Mac 26
 

The thread about crossing the atlantic in a Mac 26 was getting too long
and isnt really interesting. HOWEVER, to say that a Mac 26 sails poorly
means little as so do other "real" sailboats like the entire Morgan
Outisland series. Remember the Westsail, Practical Sailor called it
the "Wet Snail" . As far as the Dawson 26 mentioned as an ocean
crosser in the other thread, PS called it the "Doghouse 26". So,
ultimate sailing ability may mean little.
Consider that most coastal cruiosers report spending about 70% of their
time motoring and you might get a different perspective on the Mac26.
You might consider it to be a motorboat with the ability to sail.
Unlike most motorboats, this one has the safety factor of being able to
sail home. Does this make it safer than the average motorboat used for
cruising?
Do the properties of the Mac26 allow its owners to go more places than
most other sailboats.......probably. Is the Mac26 safe enough compared
to most other motorboats to allow its owner to safely cruise over to
the Bahamas under power? Consider that its speed under power may allow
it to use narrow weather windows that other sailboats could not or that
time spent at sea might sdetermine your probability of getting caught
out in bad weatrher and maybe the Mac26 speed under power gives it an
edge in safety.
I do not see the Mac 26 as an ocean crosser but as a way for people to
sail in many places. True, they will almost always sail in wind less
than 20 kts but that is what most of us want to do anyway.

Mac 26
 

I've always thought the Mac 26 is an interesting choice for boaters in
protected waters. However, I never liked that the are sold based on
on the claim of high speed. While it possible to do over 20 MPH,
there are numerous issues with this. It is only possible if the boat
is "light" and without ballast.

The safety warnings for the boat include: Always operate with ballast
full. But, if you must disregard the primary rule, you can run
without ballast if there are less than 4 people on board, no one on
the forward deck or on the forward bunk or in the head, or off the
centerline. Not in chop over one foot, or in cold water. Sails down
(actually is says "removed").

The fatal accident I posted earlier had 8 adults on deck with the
ballast tank empty - the boat flipped within seconds of getting under
way. Clearly the warnings were disregarded, and the operator was
drunk, but its not clear a novice would appreciate this when they
bought the boat.

Elsewhere on the site you can find the comment that one knot of top
speed is lost for every 100 pounds carried. The net result of this is
that if you carry gear, passengers, a full load of fuel, and some food
and water, you're not going to see 22 mph. Further, if you're in
unprotected waters, you're likely to encounter a chop over one foot,
so you can't run with ballast empty.

If you scan the Mac user forums, you'll certainly find a few reports
of high speed, but you'll also find plenty of users that say 10 to 12
knots is all you can count on once you take all of these factors into
account, and if the going get rough it could be much less. This is
still not too shabby for a 26 footer, but does mean that you can't
simply take a distance, like 40 miles to Bimini, divide by 20, and say
you can count on doing it in 2 hours.

On a slightly different point, the concept of a "weather window" bears
some discussion. At least once a year we find ourselves 150 miles
from home with unsettled weather on the way. We've generally made the
optimum choice, picking the travel days that give the least grief,
but, it has often turned into a nasty ride, nonetheless. This never
seems to happen and the beginning of a trip, where we're willing to
adjust our plans to avoid nasty weather. But towards the end of the
trip, if there appears to be a day or two that is "not so bad" we go
for it and take what comes, and frequently have a rough ride.

So when I hear about "weather windows" and the Mac 26, I wonder if the
person appreciates that they have a habit closing down and being less
than optimal conditions.





wrote:
The thread about crossing the atlantic in a Mac 26 was getting too long
and isnt really interesting. HOWEVER, to say that a Mac 26 sails poorly
means little as so do other "real" sailboats like the entire Morgan
Outisland series. Remember the Westsail, Practical Sailor called it
the "Wet Snail" . As far as the Dawson 26 mentioned as an ocean
crosser in the other thread, PS called it the "Doghouse 26". So,
ultimate sailing ability may mean little.
Consider that most coastal cruiosers report spending about 70% of their
time motoring and you might get a different perspective on the Mac26.
You might consider it to be a motorboat with the ability to sail.
Unlike most motorboats, this one has the safety factor of being able to
sail home. Does this make it safer than the average motorboat used for
cruising?
Do the properties of the Mac26 allow its owners to go more places than
most other sailboats.......probably. Is the Mac26 safe enough compared
to most other motorboats to allow its owner to safely cruise over to
the Bahamas under power? Consider that its speed under power may allow
it to use narrow weather windows that other sailboats could not or that
time spent at sea might sdetermine your probability of getting caught
out in bad weatrher and maybe the Mac26 speed under power gives it an
edge in safety.
I do not see the Mac 26 as an ocean crosser but as a way for people to
sail in many places. True, they will almost always sail in wind less
than 20 kts but that is what most of us want to do anyway.

