Hello there! I am new to this forum and new to sailing too! My husband and I have a (new to us) 1971 Venture 21 in great shape we are doing some small things to to get it on the water here in a few days. BUT, I've had my eye on the Macgregor 26M for the ability to do overnighters, haul to different locations and sail, etc. I like the space and the interior. However, the man doing some repairs on our Venture says he has sold Macgregor 26M's and he is not a fan. He says it's dangerous, he's seen some actually sink (he says the hull is very thin), and also that it tips (keels) way too easily as in a dangerous way. I do see that the owners here are very passionate about these boats which gives me hope! I have not actually seen one in person, yet I have really researched and read and viewed many articles on this boat. What can you MacGregor 26M Owners say to me about his assessment? I am very interested! And, thank you in advance.
Fell in love with the MacGregor 26M, but...
- Thread starter SailFan1
- Start date
What @Justin_NSA said. Look for a Mac 26S or 26D or even a Mac 25 (if the keel is in good shape). Other water ballast boats worth considering are the Catalina 250 as well as the Hunter 23.5, 26 and 260.
The Mac 25 is very similar to the V21 you have... it has a cast iron swing keel...but the interior is more like the Mac 26S or 26D. The other boats I mentioned (as well as the Mac 26M) are water ballast boats. You dump the ballast at the ramp to make it light enough to trailer. They feel very different when sailing. The first 5 degrees of heel is essentially a free fall with no counter righting moment. So the boat "jiggles" a lot when not under sail. After it heels about 5 degrees it starts to stiffen up and feel more similar to a "real" ballast boat. I have owned a Mac V21 and a Mac V22. I now own a Hunter 26. I have also sailed on a Mac 26S as well as a Mac 25. If you like the way the Mac 21 feels under sail, the Mac 25 will feel the most familiar and is probably the stiffest of the boats I mentioned. BUT you will need a hefty tow vehicle to pull the Mac 25 around.
I love my H26 but it is difficult to launch for a day sail. The Hunter 23.5 is surprisingly large for a 23.5 foot boat. You might also want to consider a Rhodes 22 for a small boat that is surprisingly large inside.
The Mac 25 is very similar to the V21 you have... it has a cast iron swing keel...but the interior is more like the Mac 26S or 26D. The other boats I mentioned (as well as the Mac 26M) are water ballast boats. You dump the ballast at the ramp to make it light enough to trailer. They feel very different when sailing. The first 5 degrees of heel is essentially a free fall with no counter righting moment. So the boat "jiggles" a lot when not under sail. After it heels about 5 degrees it starts to stiffen up and feel more similar to a "real" ballast boat. I have owned a Mac V21 and a Mac V22. I now own a Hunter 26. I have also sailed on a Mac 26S as well as a Mac 25. If you like the way the Mac 21 feels under sail, the Mac 25 will feel the most familiar and is probably the stiffest of the boats I mentioned. BUT you will need a hefty tow vehicle to pull the Mac 25 around.
I love my H26 but it is difficult to launch for a day sail. The Hunter 23.5 is surprisingly large for a 23.5 foot boat. You might also want to consider a Rhodes 22 for a small boat that is surprisingly large inside.
I've been working on a spreadsheet (Excel) for comparison of these models - except I didn't put the Ventura in there. But I will. If the OP will PM me, I'll send her the spreadsheet after I shore up the Mac section. There are SBO links to reviews of these models. We are not allowed to post spreadsheets - for a good reason. To PM hover over my user name.
I have owned a 26m for around 5 years. It does exactly what I want it to do. I can easily sail at hull speed with a decent breeze. I can motor at 16 knots. It trailers and launches easily. I keep it in my garage, so it stays clean and ready to go (also no worries during storms). I only sail with friends and family, so if it was the least bit dangerous, I would have gotten rid of it instantly.
The safety record for these boats is remarkable considering who typically buys them (and the people who borrow them). There are very few fatalities associated with them, all of which can be traced to mis-use and/or operator error. Are they idiot proof? No.
It is lightly built for ease of trailering and setup. However, I've sailed mine in 20 knots, gusting higher, and about 6 ft chop without any issues. It's not an easy relaxing sail in those conditions, but the boat can easily handle it. You will be heavily reefed in those conditions.
I'm 185 lbs, and 6'2", and can hop off the docks onto the boat without it getting scary. The 26m has 300 lbs of permanent ballast - making it surprisingly stable, even with the water ballast tank empty.
