Mac 26
 

DSK wrote:

Jim Cate wrote:

My note listed some eight differnces betweent the M and the X. - In
addition, there are changes in the standing rigging, and the rotating
mast. - In other words, at least ten differences. - You are
apparently claiming that they are all bogus Mac propoganda.


Umm, no.

Just that the hulls are the same shape, no "deeper V",


Wrong. The "V" configuration of the 26M, in the forward portion of the
hull, is 15 degrees, compared with 8 degrees on the 26X. (I have
personally examined both boats and seen the difference. - Check it out
yourself with a level and protractor if you don't believe me. )

the deck shape is the same, the rig is pretty much the same


Agreed that the deck shap is similar. The chainplates are modified.
However, the rig is substantially different, being Y-shaped, in top plan
view, and it does not include a backstay. This is to accommodate the
rotatable mast, which also includes bearing upper and lower bearing
structures. - Another substantive difference.


(why does the "longer mast" not stick up any higher?),

It does.

and that they don't really sail very well compared to a "real" boat...
but hey, they don't have to! You can motor!


As previously discussed, I haven't claimed that the Macs sail better
(sail faster or point higher) than some heavier displacement boats.



.... And on what do you base your assertion? - And, have YOU
compared the two boats?


I'm not the one who introduced these issues. - Most of them were
Johnathan's assertions, or yours. I'm still waiting for the two of you
to back up your own assertions.



Yep. And sailed them myself a few times. A couple of friends have
owned them and were determined to prove what great boats they were,
until the realization slowly crept over them that they were not.


And which Mac models were they?


But they are a pretty cool water toy, if you don't mind the cost.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King


As mentioned in my initial note on this topic, I don't claim that the
Macs are "better" boats, or faster under sail, or well-suited for
extended ocean crossings, etc. If your interest is in racing or in going
faster than other boats, or in making ocean crossings, then the Mac is
obviously not the right choice for you.

What I did say was that the Macs are fun to sail, and that they offer a
lot of advantages and capabilities that most boats don't offer. They
are a good choice for the conditions and usage experienced by most
sailboat owners.

What I have tried to do in this discussion is to provide a degree of
balance between the Mac-bashers, who would be embarrased if their
buddies even saw them on a Mac, and the Mac lovers who think they are
the greatest boats ever made. - I personally would rather have a Valiant
40. I love their handling, their speed, and their stability and balance
as the wind picks up. However, I'm not sure I would have more fun on a
Valiant than I do on the Mac, and I'm pretty sure that I'll be getting
in more sailing on the Mac. Now, sailing one of the Mac 65's at 15
knots might be a different story.

You approve of a balanced discussion, don't you DK? After all, a long
series of repetitive notes telling everyone that the Macs are just a
pile of junk gets kind of monotonous after a few months, don't you think?

Jim

Mac 26
 

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:
Then he must be selling other boats in addition to the Macs. (Right?) I
don't see many Mac dealers making a big profit. - Most of them seem to
be in because they like sailing and like the Macs.

No. He makes the money from the fools who buy the pieces of crap!

Well, it seems to you.

What are you saying, Johnnny? That they don't fall apart or break up?
That even though you think the Macs are a pile of junk, they still just
keep on sailing? - You're not making much sense.

No. They mostly don't sail much of anywhere in the conditions that
would cause them to break up and sink.

McDonalds makes billions of burgers, but I wouldn't want to eat them
on a regular basis.

Perhaps too much time...

You're missing the point again, Johnny. The fact that MacGregor sells
lots of boats wasn't mentioned as evidence that their boats are of
high quality (although they are). Instead, the point was that, with

Gee, really? Seems like it to me, but feel free to try an justify your
poor choice of boats.

You're really obsessed with Macs breaking up...

You're obsessed with calling them a pile of junk. Could you possibly
come up with another term Johnny?

At least I'm being accurate! Ok... they're composed of many pieces of
junk!

Assertions of what? They're junky, they look like it, they sail like
it. There are no statistics needed.


If they were just a pile of junk, as you say, and if their rigging were
not built appropriately for the loads, they would be failing, capsizing,
and breaking up after a few months of use in moderate winds. - But they
aren't, and that's why you are having trouble backing up your ridiculous
statements. - Put up or shut up Johnny!

Their rigging is minimal at best. It's quite appropriate for protected
waters found on some lakes. Any other place, and they won't last long.

No problem backing up any of my statements, as they are my opinion
based on observation.... Jimmmy.

