Between Hunter 260 and Macgregor 26 Which trialerble boat is better for coastal crusing? Area we sail: 1. Long island sound 2. Block island 3. Around New York City
- Status
Mac26 vs H260
I went through some number crunching and careful analysis prior to buying my boat. Go to this site and click on the "specs" link. This might help you make the choice. Go to: http://kobernus.com/hunter260/index.html I have a number of Mac26 friends and their reaction to the H260 is always the same.
I went through some number crunching and careful analysis prior to buying my boat. Go to this site and click on the "specs" link. This might help you make the choice. Go to: http://kobernus.com/hunter260/index.html I have a number of Mac26 friends and their reaction to the H260 is always the same.
Not "costal" cruisers.
Bob: These boat are not costal cruisers. They are designed for very protected waters. Just as look as you know the weather you should be fine with the Hunter the your described area. I think you can get some VERY strong weather in the sound and you will want to be careful there too. One big advantage of the Hunter is the fact that you can NOT dump the ballast until the boat is pulled out of the water. I believe that the M give you the ability to dump the ballast. This is a serious safety concern. Without ballast and four people aboard they can/will capsize. There was an article several years ago in Latitude 38 about this exact issue in San Franciso Bay.
Bob: These boat are not costal cruisers. They are designed for very protected waters. Just as look as you know the weather you should be fine with the Hunter the your described area. I think you can get some VERY strong weather in the sound and you will want to be careful there too. One big advantage of the Hunter is the fact that you can NOT dump the ballast until the boat is pulled out of the water. I believe that the M give you the ability to dump the ballast. This is a serious safety concern. Without ballast and four people aboard they can/will capsize. There was an article several years ago in Latitude 38 about this exact issue in San Franciso Bay.
Another great link George! Thanks!
I like my H26 for the 95% of the time that I'm at anchor or otherwise stationary. The space and comfort make it seem like a much bigger boat. That said, the Mac S26 will tow with a smaller vehicle, and folks who have them love them. An older mac 26S will sell for half of what an H26 sells for here in BC. That says two things; the H26 is more desireable, and there are a lot more Mac 26s around. You will probably be happy with either boat. If you want a sailboat that goes fast (20 mph) under power, the Mac is your only choice.
I like my H26 for the 95% of the time that I'm at anchor or otherwise stationary. The space and comfort make it seem like a much bigger boat. That said, the Mac S26 will tow with a smaller vehicle, and folks who have them love them. An older mac 26S will sell for half of what an H26 sells for here in BC. That says two things; the H26 is more desireable, and there are a lot more Mac 26s around. You will probably be happy with either boat. If you want a sailboat that goes fast (20 mph) under power, the Mac is your only choice.
Coastal Cruisers
The H26/260 designation is a class "C" boat "Category C – Inshore Voyages on coastal waters, large lakes, bays estuaries, or rivers, where wind force of up to force 6 on the Beaufort scale and significant wave heights of up to 2 meters may be experienced. " John Baumgartner is probably the authority on this issue. Maybe he can take time off from his 1700 mile coastal trip to comment on this matter.
The H26/260 designation is a class "C" boat "Category C – Inshore Voyages on coastal waters, large lakes, bays estuaries, or rivers, where wind force of up to force 6 on the Beaufort scale and significant wave heights of up to 2 meters may be experienced. " John Baumgartner is probably the authority on this issue. Maybe he can take time off from his 1700 mile coastal trip to comment on this matter.