Mac 26
 

Kidding? I dont take anybody who calls themselves "Commodore"
seriously. Yes, I am serious and think the Mac26 has a place in
sailing. However, I own an S2 that does not allow me the mobility of
the Mac26. Can a Mac 26 be upgraded to hold up better? I dunno. I
looked over the Mac website and it seemed to say that it shouldnt be
sailed with no ballast, not that it shouldnt be powered with no ballast
(i'll look again to be sure). It is possible that it is a good concept
poorly executed.

Mac 26
 

You may refer to me as Gawd Almighty.

Mac 26
 

OK, I apologize for the sarcasm. However, From what I have seen and
heard, the Mac26 is an ok boat and the Mac26 web site is fairly clear
about the capabilities and useage. If someone wants to sail the ICW or
the Keys or other inshore waters, it seems like a very good boat that
will allow its owner to see far more places than most other boats.
Consider, a few months ago, I took my 28' S2 across the Gulf of Mexico
from St, Pete to Shell Pt (near St. Marks in N. FL) which took 36
hours. I did this because I was tired of the coast hopping routine and
wanted to get home. If I had a MAc 26, I woulda trailered her home and
been safer.
For those who say you cannot power a Mac 26 at 22 kts, consider, going
from Miami to Bimini would take my boat 10 hours at 5 kts but would
only take the Mac 26 5 hours at 10 kts. There are waaaaaaaaaaay more 5
hour opportunities than 10 hour ones and much less opportunity to get
caught out in bad weather.
My remark about the Mac 26 being poorly executed was ill informed as it
appears to be well executed. I suspect that if most people here would
realistically assess their sailing, a Mac26 would be a better fit than
a heavy deep keel boat.

Mac 26
 

I always look at your posts in the light of the time you asked about
hanging a chair from that "little wire clip" hanging from the back stay,
so you could see over your dinghy.

"What COULD that little wire be for?"

Geez. . .



wrote:
You may refer to me as Gawd Almighty.

Mac 26
 

Jeff wrote:

I've always thought the Mac 26 is an interesting choice for boaters in
protected waters. However, I never liked that the are sold based on
on the claim of high speed. While it possible to do over 20 MPH,
there are numerous issues with this. It is only possible if the boat
is "light" and without ballast.

The safety warnings for the boat include: Always operate with ballast
full. But, if you must disregard the primary rule, you can run
without ballast if there are less than 4 people on board, no one on
the forward deck or on the forward bunk or in the head, or off the
centerline. Not in chop over one foot, or in cold water. Sails down
(actually is says "removed").

Elsewhere on the site you can find the comment that one knot of top
speed is lost for every 100 pounds carried. The net result of this is
that if you carry gear, passengers, a full load of fuel, and some food
and water, you're not going to see 22 mph. Further, if you're in
unprotected waters, you're likely to encounter a chop over one foot,
so you can't run with ballast empty.


Ours, with 50hp 2-cycle, can easily do 15-17 mph with filled ballast and
with a moderate load (two heavy adults, gear, ice chest, extra
batteries, etc.). I haven't really tried to see what top speed might
be. I haven't pushed it in rough weather, but it seems to have plenty
of power to cut through fairly significant chop.


Consider that most coastal cruiosers report spending about 70% of their
time motoring and you might get a different perspective on the Mac26.
You might consider it to be a motorboat with the ability to sail.
Unlike most motorboats, this one has the safety factor of being able to
sail home. Does this make it safer than the average motorboat used for
cruising?
Do the properties of the Mac26 allow its owners to go more places than
most other sailboats.......probably. Is the Mac26 safe enough compared
to most other motorboats to allow its owner to safely cruise over to
the Bahamas under power? Consider that its speed under power may allow
it to use narrow weather windows that other sailboats could not or that
time spent at sea might sdetermine your probability of getting caught
out in bad weatrher and maybe the Mac26 speed under power gives it an
edge in safety.
I do not see the Mac 26 as an ocean crosser but as a way for people to
sail in many places. True, they will almost always sail in wind less
than 20 kts but that is what most of us want to do anyway.


I'm not sure how much the Mac's extra power would help in really serious
weather, although it's nice to have the option, in a coastal cruiser, to
run to
port before heavy weather arrives. What I think it does provide is more
flexibility and more sailing and scheduling choices. - It's very
pleasant to be able to motor back to the marina at planing speed after a
long hot afternoon, or to motor out quickly to a preferred sailing area.

Jim

Mac 26
 

I still think that was a good idea. That damned wire has caused me
real problems, ussually when someone who does not know how I leave the
boat clips it to the boom and I do not know it. Next time I go
sailing, I raise the main, ease the sheets, WTF is wrong. I look all
over the sail controls to see where my reefing lines are caught and it
NEVER occurs to me to notice that clip until a gust of wind nearly
knocks us down. I HATE THAT WIRE.