At a PHRF of 274 (give or take), you won't be leading the pack on race day. There is a speed, just above hull speed when motoring, where the boat wanders a bit - requiring a very attentive Helmsman. I learned quickly to go hull speed, or get it up on plane. It's very well behaved when planing.
You shouldn't sail it without the water ballast in. You shouldn't overload the boat, nor should you put a crowd on deck when motoring fast. If you can't follow manufacturers instructions, don't buy one.
Plan on at least an hour to rig, and an hour and a half to ready for trailering. I'm down to about half those numbers after 5 years.
It is not a keel boat. It will heel to 10-15 degrees before the water ballast hardens it up. It is certainly not dangerous. I have tried deliberately to put mine on its side. It is quite well mannered, but does heel. It sails best on its feet, so if you're more than 20-25 degrees, you're likely losing speed.
As @Justin_NSA says, if you don't want a hybrid boat, don't buy a 26m. There are better sailboats, and better motor boats. It has a big cabin, but that comes with windage. Docking in a cross-wind the first time will scare the $h!zzle right out of you. That has been the most irritating quality overall for me.
If motoring home before dark at 16 knots into a head wind appeals to you, then a hybrid might be worth considering. If you strictly want to sail, or plan to do a lot of racing, look at something else.
Last edited:
The interior finish is minimal, and storage access is somewhat lacking.
The galley on mine did not come with the optional flush mount Origo. So I just finished building a slightly improved galley for mine. Hoping to do some extended camping in mine, so trying to make it a little nicer inside.
The wheel helm steers the outboard and the twin rudders simultaneously. Ordering the outboard quick disconnect kit is a must in my opinion - which lets you disconnect the outboard when sailing. It holds the outboard centered, so if something sudden happened, you could drop the tilt and steer with the rudders. But, disconnecting my 60hp tilted outboard from the helm is a totally different experience. When connected, the tilted outboard is flopping back and forth - giving a heavy feel to the helm that is totally unrelated to the rudder feel. When disconnected, the helm is very light and holds course well when released. Which brings us to another point. If you are a tiller sailor, and like rudder feedback, you may not care for the wheel helm.
The galley on mine did not come with the optional flush mount Origo. So I just finished building a slightly improved galley for mine. Hoping to do some extended camping in mine, so trying to make it a little nicer inside.
The wheel helm steers the outboard and the twin rudders simultaneously. Ordering the outboard quick disconnect kit is a must in my opinion - which lets you disconnect the outboard when sailing. It holds the outboard centered, so if something sudden happened, you could drop the tilt and steer with the rudders. But, disconnecting my 60hp tilted outboard from the helm is a totally different experience. When connected, the tilted outboard is flopping back and forth - giving a heavy feel to the helm that is totally unrelated to the rudder feel. When disconnected, the helm is very light and holds course well when released. Which brings us to another point. If you are a tiller sailor, and like rudder feedback, you may not care for the wheel helm.
Last edited:
I really am appreciating all of your feedback gentlemen!! Your input is all very helpful. I am open to other boats, but we do have the concern and limitation with our car only able to tow 3500 lbs., maybe just a bit more.I’d love to be able to consider some of these other larger or heavier boats, but maybe down the road. I will respond to each of you as I go thru your responses. Truly, thank you!!
People are often surprised when they see how thin the wings and fuselage of a light airplane are, too. But they confuse bulk with strength. In reality, the situation is more complex. As with an airplane, each bit of weigh savings reduces loads in other areas leading to further possible weight savings. (And it works the other way, too, of course: Each unnecessary weight gain increases loads in other areas resulting in further weight gain.) For example, when the bow hits a wave the resulting forces are directly proportional to the mass of the boat because they are the result of the wave trying to decelerate the boat, and F=ma. Keeping the hull light allows less sail area, which allows lighter rigging, which together allows less ballast and, in the end, you have a boat that's much lighter and therefore experiences much less force when it hits a wave. Combine that with vacuum bagged, oriented fiber construction (rather than the chop fiber used on a lot of older boats) and you have a hull that seems thin and flimsy to someone accustomed to those older boats, but is plenty strong enough for its intended purpose. Nobody would claim that a Mac 26 is a blue water boat, but they're plenty strong enough for how they're meant to be sailed.
A water ballasted boat would seem perfect for your trailering needs. They are larger yet not nearly as heavy as their LOA competition. You still haven't said you need the motoring capability of the 26M. Plus, those big motors are heavy when weight is a concern.