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

Mac 26
 

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:
Yep, and it's still a piece of junk.



Have a nice day anyway Johnny.

Jim

I have every intention, don't you worry little buddy.

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

Mac 26
 

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:
What I did say was that the Macs are fun to sail, and that they offer a
lot of advantages and capabilities that most boats don't offer. They
are a good choice for the conditions and usage experienced by most
sailboat owners.

Yeah, if you have no experience on real sailboats, sure, they're fun
to sail. Most sailboat owners??? Bwahahahaha... I'm sure you've got
some stats to buck that one up right?

What I have tried to do in this discussion is to provide a degree of
balance between the Mac-bashers, who would be embarrased if their
buddies even saw them on a Mac, and the Mac lovers who think they are

You're damn right I'd be embarrassed. They junk and look like it.

the greatest boats ever made. - I personally would rather have a Valiant
40. I love their handling, their speed, and their stability and balance
as the wind picks up. However, I'm not sure I would have more fun on a
Valiant than I do on the Mac, and I'm pretty sure that I'll be getting
in more sailing on the Mac. Now, sailing one of the Mac 65's at 15
knots might be a different story.

Yeah, might be a different story.

You approve of a balanced discussion, don't you DK? After all, a long
series of repetitive notes telling everyone that the Macs are just a
pile of junk gets kind of monotonous after a few months, don't you think?

Then stop posting your bs. Fess up.. are you a Mac dealer? There's no
embarrassment about that... well, actually there is.

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

Mac 26
 

Just that the hulls are the same shape, no "deeper V",



Jim Cate wrote:
Wrong. The "V" configuration of the 26M, in the forward portion of the
hull, is 15 degrees, compared with 8 degrees on the 26X. (I have
personally examined both boats and seen the difference. - Check it out
yourself with a level and protractor if you don't believe me. )

That must explain why the trailer bunks for the two
different models are exactly the same.


... This is to accommodate the
rotatable mast, which also includes bearing upper and lower bearing
structures. - Another substantive difference.


"Upper bearing"?? What does the mast bear on at the upper end?

BTW what benefit does a rotating mast give the boat?


(why does the "longer mast" not stick up any higher?),


It does.

Hmm, when you park the two models side by side, the masts
appear to be exactly the same height. If they're side by
side on trailers, the masts stick out the same length front
& back.


Yep. And sailed them myself a few times. A couple of friends have
owned them and were determined to prove what great boats they were,
until the realization slowly crept over them that they were not.



And which Mac models were they?


Actually I've sailed a lot of MacGregors over the years,
starting with the venerable Venture 21 and up thru the
Mac25 swing keel, the Mac26 water ballast (both dagger &
centerboard) which was the same hull stretched about 4", the
Mac 19 PowRSailR, the 26X and the M.

The ones I was referring to that my friends eventually gave
up on were the X & M PowRSailR boats, the X's kept breaking
their steering any time the wind blew more than twelve
knots. The M's don't seem to have this problem but they're
not much fun to sail IMHO compared to even a medium
performance monohull.

One friend has kept his Mac 26X although he's modified it
(beefed up steering among other things)... he mostly uses it
for fishing and towing a Hobie Cat out to where he can have
fun sailing that.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Mac 26
 

Jonathan Ganz wrote:

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:


Then he must be selling other boats in addition to the Macs. (Right?) I
don't see many Mac dealers making a big profit. - Most of them seem to
be in because they like sailing and like the Macs.



No. He makes the money from the fools who buy the pieces of crap!



Well, it seems to you.


What are you saying, Johnnny? That they don't fall apart or break up?
That even though you think the Macs are a pile of junk, they still just
keep on sailing? - You're not making much sense.



No. They mostly don't sail much of anywhere in the conditions that
would cause them to break up and sink.



McDonalds makes billions of burgers, but I wouldn't want to eat them
on a regular basis.

Perhaps too much time...


You're missing the point again, Johnny. The fact that MacGregor sells
lots of boats wasn't mentioned as evidence that their boats are of
high quality (although they are). Instead, the point was that, with



Gee, really? Seems like it to me, but feel free to try an justify your
poor choice of boats.



You're really obsessed with Macs breaking up...


You're obsessed with calling them a pile of junk. Could you possibly
come up with another term Johnny?



At least I'm being accurate! Ok... they're composed of many pieces of
junk!



Assertions of what? They're junky, they look like it, they sail like
it. There are no statistics needed.