Mac 26
 

I'll admit, I have never looked at a Mac 26 from closer than 50' and
that they have a bad reputation as the builder of the old Venture
boats. However, if whayt they say is correct on their site, they have
incorporated many of the things that were the hallmarks of good
sailboat construction in the 80s. For example, they say they use a
bolted hull to deck joint rather than the rivets on some boats
(Beneteau I think). I agree with them about their philosophy about the
use of glass rather than balsa or foam core as a properly made glass
structure can be stronger than the cored one. Furthermore, their mass
production methods is a good way to achieve high quality without high
cost. Hand made is often poorly made. So, I cannot diss them without
looking at one but I can see some good things if what their site says
is correct.

Mac 26
 

dboh and group,

I generally stay away from the Mac 26 "discussions. Pretty useless
conversations.

My feelings tho:

The Mac26 is a boat that cant make up its mind and the owners are
probably pretty much the same

BTW: I just looked up Practical Sailor Guide to Boat Buying review of
the Westsail 32 and no where is it called a "wet snail". My WS was an
extremely dry boat, sure it wasn't fast and needed a good bit of room
to turn in but was everything a true sailor could ask for. If I'd
wanted fast, I would have bought a mac26

Mac 26
 

PS did not call the WestSail a "Wet Snail" in their review, it was in
an article in the early 90s on cruising boats when they were looking
for a boat to upgrade for their world cruise. I'll find it eventually.

Mac 26
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
The thread about crossing the atlantic in a Mac 26 was getting too long
and isnt really interesting. HOWEVER, to say that a Mac 26 sails poorly
means little as so do other "real" sailboats like the entire Morgan
Outisland series. Remember the Westsail, Practical Sailor called it
the "Wet Snail" . As far as the Dawson 26 mentioned as an ocean
crosser in the other thread, PS called it the "Doghouse 26". So,
ultimate sailing ability may mean little.
Consider that most coastal cruiosers report spending about 70% of their
time motoring and you might get a different perspective on the Mac26.
You might consider it to be a motorboat with the ability to sail.
Unlike most motorboats, this one has the safety factor of being able to
sail home. Does this make it safer than the average motorboat used for
cruising?
Do the properties of the Mac26 allow its owners to go more places than
most other sailboats.......probably. Is the Mac26 safe enough compared
to most other motorboats to allow its owner to safely cruise over to
the Bahamas under power? Consider that its speed under power may allow
it to use narrow weather windows that other sailboats could not or that
time spent at sea might sdetermine your probability of getting caught
out in bad weatrher and maybe the Mac26 speed under power gives it an
edge in safety.
I do not see the Mac 26 as an ocean crosser but as a way for people to
sail in many places. True, they will almost always sail in wind less
than 20 kts but that is what most of us want to do anyway.


I'm on a learning curve in all things sailing, having only been on one once.
It seems that the Mac 26 is a hybrid which brings me to my question, is it
the design/versatility that a sailer purist abhors, or is it the quality of
workmanship, or both?

If the latter, are there hybrid boats that are built better, perhaps one
with a retractable/trailerable keel? Every time I fill up my recently
acquired powerboat, I think about the benefits of sailing.

-Greg

Mac 26
 

I'm on a learning curve in all things sailing, having only been on
one once. It seems that the Mac 26 is a hybrid which brings me to my
question, is it the design/versatility that a sailer purist abhors,
or is it the quality of workmanship, or both?

It's the RAF. The Row Away Factor. When you get in your dinghy and row
ashore, do you stop to admire the lines of your boat or not? A boat has
great RAF if you take loads of pictures and hours to get to shore.

Mac 26 has no RAF, and probably no dink.
Gaz

Mac 26
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
Kidding? I dont take anybody who calls themselves "Commodore"
seriously.

he misspelled ''Commode''.

Mac 26
 

skrev i en meddelelse
oups.com...
PS did not call the WestSail a "Wet Snail" in their review, it was in
an article in the early 90s on cruising boats when they were looking
for a boat to upgrade for their world cruise. I'll find it eventually.

I lived on the round the world cruising route way back in the early 80`s and
first heard the term "Wet snail" then.No idea where it came from though.
Bob Larder

Mac 26
 

Mac 26
 

Dene wrote:

wrote in message
ups.com...

