Hey Jim... I found your 11-14-05 (1:55PM) post very interesting and
appreciated the over view of the MacGregor.

I have been seriously thinking about buying a small craft and for the
past year or so have been looking for something that would be com-
patible with my needs and limitations. At this point in time a *new*
MacGregor has definitely tweaked my interest!

Your input... and others that I may come accross on the internet is
and will be most helpfull.

Best regards

Bill

M/V Polynesia

wrote:
"ed" wrote:
Think about range. calculate 2000 miles distance by a 5 mpg and
you need how many gallons of fuel on board? How much space does
400 gallons of fuel require? How and where will you store it?
Safely. What will the added weight (about a ton) do to stability?
To mileage and handling? If you use bladders, will chafing cause
a catastrophic leak?

editor
http://www.marineenginedigest.com

I forgot to say that the MacGregor is a sailboat :-)

It may not perform well crossing an ocean and may take twice
as long as a good sailboat but since it cannot sink or capsize
you won't have to worry about getting eaten by sharks.

Why do you keep insisting it can't capsize?
http://www.ne-ts.com/ar/ar-407capsize.html

Of course, you can claim that they did not follow proper procedures in
this case. However, the North Atlantic has a way of testing gear in
ways not covered by the procedures.

Jeff wrote:
wrote:
"ed" wrote:
Think about range. calculate 2000 miles distance by a 5 mpg and
you need how many gallons of fuel on board? How much space does
400 gallons of fuel require? How and where will you store it?
Safely. What will the added weight (about a ton) do to stability?
To mileage and handling? If you use bladders, will chafing cause
a catastrophic leak?

editor
http://www.marineenginedigest.com

I forgot to say that the MacGregor is a sailboat :-)

It may not perform well crossing an ocean and may take twice
as long as a good sailboat but since it cannot sink or capsize
you won't have to worry about getting eaten by sharks.

Why do you keep insisting it can't capsize?
http://www.ne-ts.com/ar/ar-407capsize.html

Of course, you can claim that they did not follow proper procedures
in this case. However, the North Atlantic has a way of testing gear
in ways not covered by the procedures.

So I should have said that it cannot capsize if the ballast tank
is full and the boat is not overloaded and it doesn't have 300 lbs
of weight attached to the top of the mast, etc, etc.

I'm sure it can also sink if you put enough weight in it.

I'm not a big fan of MacGregor but I'm still waiting for somebody
to tell me why this boat wouldn't be as safe as larger sailboats
when proper procedures are followed.

wrote:
Jeff wrote:
....

Of course, you can claim that they did not follow proper procedures
in this case. However, the North Atlantic has a way of testing gear
in ways not covered by the procedures.

So I should have said that it cannot capsize if the ballast tank
is full and the boat is not overloaded and it doesn't have 300 lbs
of weight attached to the top of the mast, etc, etc.

I'm sure it can also sink if you put enough weight in it.

I'm not a big fan of MacGregor but I'm still waiting for somebody
to tell me why this boat wouldn't be as safe as larger sailboats
when proper procedures are followed.

Just to be clear ... you're talking about safe for a trans-Atlantic?

I'm sure others will have something to say, but for starters, the
basic parameters of the boat are not favorable - what little speed it
has is dependent on staying light, but it looses this with the
gear/fuel/water etc. that would have to be carried. But this is not
insurmountable. A bigger problem is that the basic design is not very
seaworthy. It has extremely high freeboard and thus windage. A hull
shape that provides little stability. And then there's construction
issues - very light rigging which, with the deck stepped mast, pretty
much guarantees the rig will be lost in rollover, and probably in a
knockdown. And the rudder assembly is not noted for strength. And
then there's the issue of whether the hull itself is strong enough to
handle the severe pounding of a serious storm.

The Mac is very attractive to some as a fla****er sailing, and hence
is one of the most successful designs ever. But I think you can find
better choices for a trans-Atlantic.

wrote:

Jeff wrote:

wrote:

"ed" wrote:

Think about range. calculate 2000 miles distance by a 5 mpg and
you need how many gallons of fuel on board? How much space does
400 gallons of fuel require? How and where will you store it?
Safely. What will the added weight (about a ton) do to stability?
To mileage and handling? If you use bladders, will chafing cause
a catastrophic leak?

editor
http://www.marineenginedigest.com

I forgot to say that the MacGregor is a sailboat :-)

It may not perform well crossing an ocean and may take twice
as long as a good sailboat but since it cannot sink or capsize
you won't have to worry about getting eaten by sharks.

