On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 21:52:12 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 17:48:24 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Now I want to try that Flying Scot, but I've got no
doubt it'll make the Max 26 feel like a dog under sail.

More like 3 dogs :-)

The Flying Scot will run circles around it.

The mac 26 is just too big a compromise in my opinion. Most people
end up using them under power most of the time, and they aren't nearly
as well suited for that as a real power boat.

Your opinion noted and respected.
I've spent considerable time reading the Mac forum and other sail
forums, including ASA. You're right about Mac 26's being used mostly
under power, but the same is true for all cruising sailboats, Mac or
not. The Mac just powers better.
I've read post after post from non-Mac cruising sailors who hardly
ever sail! They are frank when informal surveys are done.
Not enough wind to hoist sail. Too windy to hoist sail. ICW
unsuitable for sailing. Easier to just crank up the motor. Don't
want to beat against the wind. Prefer not to heel too much because
the drinks get spilled. And on and on. Others are marina or hook
sailors who seemingly *never* sail, but write posts about sailing
quite a bit, much as I'm doing and I don't even have a boat!
Just as a rough estimate from my reading, I'd say Mac owners spend
more time out in the water moving than the average sailboat owner.
Some of the Mac owners sail quite a bit and enjoy it. Some
of them have been sailing all their lives on quicker boats but still
are happy to sail their Macs. Since I'm not a sailing purist, and
have vowed never to be in a hurry, I have no problem with the Mac
being slow. I'll give a friendly wave to those who pass and leave
them to feel like happy because they passed a Mac. Since you were a
racing sailor, you may have difficulty connecting to that mindset.
Of course, maybe I'll trouble with it to when I get to sailing.
Bottom line is you want to sail, you hoist sail. If you want to race
under sail and brag about it, don't get a Mac.
Actually, on the power cruiser side, there seems to be even less
compromise.
Like sailers, power cruisers come in many flavors. Speed, cabin
size, fishing suitability, economy and weather handling quickly come
to mind. The Mac is again slow to the speedster, probably doing
12-15 knots with a cruising load and 50hp. Still faster than tugs and
trawlers at better economy. Might get superb MPG if powered right and
kept below hull speed. Most owners don't use it that way.
It's not a good fishing platform. It's better in weather than an open
boat and at least equal to a similarly priced power cruiser.
The cabin space is voluminous compared to motor cruisers of the same
length, though buried below deck and not well appointed stock.
The power cruiser aspect is what got me interested in the Mac in the
first place, when I realized that if I went with the Carolina Skiff my
sense of gas economy and no need for speed would have me running
it off plane. So in considering economical hull types I reached the
Mac, which might be called a semi-displacement hull, and has many
advantages over the Carolina Skiff in my eyes, though it's 8-10k more.
That's where I am now, compromised. And it's fun enough.
I've worn this subject out for now, and other facts are intervening.
Was going to Punta Gorda first week of April and try out some boats,
but I've been offered a six month contract that will probably draw me
out of retirement, which is good and bad.
Bad because I don't like work, good because I can get more boat.
Since in six months I might be too old to handle sail and have more
money too, that RF246 might look sweeter yet.
If I'm stuck here I'll call some sailing contacts and maybe crew on
Lake Michigan some weekends this summer to get a better picture.
Gosh, I hope I don't get seasick. That'll screw things up real good.

--Vic