The thread about crossing the atlantic in a Mac 26 was getting too long
and isnt really interesting. HOWEVER, to say that a Mac 26 sails poorly
means little as so do other "real" sailboats like the entire Morgan
Outisland series. Remember the Westsail, Practical Sailor called it
the "Wet Snail" . As far as the Dawson 26 mentioned as an ocean
crosser in the other thread, PS called it the "Doghouse 26". So,
ultimate sailing ability may mean little.
Consider that most coastal cruiosers report spending about 70% of their
time motoring and you might get a different perspective on the Mac26.
You might consider it to be a motorboat with the ability to sail.
Unlike most motorboats, this one has the safety factor of being able to
sail home. Does this make it safer than the average motorboat used for
cruising?
Do the properties of the Mac26 allow its owners to go more places than
most other sailboats.......probably. Is the Mac26 safe enough compared
to most other motorboats to allow its owner to safely cruise over to
the Bahamas under power? Consider that its speed under power may allow
it to use narrow weather windows that other sailboats could not or that
time spent at sea might sdetermine your probability of getting caught
out in bad weatrher and maybe the Mac26 speed under power gives it an
edge in safety.
I do not see the Mac 26 as an ocean crosser but as a way for people to
sail in many places. True, they will almost always sail in wind less
than 20 kts but that is what most of us want to do anyway.



I'm on a learning curve in all things sailing, having only been on one once.
It seems that the Mac 26 is a hybrid which brings me to my question, is it
the design/versatility that a sailer purist abhors, or is it the quality of
workmanship, or both?

If the latter, are there hybrid boats that are built better, perhaps one
with a retractable/trailerable keel? Every time I fill up my recently
acquired powerboat, I think about the benefits of sailing.

-Greg



It is the windage of a large superstructure, and an outboard motor
in windy waters. It seems a seductive death trap. I am not sure I
would want to sail it in rough weather to find out how it goes.
Otherwise, it seems fine for a light pleasure toy, roomy,
comfortable, full of amenities.

Simple as that.

Terry K

Mac 26
 

Captain Joe Redcloud wrote:

On 17 Nov 2005 18:08:04 -0800, wrote:



Kidding? I dont take anybody who calls themselves "Commodore"
seriously. Yes, I am serious and think the Mac26 has a place in
sailing. However, I own an S2 that does not allow me the mobility of
the Mac26. Can a Mac 26 be upgraded to hold up better? I dunno. I
looked over the Mac website and it seemed to say that it shouldnt be
sailed with no ballast, not that it shouldnt be powered with no ballast
(i'll look again to be sure). It is possible that it is a good concept
poorly executed.



You continue to make mistakes based on your own prejudices.

I am a commodore, so it is appropriate that I identify myself as such. Do you
even know what it means?




The Mac 26x or M is a death trap for anything other than daysailing in very mild
conditions. If you expect winds over 15 knots or waves over 2 feet, you don't
want to be on a Mac 26x or M.


A death trap? How many deaths have there been, Joe? A thousand? -
Maybe 500? 200? Since they are some of the most popular models ever
produced, with thousands still out there, surely you could cite reports
of several hundreds.


The performance claims for speed under power for the Mac26 are based on one
person on board and all mast and rigging REMOVED.


Mine are based on a loaded boat with two adults, rigged and with the
mast standing, and with a filled ballast. - Joe, would it help your
attitude if I brought you some more Coronas?

Jim

Mac 26
 

Terry Spragg wrote:

wrote:

The thread about crossing the atlantic in a Mac 26 was getting too long
and isnt really interesting. HOWEVER, to say that a Mac 26 sails poorly
means little as so do other "real" sailboats like the entire Morgan
Outisland series. Remember the Westsail, Practical Sailor called it
the "Wet Snail" . As far as the Dawson 26 mentioned as an ocean
crosser in the other thread, PS called it the "Doghouse 26". So,
ultimate sailing ability may mean little.
Consider that most coastal cruiosers report spending about 70% of their
time motoring and you might get a different perspective on the Mac26.
You might consider it to be a motorboat with the ability to sail.
Unlike most motorboats, this one has the safety factor of being able to
sail home. Does this make it safer than the average motorboat used for
cruising?
Do the properties of the Mac26 allow its owners to go more places than
most other sailboats.......probably. Is the Mac26 safe enough compared
to most other motorboats to allow its owner to safely cruise over to
the Bahamas under power? Consider that its speed under power may allow
it to use narrow weather windows that other sailboats could not or that
time spent at sea might sdetermine your probability of getting caught
out in bad weatrher and maybe the Mac26 speed under power gives it an
edge in safety.


This is folly. It's "capabilities" may seduce one who depends on a
safe window into thinking he will be ok because he has power and speed
in reserve, until it gets rough a day early.

Then he is a tidbit for Poseidon, bait.

He would do better to hope he can survive with ballast, stability,
bare poles and slow, gradual progress toward shelter, if he can keep
his outboard motor in the water.

The Mac 26 is a light coastal pleasure weather cruiser with some
amenities, that can sail a little bit. It is not likely an
intercontinental starship.

Nothing wrong with that. It's the people who expect too much that are
the hazard.

Terry K




I do not see the Mac 26 as an ocean crosser but as a way for people to
sail in many places. True, they will almost always sail in wind less
than 20 kts but that is what most of us want to do anyway.



