cannot be removed.
Back up any deck hardware that looks insecure.
Jacklines
Check into hatch security
eliminate thru-hulls
Look into security of rudder
Security of centerboard
Knowing nothing of her rigging, I can say nothing except I get the
impression she has small sails so perhaps her small rigging is ok.
I cannot evaluate the hull construction except for what PS says which
seems ok. However, I will note that fibreglas construction has
advanced so well that today making a very good hull is easy. A
lightweight hull today can easily be stronger than a very thick hull
of yesteryear.
Any other ideas?

BTW, a web site I checked said a Pearson Triton had a much worse PHRF
than the Mac26, I dunno.

I used to know a homeless guy who lived on a trashed out Venture 21.
He lived on it and cruised all over this part of FL. He did more
sailing on that gawdawful boat than I did on my S2.

A question, is the Macgregor of Mac26 fame the same Macgregor who
built large multihulls?

MacGregor has built a number of interesting boats, including a catamaran.

I sailed a Venture catamaran and found it in all ways to be inferior to a Hobie
of the same size. The owner literally had a Clorex bottle tied to his masthead
to keep the boat from turning turtle when it tipped over.

I think this is a different boat from the large MacGregor 36

http://tinyurl.com/2zl6e


JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
MacGregor has built a number of interesting boats, including a catamaran.

I sailed a Venture catamaran and found it in all ways to be inferior to a
Hobie
of the same size. The owner literally had a Clorex bottle tied to his
masthead
to keep the boat from turning turtle when it tipped over.

On Tue, 18 May 2004 19:26:16 -0700, Parallax wrote:

BTW, a web site I checked said a Pearson Triton had a much worse PHRF
than the Mac26, I dunno.

Are you sure that you're not confusing the Mac26 with the Mac26X/Mac26M?
The latter are the current motorboat/sailboat combos that have been under
discussion here. From the late 80's to the mid 90's MacGregor built a 26
footer that was also water ballasted but was 100% sailboat. From what I
hear they were fairly decent performers. This web site may have been
referring to the earlier model.