Why do you keep insisting it can't capsize?
http://www.ne-ts.com/ar/ar-407capsize.html

Of course, you can claim that they did not follow proper procedures
in this case. However, the North Atlantic has a way of testing gear
in ways not covered by the procedures.


So I should have said that it cannot capsize if the ballast tank
is full and the boat is not overloaded and it doesn't have 300 lbs
of weight attached to the top of the mast, etc, etc.

I'm sure it can also sink if you put enough weight in it.

I'm not a big fan of MacGregor but I'm still waiting for somebody
to tell me why this boat wouldn't be as safe as larger sailboats
when proper procedures are followed.

It's not the size of boat that matters, its the seaworthiness. Since
it's not designed for heavy seas, heavy seas will create big problems.

For example, if you can't make headway in forty knot winds and if you
are not a boating expert with about five strategies for handling
emergency X, you'll find yourself being carried onto rocks and smashed
to bits, or in a weak-assed MacGregor maybe just broken up by the waves.
"Bluewater" boats are built stronger with heavy keels. They can take
anything the ocean can dish out, as long as the skipper knows what they
are doing.

For the open ocean, get a sailboat designed for the open ocean, learn
navigation, and read up on others' ocean travels. Ideally, you should
crew on ocean crossings with an experienced captain or two.

I have a Hunter 33', stronger than a MacGregor, but I would never
venture out into the ocean with it. On the other hand, I crewed numerous
times on a Blanchard 33' in very heavy seas and felt as safe as a bug in
a rug.

--
Stephen

-------

For any proposition there is always some sufficiently narrow
interpretation of its terms, such that it turns out true, and
some sufficiently wide interpretation such that it turns out
false...concept stretching will refute *any* statement, and will
leave no true statement whatsoever.
-- Imre Lakatos

wrote in message
k.net...

"ed" wrote:
Think about range. calculate 2000 miles distance by a 5 mpg and
you need how many gallons of fuel on board? How much space does
400 gallons of fuel require? How and where will you store it?
Safely. What will the added weight (about a ton) do to stability?
To mileage and handling? If you use bladders, will chafing cause
a catastrophic leak?

editor
http://www.marineenginedigest.com

I forgot to say that the MacGregor is a sailboat :-)

It may not perform well crossing an ocean and may take twice
as long as a good sailboat but since it cannot sink or capsize
you won't have to worry about getting eaten by sharks.

A sailboat boat definition only. Have a look a the lines of the thing and
tell me what it would be like trying to pound that fat entry into an
oncoming sea in a storm.
http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/sa...fications.html
It is a perfect boat for noob lake-sailors who want the comfort of being
able to power home faster than they can sail. I prefer a boat that sails
faster than it powers.

The weight of a Honda 50 is 200+ lbs. (
http://www.honda-marine.com/pdfs/50hp.pdf )
Would you really like some fat guy hanging off your transom and slowing you
down everytime you set sail. Cos thats what youve got! And thats just the
Honda. Put a Merc on the back you have nearly 250lbs. Not very appealing eh?

Cant sink? Great! http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/safety.html take a good
look at that first photo. Its in nice weather against a Marina. Now imagine
20ft breaking waves- not at all unusal at sea. That boat would not under any
circumstances be inhabitable or controllable in those conditions while
flooded,. The boat would be rolled over and over again. The mast and boom
would be snapped off and would become missiles. The crew would be washed
from the boat or drowned/concussed/speared as they became victims of the
waves/rig/hull. Yeah, I know thats all a bit negative, but its the truth.

As most yachts rely on the engine to top up the batteries you will have to
take enough petrol to last you two hours motoring per day at sea minimum. I
wouldnt like having to take all that petrol with me to supply power. Deisel
is prefered on yachts cos it is more economical and it doesnt go Kaboom.