Here in the Houston-Kemah-Galveston area, there are many thousands of
beautiful sailboats, many with great sailing characteristics, etc. Most
of my sailing experiece through the years has been on displacement boats
in the 30- 40 foot range (My favorite was a 40-ft, cutter-rigged
Valiant.), and I appreciate their feel under sail and what they can do.

However, most of those boats spend 99.9% of their lives sitting in a
marina. While some are out on Galveston Bay on weekends, most are
seldom if ever taken on extended cruises that make use of their
capabilities. I'm sure it's nice to know that you have a great boat
that COULD be sailed accross the Gulf, but, on balance, I think we will
probably get in more sailing on our Mac than most of the owners of these
larger boats. And while the Mac 26M isn't a Valiant 40, it's still fun
to sail. I have multiple reefing points on the main, lines led aft,
roller furling, autopilot, DF, chart-reader, VHF, TTW and GPS knot
meters, and a nice stereo.

Different strokes for different folks. Of course, we can always charter
one of the displacement boats for extended cruising or if we have
multiple guests.

Jim

Mac 26
 

On 18 Nov 2005 10:25:03 -0600, Dave wrote:

On 17 Nov 2005 18:58:20 -0800, said:

I suspect that if most people here would
realistically assess their sailing, a Mac26 would be a better fit than
a heavy deep keel boat.

I think you hit the nail on the head there, David. There are an awful lot of
sailboat owners who are wrapped up in romantic images derived from years of
reading sailing magazines, and can't break out of that mind set. There are a
lot of others who for whom the Mac would not be suitable, and who derive a
great deal of pleasure from deriding as "not real sailors" anyone whose
needs and desires differ from their own.

This is true. I am considering a "heavy, full keel boat" for
passagemaking, and no doubt a lot of motoring, motorsailing and
waiting for wind. However, I want such a boat for reasons of safety,
durability, ease of repair, carrying capacity and pure strength should
I navigate onto the odd coral reef. But it'll still sail, just not
like a J/24

There are fast passagemakers, yes, but I haven't won a lottery. By the
way, my current boat is an IORish racer I use as a cruiser, about as
different from what I think my next boat will look like as a C&C 110
is from a Tayana 37.

R.

Mac 26
 

MAIN PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THEM IS I STEPPED ON ONE AT THE ANNAPOLIS SAILBOAT
SHOW A FEW YEARS AGO AND THE ENTIRE DECK WAS VERY SPONGY .....NOT STIFF AT
ALL ...I WORRY ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION ....I THINK THEY WENT VERY LITE TO
MAKE SPEED ...BUT I GUESS THATS FINE IF YOU DON'T GET CAUGHT IN A BAD SPOT
wrote in message
ups.com...
I'll admit, I have never looked at a Mac 26 from closer than 50' and
that they have a bad reputation as the builder of the old Venture
boats. However, if whayt they say is correct on their site, they have
incorporated many of the things that were the hallmarks of good
sailboat construction in the 80s. For example, they say they use a
bolted hull to deck joint rather than the rivets on some boats
(Beneteau I think). I agree with them about their philosophy about the
use of glass rather than balsa or foam core as a properly made glass
structure can be stronger than the cored one. Furthermore, their mass
production methods is a good way to achieve high quality without high
cost. Hand made is often poorly made. So, I cannot diss them without
looking at one but I can see some good things if what their site says
is correct.

Mac 26
 

On 18 Nov 2005 15:27:04 -0600, Dave wrote:



I'm pleased with the result. The 5 1/2' draft fin keel does limit our
getting in to a few places, and I do have to put on the autopilot for the
boat to sail itself, but the tradeoff in speed was well worth it.

I totally understand that. In fact, I'm trying to "long-term loan" my
current C&C design (fast if old) so I don't have to sell it when I buy
a passagmaking boat. We'll have no schedule to keep, and I would
prefer exactly those features you cite when doing a circ.

When I get back though, I would sell it pronto and take up where I
left off with my cruiser-racer, far more appropriate for the light air
and only rarely shoal waters of Lake Ontario.

R.

Mac 26
 

In article ,
"Dene" dene@(nospam) ipns.com wrote:

It seems that the Mac 26 is a hybrid which brings me to my question,
is it the design/versatility that a sailer purist abhors, or is it
the quality of workmanship, or both?

Pretty much both. It's not great at anything, and it's very "lightly
built".

Our previous boat was the Mac 21. When another boat clipped us while we
were moored, we suffered an astounding amount of damage and we couldn't
stint on maintenance as there was little reserve strength.

BUT, we sailed her for almost a decade. We did some astoundingly stupid
things and she didn't let us down. Was a blast getting into areas too
shallow for some dinks.

--
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/

Mac 26
 

"Jim Cate" wrote


that COULD be sailed accross the Gulf, but, on balance, I
think we will
probably get in more sailing on our Mac than most of the owners
of these
larger boats.

Most real sailors would not want to ''sail' on your Mac.