If they were just a pile of junk, as you say, and if their rigging were
not built appropriately for the loads, they would be failing, capsizing,
and breaking up after a few months of use in moderate winds. - But they
aren't, and that's why you are having trouble backing up your ridiculous
statements. - Put up or shut up Johnny!



Their rigging is minimal at best. It's quite appropriate for protected
waters found on some lakes. Any other place, and they won't last long.


If their rigging is inadequate, then obviously the boats would be
falling apart whenever they are taken out in any significant weather.
With 40,000 of them out there, hundreds of the the boats would be lost
or torn apart every year, and Mac owners and guests would be drowned or
stranded every year. Yet that doesn't happen except in very rare instances.

Where's your evidence that the Mac rigging is failing or coming apart,
Johnny? What statistics do you have on the number of Macson on which
the rigging failed?

No problem backing up any of my statements, as they are my opinion
based on observation.... Jimmmy.


No problem backing up your statements Johnny? Then why don't you get
busy and start? So far all you have done is post more of your ridiculous
biased assertions, with nothing backing them up. Think about how that
makes you look to others monitoring this discussion, John!.

No problem backing up your statements? - Then have at it.

Jim
..

Mac 26
 

Jonathan Ganz wrote:

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:


What I did say was that the Macs are fun to sail, and that they offer a
lot of advantages and capabilities that most boats don't offer. They
are a good choice for the conditions and usage experienced by most
sailboat owners.



Yeah, if you have no experience on real sailboats, sure, they're fun
to sail.

No experience on real sailboats? Well, I sailed a number of sailboats
in the 30 - 40 ft range for some 25 years before I bought the Mac 26M. -
They included several Catalinas, several Cals, an Endeavor 32, an O'Day
37, a Valiant 40, etc., etc. - Are any of those "real sailboats" John?


Most sailboat owners??? Bwahahahaha... I'm sure you've got
some stats to buck that one up right?


Most sailboat owners in the Houston-Clear Lake - Kemah area leave their
boats sitting in their slips 99.9% of the time.

What I have tried to do in this discussion is to provide a degree of
balance between the Mac-bashers, who would be embarrased if their
buddies even saw them on a Mac, and the Mac lovers who think they are



You're damn right I'd be embarrassed. They junk and look like it.



What exactly are you talking about John.? - "They junk and look like
it"! - What the Hell does that mean?



the greatest boats ever made. - I personally would rather have a Valiant
40. I love their handling, their speed, and their stability and balance
as the wind picks up. However, I'm not sure I would have more fun on a
Valiant than I do on the Mac, and I'm pretty sure that I'll be getting
in more sailing on the Mac. Now, sailing one of the Mac 65's at 15
knots might be a different story.



Yeah, might be a different story.



You approve of a balanced discussion, don't you DK? After all, a long
series of repetitive notes telling everyone that the Macs are just a
pile of junk gets kind of monotonous after a few months, don't you think?



Then stop posting your bs. Fess up.. are you a Mac dealer? There's no
embarrassment about that... well, actually there is.



Nope. If I were a Mac dealer I woudn't waste my time with sickos like
you. I would be afraid that if you bought one you would give the Macs a
bad name.

Jim

Mac 26
 

DSK wrote:

Just that the hulls are the same shape, no "deeper V",




Jim Cate wrote:

Wrong. The "V" configuration of the 26M, in the forward portion of
the hull, is 15 degrees, compared with 8 degrees on the 26X. (I have
personally examined both boats and seen the difference. - Check it
out yourself with a level and protractor if you don't believe me. )


That must explain why the trailer bunks for the two different models
are exactly the same.


Check them out yourself Doug. - They are different. (Incidentally, we
went through this same discussion on the asa ng ad nausium for several
months last year. Someone finally checked out the hulls of the two
boats and admitted that they were, in fact, substantially different.)




... This is to accommodate the rotatable mast, which also includes
bearing upper and lower bearing structures. - Another substantive
difference.


"Upper bearing"?? What does the mast bear on at the upper end?

As understood, it bears on the movable elements of the upper bearing
structure, which are rotatably constrained within the fixed elements,
which in turn are fastened to and constrained by the lateral stays and
the jib stay.


BTW what benefit does a rotating mast give the boat?