Tons of truth here, with a couple of comments.
I totally agree with the notion of light/strong construction. Its the only way to make truly fast sailboats. But you cannot forget about design and material choice. The simple fact is that most light and strong sailboats are MORE expensive than their heavier counterparts not less. The lighter/cheaper/better story that Roger Mcgregor spun to newbies is simply not true. Quality/weight/cost. You get to pick two.
I've never hear of one sinking because of it, the the loudest oil-canning I've every heard was on a mac. Wow.
You mention vacuum-bagged construction. Pretty sure they never did that.
You would be getting close with a Mac 26M. The specs show the empty boat at 2550. Now add an O.B. (350lb) gear, cooler, anchor, spare anchor, chain, food, stores and you are pushing your limit if not over already. If you go with a Mac 26s or 26d your empty weight is 1650 and your O.B. is in the 90lb range.
I have towed mine with an AWD 2007 Equinox LT. It was rated at 3,500 towing capacity. It made the 28 mile round trip, and got the boat up the ramp; but I never used it to tow again. It was significantly overloaded. My boat is not heavily modified, and I never have over about 10 gallons of gas. All of that to say, at 3,500 towing capacity, don't plan on going far, towing a 26m - based on my experience. The 2008 Trailblazer with the 4.2 6 cyl, towed it fine. My 2016 Silverado crew LT tows it fine. You will need a higher tow rating to pull an M to really travel and enjoy it.
If you aren't planning on a new tow vehicle, you need to be looking at a lighter boat.
If you aren't planning on a new tow vehicle, you need to be looking at a lighter boat.
I don't think Macgregor ever claimed these boats were better than other sailboats in some general or global sense. He said that making them lighter and cheaper (and, yes, he did achieve both) made them better in specific ways. Better because easier to tow, launch, and recover which, for these boats, were critical requirements. Better because being easy to tow, launch, and recover means they can be kept at home, saving moorage cost and making maintenance far easier. And better because more affordable is always better, if the design meets its requirements.
Your quality/weight/cost triad is true when low weight is achieved using more expensive materials and processes. But, again, that's not what Macgregor claimed, nor is it how they went about keeping weight low. Macgregor counted on building a relatively large number of boats from his investment in capital equipment to keep the manufactured cost low, rather than using exotic materials or processes. And, because the design kept the boat very light (DLR under 100, in imperial units), smaller sails and lighter rigging could be used, leading to further weight and cost reduction.
Macgregor didn't deceive anyone. Sure, he portrayed his boats in the most positive way he truthfully could in his marketing material. Who doesn't? But the claims are all true, and the boats do perform as advertised.
That's one area where Macgregor might have buttered the bread a little. On paper, a vehicle with a 3500 lb towing capacity is fine at least for the earlier Mac 26s, like mine. But I don't think you'd find it a very satisfactory experience, in practice, if you have to tow a long way, or often. I have no experience with the 26Ms or 26Xs, but I'm sure they're not lighter than my boat.
Also, there's more than just towing capacity to consider. I find with the 26S that having AWD or 4WD is pretty much a necessity, for regular launching and recovery. With certain combinations of ramp slope, surface, and surface condition you're going to have a hard time getting the boat out of the water without it. Remember, it's 1200 lb heavier when you recover it. That might not be a problem for the ramps you expect to use, but it will limit where you can go, to some extent.
@Jackdaw is correct. The 26m is hand laminated, but not vacuum bagged.
Start viewing around 5 mins 20 secs for the construction techniques on the M boat.
And I want to stress that you can't talk about Macgregor boats as if they are similar (other than the light construction). The two power sailer hybrids (26x and 26m) are somewhat similar. Earlier boats are very different. They are more of a pure sailboat, but the water ballast (and boat stability without the ballast tank full) can be very different. You really need to experience the boats you are considering. I have been on a 26x, a 26m, and a 26s. The hybrid boats were a radical departure from the 26s.
Last edited:
Tedd,
You seem like a smart guy who likes his boat. This comment has nothing to do with that fact!
But, Mcgregors marketing material is filled with hyperbole, half-truths and lies of omission. Mostly designed for newbies who don't or can't see through it. All maintained here.