SBV

Mac 26
 

Scotty wrote:

"Jim Cate" wrote




that COULD be sailed accross the Gulf, but, on balance, I


think we will


probably get in more sailing on our Mac than most of the owners


of these


larger boats.



Most real sailors would not want to ''sail' on your Mac.

SBV



And most of those "real sailors," as you call them have never sailed a
Mac. - A few have, but most wouldn't want to get on a Mac for fear that
one of their "real sailor" buddies might see them and look down their
noses at them. (I suggest that those who enjoy getting "atta-boys" by
criticising the Macs on this ng should at least provide a disclaimer if
they haven't sailed one of the recent (26M) models. In other words, a
disclaimer telling us that they really don't know what the hell they are
talking about.)

Bottom line: The Macs aren't ocean-crossing, blue water boats, but they
are, nevertheless, still fun to sail.

Jim

Mac 26
 

Yesterday, Ihad the opportunity to finally see a new Mac26 up close. I
was able to walk around her on her trailer but was not able to go
aboard or even look inside. From what i saw, I was impressed with
workmanship although her fittings seemed light. Her shrouds seemed the
right size but the fittings were sorta small to save weight. Her two
visible winches seemd small for what I am used to. However, I assume
her sail is also small to account for this. The double rudder looked
weird but thats ok. I assume the water ballast fills most of the
entire volume below the waterline so it seems like a lot. From the
cabin top, I think she must have far more interior volume than most
boats of that size. I would feel weird going over the cabin top to the
forpeak but would get used to it.
I was mostly impressed by the mast raising rig and the trailer made
just for her with many thoughts to details unique to her.
Many people say the Mac26 is ugly but I do not think so although I may
be aesthetically challenged. Similar boats that I do think are ugly
are the old and poorly made Buccaneer Bayliner (mostly occupying
landfills now) and Morgan Out Island boats. If you like boats purely
for traditional lines, the mac26 will be ugly to you. If you like
utilitarian designs, you might admire her looks.

Mac 26
 

wrote:

Yesterday, Ihad the opportunity to finally see a new Mac26 up close. I
was able to walk around her on her trailer but was not able to go
aboard or even look inside. From what i saw, I was impressed with
workmanship although her fittings seemed light. Her shrouds seemed the
right size but the fittings were sorta small to save weight. Her two
visible winches seemd small for what I am used to. However, I assume
her sail is also small to account for this. The double rudder looked
weird but thats ok. I assume the water ballast fills most of the
entire volume below the waterline so it seems like a lot. From the
cabin top, I think she must have far more interior volume than most
boats of that size. I would feel weird going over the cabin top to the
forpeak but would get used to it.
I was mostly impressed by the mast raising rig and the trailer made
just for her with many thoughts to details unique to her.
Many people say the Mac26 is ugly but I do not think so although I may
be aesthetically challenged. Similar boats that I do think are ugly
are the old and poorly made Buccaneer Bayliner (mostly occupying
landfills now) and Morgan Out Island boats. If you like boats purely
for traditional lines, the mac26 will be ugly to you. If you like
utilitarian designs, you might admire her looks.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the looks of the current model (the 26M, in the white version)
are improved relative to the previous models. - I don't know which one
you saw.

To me, the shorter versions of the Island Packet and the Crealock are
ugly. - Sort of like miniature tugboats. Of course, if you ignore their
looks, they are great, heavily built boats suited for extended blue
water sailing.

Jim

Mac 26
 

"Jim Cate" wrote


Most real sailors would not want to ''sail' on your Mac.

SBV



And most of those "real sailors," as you call them have never
sailed a
Mac. - A few have, but most wouldn't want to get on a Mac

Well, OK then, as long as we're agreed.

Scotty

Mac 26
 

Scotty wrote:

"Jim Cate" wrote


Most real sailors would not want to ''sail' on your Mac.

SBV




And most of those "real sailors," as you call them have never


sailed a


Mac. - A few have, but most wouldn't want to get on a Mac (Because of what their "real sailor" buddies might say about them.)


If they did, they might discover that they liked the Mac.- - That
would REALLY be embarrassing.




Well, OK then, as long as we're agreed.


Yes, we're pretty much in agreement.

Jim

Mac 26
 

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:
And most of those "real sailors," as you call them have never sailed a
Mac. -  A few have, but most wouldn't want to get on a Mac for fear
that one of their  "real sailor" buddies might see them and look down
their noses at them.  (I suggest that those who enjoy getting
"atta-boys" by criticising the Macs on this ng should at least provide
a disclaimer if they haven't sailed one of the recent (26M) models.  In
other words, a disclaimer telling us that they really don't know what
the hell they are talking about.)br

I have. I think their garbage boats. You're just upset because you
bought a piece of junk.

Bottom line: The Macs aren't ocean-crossing, blue water boats, but they
are, nevertheless, still fun to sail. br

YEah, in very protected waters, in very limited situations. Good for
you.. enjoy your Mac.

