Something I just heard... Mac 26
- Thread starter Chris Blubaugh
- Start date
- Status
Yes, it's about tradeoffs -
Aside from that, I like the simple design of the MacGregor, the low cost and associated maintenance.
Have sailed on a Catalina 250 and liked the boat, but probably too big/heavy for what I'm looking for right now.
Thanks everyone for all the input.
I am still looking to stay in the "trailerable" realm as I may be moving around with the job - and I don't want to invest in a heavy-duty tow vehicle.
Aside from that, I like the simple design of the MacGregor, the low cost and associated maintenance.
Have sailed on a Catalina 250 and liked the boat, but probably too big/heavy for what I'm looking for right now.
Thanks everyone for all the input.
I was asking what the length was, not what lwl meant.... Caleb, Thanks for answering the question.
As far as the speed; Sumner thanks for the PHRF ratings.
I posted my previous comment from my cell phone this morning which is why I didn't look any of that up myself, but I wanted to get the question of the facts out there to stop the emotional responses about if the boats are good or not.
my personal opinion is that they are very ugly boats, and as I have no need to trailer the boat, prefer something with a keel for better pointing and ability to handle weather. This however does not mean the Mac is a BAD boat, just not one that I would want as it does not suit MY needs. If I was sailing out west on lakes like the picture above, the mac (or the new Hunter Edge which I find equally displeasing to the eye) would make sense and be a good option to buy.
As to all the comments about how bad they sail, I would have lost money in a bar bet before reading this thread about the speed of the Mac's, but the PHRF rating shows that they are consistently capable of sailing to the hull speed of the boat, and are probably not bad light air sailors (I assume it's because they weigh next to nothing), but due to that same light displacement that helps them to sail with such small sail plans, probably requires the reducing of canvas in air that many slightly larger boats just begin to get fun and come alive in.
On my boat with a similar LWL, but more than twice the displacement and a keel, I stop using the 250% drifter in favor of the 110% Genoa around 8kts, and will reef the main around 15-18kts (depending on what tack I'm on), and can comfortably sail with less than 10 degrees of heel under the reefed main alone still doing around 6kts up to winds of at least 25kts (I did just last weekend).
I suspect most Mac owners will think of being out in 25kts of wind with any canvas still up and imagine things on the verge of or actually breaking, water over the gunwale, and people scrambling to hang on.
The point being that a Mac is build for a completely different environment than a boat with a real keel that most people compare them to, and as such cannot be compared to one another. Macs are used primarily on large inland freshwater lakes and reservoirs, and only a small percentage of the macs out there sail on salt water or ever see actual ocean conditions. Take your 5 foot of draft to the keel out to many of the places macs are popular and see A) how well it sails in the lighter air, and B) how little of the water is usable with the deeper draft.
So knock them all you want, it's like saying oranges are horrible because you like apples.
(but I still think they are ugly)
I'll offer this perspective regarding MacGregors:
Back in the 70's I worked at 4 different sailboat plants in Costa Mesa, Calif., same town as MacGregor. We all saw them as a joke, really looked down our nose at them. Their workforce was incredibly unskilled, so much so that there were dimples molded into the decks where holes were to be drilled for various deck hardware. The foreman would carry around a model paint set and put different color dots in the dimples corresponding to a colored set of drill bits used by the deck crew. Couldn't explain drill sizes to them but they understood the roja drill went into the roja dimple.
And here we are 35 years later. All the 'real' boat manufacturers are long gone, their facilities are now moving and storage companies, business parks or Jacuzzi plants and MacGregor is in the same building on the same street in the same town shipping boats down the same driveway every day.
Back in the 70's I worked at 4 different sailboat plants in Costa Mesa, Calif., same town as MacGregor. We all saw them as a joke, really looked down our nose at them. Their workforce was incredibly unskilled, so much so that there were dimples molded into the decks where holes were to be drilled for various deck hardware. The foreman would carry around a model paint set and put different color dots in the dimples corresponding to a colored set of drill bits used by the deck crew. Couldn't explain drill sizes to them but they understood the roja drill went into the roja dimple.