I'm been on (cruising or racing) 100s of boats. Including several mac, 25s and 26s. In my option their construction is crude and lightweight, to the point of being underbuilt.. They flex, oilcan and leak through the hull deck joint. Roger touts this particular construction, but in fact they use window sealing foam as a sealant. The notion that that use 'buying power' to make 'a better boat at lower cost' is simply untrue. While maybe bigger then some of their older SoCal competitors, Up against the likes Beneteau (or to a lesser degree Hunter or Catalina) is silly. Beneteau is a BILLION dollar/year company. Their buying and cost amortization power is immense. They cost more because they are built better. Full stop.
Practical Sailor shares that opinion.
MacGregor 26 (newer model) - Practical Sailor
Since 1974, Practical Sailor’s independent testing has taken the guesswork out of boat and gear buying.
www.practical-sailor.com
Lies? I can read the marketing material and find dozens. Most small, but designed to plain an untrue picture. Like this one.
The daggerboard’s long, thin airfoil is far more efficient than a short, wide one. This is why racing sailboat keels are deep, and why sailplane wings are long and thin. The relationship between the fore and aft width of the board and its length is called its aspect ratio. Most boats have keels with aspect ratios of 2 to 1 (meaning that the keel or centerboard is two times as deep as it is wide). The MacGregor 26 centerboard has a ratio of five to one (it is 16″ wide and 5′ 6″ deep). The high aspect ratio increases lift as the boat sails into the wind and reduces drag. This is one of the major reasons that the new 26 will point closer into the wind and sail faster than other trailerables.
FIVE to one? Its actually 4.1 of full draft, not just the board extension. But he rounds up.
Then this section on rigging. I don't know where to begin. T-toggles. Turnbuckles? Swages? Dummies!
RIGGING: Ours is specifically designed for trailering. We use stay adjusters, rather than turnbuckles, for the wires that support the mast. With masts that are raised and lowered, turnbuckle bending and failure is very common. Stay adjusters are stronger and far more reliable. Also, we bolt the support wires to the mast, rather than using removable “T” fittings that can fall off and allow the wires to tangle up in the trailer wheels when on the road. We use double nicopress fittings on the mast support wires because of their reliability. Swaged fittings have a tendency to crack, and it is impossible to determine their true condition without X-ray. The nicopress fittings, in contrast, are easy to inspect. We have had remarkable success with these fittings over many years. On hang gliders and ultra light aircraft, you will always see nicropress and not swaged fittings. These guys really have their life on the line when choosing hardware.
But here is the deal. In protected water I've never felt unsafe on one, and the 25 sailed pretty well. As the British would say 'cheap and cheerful'. But the marketing portrayed them as much more then they are, and that can be dangerous.
Last edited:
Sorry @Tedd. Going to have to lean more toward @Jackdaw on this one (with regard to the 26m - I have not fully experienced an S).
I love my 26m. It does what I want, at a price point I can afford. It is an odd combination. I'm an odd guy.
You can't compare build quality of a Mac with offshore boats, or higher dollar boats. The quality and price point were compromises. Roger was a marketing/sales guy through and through. I'm an engineer, and I know marketing when I step in it. All companies selling products do it to the best of their ability and Roger was among the best.
The Mac boats meet their design objectives. Use them for their intended purposes, and enjoy them for what they are. If you own one, develop a thick skin. They are one of the most (if not the most) vilified boats in the industry. If you can't take the criticism, buy something else. The fact that so many people hated them and basically said "they are so dangerous, you will die if you even walk past one on the trailer" intrigued me. It was such a sharp contrast to the majority of actual owners who really enjoyed them. One test sail/motor later, I owned one.
Perfect boat? No. Perfect for my current needs? Check. Can I take criticism? All day long.
I love my 26m. It does what I want, at a price point I can afford. It is an odd combination. I'm an odd guy.
You can't compare build quality of a Mac with offshore boats, or higher dollar boats. The quality and price point were compromises. Roger was a marketing/sales guy through and through. I'm an engineer, and I know marketing when I step in it. All companies selling products do it to the best of their ability and Roger was among the best.
The Mac boats meet their design objectives. Use them for their intended purposes, and enjoy them for what they are. If you own one, develop a thick skin. They are one of the most (if not the most) vilified boats in the industry. If you can't take the criticism, buy something else. The fact that so many people hated them and basically said "they are so dangerous, you will die if you even walk past one on the trailer" intrigued me. It was such a sharp contrast to the majority of actual owners who really enjoyed them. One test sail/motor later, I owned one.
Perfect boat? No. Perfect for my current needs? Check. Can I take criticism? All day long.