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

Mac 26
 

wrote:
I still think that was a good idea. That damned wire has caused me
real problems, ussually when someone who does not know how I leave the
boat clips it to the boom and I do not know it. Next time I go
sailing, I raise the main, ease the sheets, WTF is wrong. I look all
over the sail controls to see where my reefing lines are caught and it
NEVER occurs to me to notice that clip until a gust of wind nearly
knocks us down. I HATE THAT WIRE.


So tape it to the backstay, or at the very least, tape the clip off so
that it can't be easily used.

Jonathan

--
I am building my daughter an Argie 10 sailing dinghy, check it out:
http://home.comcast.net/~jonsailr

Mac 26
 

Jonathan Ganz wrote:

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:


And most of those "real sailors," as you call them have never sailed a
Mac. -  A few have, but most wouldn't want to get on a Mac for fear
that one of their  "real sailor" buddies might see them and look down
their noses at them.  (I suggest that those who enjoy getting
"atta-boys" by criticising the Macs on this ng should at least provide
a disclaimer if they haven't sailed one of the recent (26M) models.  In
other words, a disclaimer telling us that they really don't know what
the hell they are talking about.)br



I have. I think their garbage boats. You're just upset because you
bought a piece of junk.


Which models have you sailed, and under what circumstances? Have you
sailed the current model (the 26M)? They include several fairly
significant changes.



Bottom line: The Macs aren't ocean-crossing, blue water boats, but they
are, nevertheless, still fun to sail. br



YEah, in very protected waters, in very limited situations. Good for
you.. enjoy your Mac.


Very limited situations, in very protected waters? I agree that the Mac
isn't a good choice for an ocean crossing, and that their owners need to
know their boats' limitations, monitor the weather, etc. But if you
check trip reports on some of the Mac discussion groups, you would see
discussions from Mac owners who sail in a variety of waters in many
interesting locations around the world. Those in California, where the
boat is manufactured, sail in San Francisco Bay, often in high wind
conditions. Those near LA sail and/or motor offshore to Catalina Island,
etc. (They have the option of motoring out in two hours after work on a
Friday, then spending two days of sailing and exploring the area, then
returning by sail or motor Sunday afternoon or Monday morning.) - For
example, according to one recent report, there were more than 10 Macs
anchored at Catalina when the owner sailed there one weekend. Another
report was from a Mac owner who has sailed on several extended trips
near Marina Del Ray to the Channel Islands, from Oxnard. Of course, it's
also true that some Mac owners sail in lakes.... like, Lake Ontario,
Lake Michigan, etc. In New England, Mac owners sail from various areas
up and down the coast, and, and between Cape Cod, Buzzards Bay, etc. In
Florida, they sail offshore from Pensacola, or down the keys to Key
West, and from Key West out to the Tortugas. Others have sailed to the
Bahamas. In Europe, they sail in the Mediterranean, and in waters near
the British Isles. Also, there seem to be lots of Macs sailing from
Australia.

Of course, with a Mac you aren't limited to sailing from one home port
or sailing primarily in one region. If you have a week's vacation and
want to go to somewhere new, you can easily trailer the boat to a port
of your choice. E.g., north in the summer, and south in winter.

So, you were saying that Macs are restricted to "very limited
situations"? Really? - Seems to me that Mac owners have some pretty
interesting options.

Jim

Mac 26
 

Jonathan Ganz wrote:

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:


If they did, they might discover that they liked the Mac.- -   That
would REALLY be embarrassing. br



No they wouldn'tt. Macs are crap. Their lightly built and look like
it.

They certainly sail like it.



Sounds like you are having a bad hair day Johnny. - Hope the week picks
up for you.

Jim

Mac 26
 

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:
Sounds like you are having a bad hair day Johnny. - Hope the week picks
up for you.

Thanks Jimmy. I'm sure you're the expert on that subject!

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

Mac 26
 

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:
I have. I think their garbage boats. You're just upset because you
bought a piece of junk.

Which models have you sailed, and under what circumstances? Have you
sailed the current model (the 26M)? They include several fairly
significant changes.

If I told you, would you believe me... doubt it.

Would you believe me if I told you that I know a major dealer of them
in this area and even he thinks they're crap... doubt it.

YEah, in very protected waters, in very limited situations. Good for
you.. enjoy your Mac.


Very limited situations, in very protected waters? I agree that the Mac
isn't a good choice for an ocean crossing, and that their owners need to
bs deleted

It's nice when we agree.

Of course, with a Mac you aren't limited to sailing from one home port
or sailing primarily in one region. If you have a week's vacation and
want to go to somewhere new, you can easily trailer the boat to a port
of your choice. E.g., north in the summer, and south in winter.

Yep. Put it on a trailer and go to a nice quiet lake. I'm sure that
would be fine.