And here we are 35 years later. All the 'real' boat manufacturers are long gone, their facilities are now moving and storage companies, business parks or Jacuzzi plants and MacGregor is in the same building on the same street in the same town shipping boats down the same driveway every day.
Good honest comments and I agree with them, but wonder about the following......
....above is a Mac 19 power sailer that morphed later into the X..
....and a Mac 21 .....
....and a 22....
...and a Mac 25
and a classic 26D. The first of the water ballast Mac's, but not a power sailer as it has a displacement hull (D for dagger board)...
and above the classic 26S. Followed the D and the S is for a swing centerboard (still water ballast)...
and above the X still with water ballast, but with a planning hull and capable of running over 20 knots with a 60-90 HP outboard. Has 5 foot 11 inches of headroom and a lot larger inside than the Macs before it, but still a 26 footer like the D and S before it.....
and the current model the M with 6 feet of head room. A little video of an X out in not so calm conditions.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smlP6iXnk2s&feature=related
Of course there was also the 65-70....
...at one time the fastest production (displacement) sailboat I believe.
and the 36......
So which ones don't you like the looks of? All of them?
Thanks,
Sum
Our Trips to Lake Powell, UT - Kootenay Lake, Canada - Priest Lake, ID
Our Mac Pages
Mac-Venture Links
.... wondering which Mac you think is ugly. Care to post a picture of one or pick from one of the models below?
....above is a Mac 19 power sailer that morphed later into the X..
....and a Mac 21 .....
....and a 22....
...and a Mac 25
and a classic 26D. The first of the water ballast Mac's, but not a power sailer as it has a displacement hull (D for dagger board)...
and above the classic 26S. Followed the D and the S is for a swing centerboard (still water ballast)...
and above the X still with water ballast, but with a planning hull and capable of running over 20 knots with a 60-90 HP outboard. Has 5 foot 11 inches of headroom and a lot larger inside than the Macs before it, but still a 26 footer like the D and S before it.....
and the current model the M with 6 feet of head room. A little video of an X out in not so calm conditions.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smlP6iXnk2s&feature=related
Of course there was also the 65-70....
...at one time the fastest production (displacement) sailboat I believe.
and the 36......
So which ones don't you like the looks of? All of them?
Thanks,
Sum
Our Trips to Lake Powell, UT - Kootenay Lake, Canada - Priest Lake, ID
Our Mac Pages
Mac-Venture Links
Regarding appearances, I think all boats drawn with a straightedge rather than a curve possess a certain ugliness - all of 'em.
I think they are all ugly except the 21, 22, and 25. They are a victim of their success on the 26's because even though they make other models, that is the line they are best and most widely known for. Aside from the large wrap around black stripe that tries to make a 26 fot boat look like a shrunken cruise ship, I think the uglyiest thing about them is the sloping side to the cockpit that comes from the cabin top down to the stern, coupled with an enourmous amount of freeboard makes the boat look to me like a bastardized sterndrive powerboat with a mast.
None of this makes it a BAD boat, just one I don't want.
Overall, I think the designers lack the ability to build a boat with nice lines to it
Have you ever seen the 65 in person? it looks like a 26x stretched out to 65 feet long. the hull has no shape to it at all, it's 11 feet wide for like 59 of it's 65 feet, and the hull below the waterline looks no different! it's basically an 11 foot diameter fiberglass tube with the top flattened to make the deck, a very short bulb wing keel underneath, and the front pinched off to make the bow, and stern closed up. The pilothouse version looks just the same, if you were to stretch out the 26m.
of course the 65 was the fastest production boat at the time, I doubt anyone else made anything close to that size at the waterline in production back in the 70's.
None of this makes it a BAD boat, just one I don't want.