They were developed on competetive cats and trimarans, because they
improve the forward force vectors by eliminating turbulence behind the
the luff of the sail caused by the mast, which projects into the airflow
beyond the luff and tends to break up the airflow in the region behind
the mast. In any event, owners of competetive multi-hull craft have
been using them for several years. - Whether, or by how much, the system
improves the Mac's response I really don't know.


It does.


(why does the "longer mast" not stick up any higher?),
Hmm, when you park the two models side by side, the masts appear to be
exactly the same height. If they're side by side on trailers, the
masts stick out the same length front & back.

Maybe there's a difference in the configuration of the deck or cabin
that makes the bottom of the mast sit lower relative to the trailer.
In any event, what do you want me to do about it? - Should I ask my
neighbors to drop the masts on their 26Xs so I can measure them with a
tape measure and compare them with the M?

Yep. And sailed them myself a few times. A couple of friends have
owned them and were determined to prove what great boats they were,
until the realization slowly crept over them that they were not.

And which Mac models were they?


Actually I've sailed a lot of MacGregors over the years, starting with
the venerable Venture 21 and up thru the Mac25 swing keel, the Mac26
water ballast (both dagger & centerboard) which was the same hull
stretched about 4", the Mac 19 PowRSailR, the 26X and the M.

The ones I was referring to that my friends eventually gave up on were
the X & M PowRSailR boats, the X's kept breaking their steering any
time the wind blew more than twelve knots. The M's don't seem to have
this problem but they're not much fun to sail IMHO compared to even a
medium performance monohull.

One friend has kept his Mac 26X although he's modified it (beefed up
steering among other things)... he mostly uses it for fishing and
towing a Hobie Cat out to where he can have fun sailing that.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King


Lots of owners seem to like their 26Xs and the new 26Ms. - They don't
want to part with them. - In any event, hope you get some good sailing
weather this weekend.

Jim

Mac 26
 

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:
If their rigging is inadequate, then obviously the boats would be
falling apart whenever they are taken out in any significant weather.
With 40,000 of them out there, hundreds of the the boats would be lost
or torn apart every year, and Mac owners and guests would be drowned or
stranded every year. Yet that doesn't happen except in very rare instances.

Yup. You got it. They fall apart in the SF bay. Even the dealer
recommends people not sail them here without extensive work.

Where's your evidence that the Mac rigging is failing or coming apart,
Johnny? What statistics do you have on the number of Macson on which
the rigging failed?

See previous. And, I saw a Mac last year that could not sail in
Raccoon Straight. We circled them and ask if they needed help, they
said, no, and dropped the sail and started the engine. Made straight
for Tiberon. Gee, and it was only blowing about 22 kts.

No problem backing up your statements Johnny? Then why don't you get
busy and start? So far all you have done is post more of your ridiculous
biased assertions, with nothing backing them up. Think about how that
makes you look to others monitoring this discussion, John!.

Already did.

No problem backing up your statements? - Then have at it.

Done did it.

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

Mac 26
 

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:
No experience on real sailboats? Well, I sailed a number of sailboats
in the 30 - 40 ft range for some 25 years before I bought the Mac 26M. -
They included several Catalinas, several Cals, an Endeavor 32, an O'Day
37, a Valiant 40, etc., etc. - Are any of those "real sailboats" John?

And, you picked a Mac. That either says a lot about your judgement or
you sail in very protected waters. We need to know our limitations
Jimmy.

Most sailboat owners in the Houston-Clear Lake - Kemah area leave their
boats sitting in their slips 99.9% of the time.

So, what's your point?

From http://www.clearlakesailingclub.org/

"We had a good turn out for the belated start of our Fall series! We
had five boats, sailing portsmouth. Three Lido-14s, a Coronado-15, and
a Sunfish. We had some close racing with the "newer" sailors, it was
fun to see and I think everyone had a good time. The weather was
wonderful, sunny, not too hot and winds between 5-8 out of the ESE."

Wow... 5-8!! That's what I call a lot of wind!!!

You're damn right I'd be embarrassed. They junk and look like it.



What exactly are you talking about John.? - "They junk and look like
it"! - What the Hell does that mean?

Macs look cheap and they are. They're junk. Not sure how much more
clear I can be.

Then stop posting your bs. Fess up.. are you a Mac dealer? There's no
embarrassment about that... well, actually there is.

Nope. If I were a Mac dealer I woudn't waste my time with sickos like
you. I would be afraid that if you bought one you would give the Macs a
bad name.

Wooooooo - I'm a sicko! Call the police!!

Don't worry, I wouldn't buy one.

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