So, you were saying that Macs are restricted to "very limited
situations"? Really? - Seems to me that Mac owners have some pretty
interesting options.

Well, dumpster divers find pretty interesting things, but I wouldn't
want to be one.



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

Mac 26
 

Jim Cate wrote:
... Have you
sailed the current model (the 26M)? They include several fairly
significant changes.


You mean like the fancy new window shape & the (snicker) rotating mast?

The only significant change I've noticed in the boat is that they put a
bit more fiberglass on the transom, which needed it badly, and started
putting in a stronger steering system so it no longer breaks every time
the wind blows more than 12 knots.

(sigh) the things they don't tell you in the advertising brochures!

DSK

Mac 26
 

Jonathan Ganz wrote:

In article ,
Jim Cate wrote:


I have. I think their garbage boats. You're just upset because you
bought a piece of junk.



Which models have you sailed, and under what circumstances? Have you
sailed the current model (the 26M)? They include several fairly
significant changes.



If I told you, would you believe me... doubt it.


Try me.


Would you believe me if I told you that I know a major dealer of them
in this area and even he thinks they're crap... doubt it.



Shouldn't he consider some other kind of work? - There doesn't seem to
be a great deal of profit running a Mac dealership.

YEah, in very protected waters, in very limited situations. Good for
you.. enjoy your Mac.



Very limited situations, in very protected waters? I agree that the Mac
isn't a good choice for an ocean crossing, and that their owners need to


bs deleted

It's nice when we agree.


Johnny, seems to me that, if the Macs are simply a pile of junk as you
keep saying, we would see thousands of them breaking apart in any winds
higher than 15 knots or so, and we would see reports of hundreds of
skippers and passengers drowned or stranded on capsized boats.
Particularly since the Macs have been one of the most popular lines ever
made, with over 40,000 of them sold, reports of failures should be all
over the place. I spend a lot of time on the Mac discussion groups, and
I read lots of reports and sailing mags, and I don't remember seeing
accounts of any Macs that simply fell apart, or any on which the owners
or passengers were drowned, etc., other than the one in which a drunk
skipper rolled an overloaded Mac 26X with no ballast. As in any boat,
repairs are sometimes needed, but the Mac owners keep on sailing their
boats year after year, and when they want to trade, most of them seem to
buy a newer Mac.- In any event, with that many boats out there, and if
they are just a pile of junk as you say, surely hundreds of them would
have simply fallen apart or capsized by this time.

So, it should be fairly easy for you to cite some statisticsbacking up
your ridiculous assertions. Could you do that for us, Johnny? - If you
aren't just blowing smoke, that is.

Jim

Mac 26
 

Joe, are you still docked at the marina on Clear Lake?

Jim

Commodore Joe Redcloud© wrote:

On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:58:00 -0600, Jim Cate wrote:



Those near LA sail and/or motor offshore to Catalina Island,
etc. (They have the option of motoring out in two hours after work on a
Friday, then spending two days of sailing and exploring the area, then
returning by sail or motor Sunday afternoon or Monday morning.) - For
example, according to one recent report, there were more than 10 Macs
anchored at Catalina when the owner sailed there one weekend.



Good thinking to bring plenty of spares!


Commodore Joe Redcloud©

Mac 26
 

DSK wrote:

Jim Cate wrote:

... Have you sailed the current model (the 26M)? They include several
fairly significant changes.


You mean like the fancy new window shape & the (snicker) rotating mast?

The only significant change I've noticed in the boat is that they put
a bit more fiberglass on the transom, which needed it badly, and
started putting in a stronger steering system so it no longer breaks
every time the wind blows more than 12 knots.

(sigh) the things they don't tell you in the advertising brochures!

DSK


The M has a completely different hull, with deeper V, and uses a narrow
dagger board instead of a pivotable keel. Because the keel doesn't
pivot back into the hull, there is no six-foot recess or pocket in the
hull for receiving the board, and no corresponding "hump" in the cabin
floor. The mast is several feet higher, and the main has a more narrow
profile. The hull has an additional layer of fiberglass. Additionally,
the boat includes several hundred pounds of fixed ballast, in addition
to the water ballast. There are a number of other changes to the cabin,
cockpit, and exterior.

Jim

Jim

Mac 26
 

The elitists here who feel that only "traditional" designs belong on
the water need to loosen their yachtie captains hats and get over the
Mac26 and realize that it works very well enabling the less affluent
among us to go sailing and to do far more sailing than those who mainly
sail from yacht club bar stools. In spite of their apocryphal stories
of Mac26 disasters they can never back up, I have read of many great
Mac26 trips including the entire ICW, the inside passage to Alaska,
Catalina, Bahamas. From what I can tell, the current Mac26 is built
better than the original Hunters and some Beneteaus. As far as safety
is concerned, it seems considerably safer than most power boats and a
strong case can be made for it being safer than many other sail boats.