Oddly enough, the length of the boat would not be an issue. Many yachts
smaller than that have done trasats as well as circum-navs. The difference
being the other yachts were/are designed as blue water boats.

Thats my 2 cents.

DP

Hey, people sail small boats across the ocean all the time. If that is what
you want to do, well by all means have at it. Don't forget to wear your
hair shirt to add to your comfort and joy while aboard.

"d parker" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
k.net...

"ed" wrote:
Think about range. calculate 2000 miles distance by a 5 mpg and
you need how many gallons of fuel on board? How much space does
400 gallons of fuel require? How and where will you store it?
Safely. What will the added weight (about a ton) do to stability?
To mileage and handling? If you use bladders, will chafing cause
a catastrophic leak?

editor
http://www.marineenginedigest.com

I forgot to say that the MacGregor is a sailboat :-)

It may not perform well crossing an ocean and may take twice
as long as a good sailboat but since it cannot sink or capsize
you won't have to worry about getting eaten by sharks.

A sailboat boat definition only. Have a look a the lines of the thing and
tell me what it would be like trying to pound that fat entry into an
oncoming sea in a storm.
http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/sa...fications.html
It is a perfect boat for noob lake-sailors who want the comfort of being
able to power home faster than they can sail. I prefer a boat that sails
faster than it powers.

The weight of a Honda 50 is 200+ lbs. (
http://www.honda-marine.com/pdfs/50hp.pdf )
Would you really like some fat guy hanging off your transom and slowing
you down everytime you set sail. Cos thats what youve got! And thats just
the Honda. Put a Merc on the back you have nearly 250lbs. Not very
appealing eh?

Cant sink? Great! http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/safety.html take a
good look at that first photo. Its in nice weather against a Marina. Now
imagine 20ft breaking waves- not at all unusal at sea. That boat would not
under any circumstances be inhabitable or controllable in those conditions
while flooded,. The boat would be rolled over and over again. The mast and
boom would be snapped off and would become missiles. The crew would be
washed from the boat or drowned/concussed/speared as they became victims
of the waves/rig/hull. Yeah, I know thats all a bit negative, but its the
truth.

As most yachts rely on the engine to top up the batteries you will have to
take enough petrol to last you two hours motoring per day at sea minimum.
I wouldnt like having to take all that petrol with me to supply power.
Deisel is prefered on yachts cos it is more economical and it doesnt go
Kaboom.

Oddly enough, the length of the boat would not be an issue. Many yachts
smaller than that have done trasats as well as circum-navs. The difference
being the other yachts were/are designed as blue water boats.

Thats my 2 cents.

DP

"Bryan" wrote in message
...
Hey, people sail small boats across the ocean all the time. If that is
what you want to do, well by all means have at it. Don't forget to wear
your hair shirt to add to your comfort and joy while aboard.
Snip

The difference it that this guy is talking about taking a MacGregor 26. Its
not about the length. Smaller baots can do it. Its about seaworthyness.

DP

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:01:58 +0000, popeye wrote:


Since the MacGregor doesn't capside and doesn't sink
(even when filled with water) would it be safer for
crossing the Atlantic than a 30' Bayliner ?

http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/safety.html

I don't know where you got the idea that a McGregor doesn't capsize. Water
ballast is essentially useless in keeping a boat from capsizing. If it had
a proper ballasted keel, it might be doable, assuming you're willing to
get VERY wet, have no sleep and get knocked down and turned over
repeatedly.

Lloyd Sumpter
"Far Cove" Catalina 36

Lloyd Sumpter wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:01:58 +0000, popeye wrote:


Since the MacGregor doesn't capside and doesn't sink
(even when filled with water) would it be safer for
crossing the Atlantic than a 30' Bayliner ?

http://www.macgregorsailboats.com/safety.html


I don't know where you got the idea that a McGregor doesn't capsize. Water
ballast is essentially useless in keeping a boat from capsizing. If it had
a proper ballasted keel, it might be doable, assuming you're willing to
get VERY wet, have no sleep and get knocked down and turned over
repeatedly.

Lloyd Sumpter
"Far Cove" Catalina 36


How do you figure that water ballast is "essential useless in keeping a
boat from capsizing"? It seems to work well in everything from open 60s
to submarines.