Overall, I think the designers lack the ability to build a boat with nice lines to it
Have you ever seen the 65 in person? it looks like a 26x stretched out to 65 feet long. the hull has no shape to it at all, it's 11 feet wide for like 59 of it's 65 feet, and the hull below the waterline looks no different! it's basically an 11 foot diameter fiberglass tube with the top flattened to make the deck, a very short bulb wing keel underneath, and the front pinched off to make the bow, and stern closed up. The pilothouse version looks just the same, if you were to stretch out the 26m.
of course the 65 was the fastest production boat at the time, I doubt anyone else made anything close to that size at the waterline in production back in the 70's.
We had a Mac 26D for 9 years and sailed rings around many boats. The down side other than low headroom is storage. I think most people do mods to improve storage and make the boat "Theirs" We certainly did. I think it's a great boat for protected water. I wouldn't take it into our Pacific Ocean. After 9 years we sold it this June for $1100 more than we paid for it although we had done a lot of improvements. As for the dagger board VS swing keel we never had a grounding problem where we sail. The daggerboard is no more handicap than a fixed keel would be. It can't be beat trailering.
We sold because we wanted a bigger boat that we could moor. The moving keel is an invitation to barnacles because of the moving parts.
We sold because we wanted a bigger boat that we could moor. The moving keel is an invitation to barnacles because of the moving parts.
Be nice
Not cool to knock another person's choice. Kind of like saying "Your spouse is ugly". You just never know the whole story behind a person's choice (maybe there're rich). At least we are all on the water in whatever boat. Hence the saying "Whatever floats your boat".
Not cool to knock another person's choice. Kind of like saying "Your spouse is ugly". You just never know the whole story behind a person's choice (maybe there're rich). At least we are all on the water in whatever boat. Hence the saying "Whatever floats your boat".
In the past, when Mac's have been bashed, the forum owner usually points out that there are a lot of them around. Seems only a handful of people here get involved in the bashing but it probably runs off a fair amount of chandlery business.
Ive had an old 1990 Mac26S for a few years now, Ive really enjoyed it myself but I enjoy working on the boat and my application is inland lakes. One of the lakes has all sorts of nice under water things to hit the centerboard on and this lake is a windy MF. I single hand the old Mac at this lake fairly often and I like that I can let the centerboard freely swing but never worry about the righting moment changing. Its relatively easy to do maintenance on the centerboard. Im also currently moored in about 3 feet of water and the Mac also easily allows for this. They don't have standing head room inside - but Im not so sure standing head room is a "good" idea in any easy to trailer boat (but lots of people have no problem with the trade off).. I personally like the lower freeboard. The old Macs are really more like a stretched out 22 foot boat than a lot of the other boats which are 26 foot but its got plenty of room for me. I had the boat on a slip at a Denver lake in the spring, took it to Lake Powell for a five day trip, now it is moored at a high mountain lake. The change is nice..
The downside for me... the additional hassle of water ballast that the zebra mussel issue has caused. I think this is mostly an issue in Colorado but it really limits where Im willing to take the boat.
And.. I really like what it costs me to own this boat!!!! Great dollar to fun ratio.
Ive had an old 1990 Mac26S for a few years now, Ive really enjoyed it myself but I enjoy working on the boat and my application is inland lakes. One of the lakes has all sorts of nice under water things to hit the centerboard on and this lake is a windy MF. I single hand the old Mac at this lake fairly often and I like that I can let the centerboard freely swing but never worry about the righting moment changing. Its relatively easy to do maintenance on the centerboard. Im also currently moored in about 3 feet of water and the Mac also easily allows for this. They don't have standing head room inside - but Im not so sure standing head room is a "good" idea in any easy to trailer boat (but lots of people have no problem with the trade off).. I personally like the lower freeboard. The old Macs are really more like a stretched out 22 foot boat than a lot of the other boats which are 26 foot but its got plenty of room for me. I had the boat on a slip at a Denver lake in the spring, took it to Lake Powell for a five day trip, now it is moored at a high mountain lake. The change is nice..
The downside for me... the additional hassle of water ballast that the zebra mussel issue has caused. I think this is mostly an issue in Colorado but it really limits where Im willing to take the boat.
And.. I really like what it costs me to own this boat!!!! Great dollar to fun ratio.
- Status