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'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.

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 may refer to me as Gawd Almighty.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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