We love our 260
Well George the trip in 8,700 nm but we have only traveled about 1700 nm, LOL. We like our 260 because of all the room below decks that we have used to modify the boat for long distance travel. We have traveled to the bahamas twice from Miami. We are kinda extream in distance travel on the water. We are now on a trip that takes us around the Eastern half of the US, up the East coast and thru the heartland of the US and across the Gulf ICW to the Keys than back to Jacksonville FL. Sould take us about 16-18 months. We only travel during the day and watch for weather windows. We have hit some weather but the boat can handle more than we can. What can I say we love our 260, Baums Rush. John Baumgartner. If you want to get on our "sailing update just send me an e-mail and ask to be put on, The sailing update is an e-mail that I send out about 1 a week. ****LKYusnret2@aol.com****
Well George the trip in 8,700 nm but we have only traveled about 1700 nm, LOL. We like our 260 because of all the room below decks that we have used to modify the boat for long distance travel. We have traveled to the bahamas twice from Miami. We are kinda extream in distance travel on the water. We are now on a trip that takes us around the Eastern half of the US, up the East coast and thru the heartland of the US and across the Gulf ICW to the Keys than back to Jacksonville FL. Sould take us about 16-18 months. We only travel during the day and watch for weather windows. We have hit some weather but the boat can handle more than we can. What can I say we love our 260, Baums Rush. John Baumgartner. If you want to get on our "sailing update just send me an e-mail and ask to be put on, The sailing update is an e-mail that I send out about 1 a week. ****LKYusnret2@aol.com****
H26
Bob, I wonder if you have posted this same question on the Macgregor site? It would be interesting to compare responses. It is likely that you will hear a Hunter bias here, and a Macgregor bias on that site. Having said that, when we bought our 95 H26 last year, we looked at a new Macgregor 26 at the same dealership. There was no comparison in the interior space; the H26 is much roomier and better laid out, at least for our tastes. One of the reasons of course is the wider beam; which puts it on the edge for trailering. Almost everything about the boat seemed more substantial and more stongly constructed. As someone mentioned the trailer is heavier with tandem axle versus single axle. You will have to consider your tow vehicle. I have a Ford 350 so I can reliably transport the boat over long distances. The dealer said two things that I thought interesting: A Macgregor, with its large motor and and fast speeds can out run many storms/bad weather and get to port before things get too rough. About Hunter he said that Hunter is a big boat manufacturer that also makes a smaller boat and applies the same quality/standards to the smaller boats. Since buying the H26, I have gotten some excellent advice and information from this forum which has been value added.
Bob, I wonder if you have posted this same question on the Macgregor site? It would be interesting to compare responses. It is likely that you will hear a Hunter bias here, and a Macgregor bias on that site. Having said that, when we bought our 95 H26 last year, we looked at a new Macgregor 26 at the same dealership. There was no comparison in the interior space; the H26 is much roomier and better laid out, at least for our tastes. One of the reasons of course is the wider beam; which puts it on the edge for trailering. Almost everything about the boat seemed more substantial and more stongly constructed. As someone mentioned the trailer is heavier with tandem axle versus single axle. You will have to consider your tow vehicle. I have a Ford 350 so I can reliably transport the boat over long distances. The dealer said two things that I thought interesting: A Macgregor, with its large motor and and fast speeds can out run many storms/bad weather and get to port before things get too rough. About Hunter he said that Hunter is a big boat manufacturer that also makes a smaller boat and applies the same quality/standards to the smaller boats. Since buying the H26, I have gotten some excellent advice and information from this forum which has been value added.
Neither.
These boats are not coastal sailers. Try a fixed short keel center board combination. The manufacturers are moving away from water ballasted boats for liability concerns. Check Hunter's new 25' and 27' pocket cruisers. The short keel design hace been around for a while as used by Windstars and Precisions and Catalins and now Hunter has joined the ranks. The only advantage of the water ballast is for trailering and towing purposes; in the water there is no advantage. A short keel boat will trailer higher and heavier but in the water comes into its own.
These boats are not coastal sailers. Try a fixed short keel center board combination. The manufacturers are moving away from water ballasted boats for liability concerns. Check Hunter's new 25' and 27' pocket cruisers. The short keel design hace been around for a while as used by Windstars and Precisions and Catalins and now Hunter has joined the ranks. The only advantage of the water ballast is for trailering and towing purposes; in the water there is no advantage. A short keel boat will trailer higher and heavier but in the water comes into its own.
Sparkman and Stephens have been
designing shoal keel/Centreboard boats since the 40s. Probablt before that. There are some lovely old ones still around in double planked mahogany, bronze fastened, usually ketch rigged. The H26 is definitely not a blue water boat, which to me includes extensive coastal cruising up here in BC. I think it would be fine for Catalia Island or the coast of Mexico and Sea of Cortez. It wouldn't surprise me if someone sailed around Vancouver Island in an H26 in summer. Not a crazy thing to do if you watch your weather. If you got stuck out in bad weather in an H26, a double reefed main and a small or almost rolled up jib would get you home if it wasn't to windward. Any small boat would be difficult to windward, unless it was my old 27 foot Vertue Class Sloop with 5500 lbs of lead in her deep keel. If things got really nasty I think an H26 would be quite seaworthy as a motor boat. No sail at all, or perhaps a scrap of jib to make the motion easier.
designing shoal keel/Centreboard boats since the 40s. Probablt before that. There are some lovely old ones still around in double planked mahogany, bronze fastened, usually ketch rigged. The H26 is definitely not a blue water boat, which to me includes extensive coastal cruising up here in BC. I think it would be fine for Catalia Island or the coast of Mexico and Sea of Cortez. It wouldn't surprise me if someone sailed around Vancouver Island in an H26 in summer. Not a crazy thing to do if you watch your weather. If you got stuck out in bad weather in an H26, a double reefed main and a small or almost rolled up jib would get you home if it wasn't to windward. Any small boat would be difficult to windward, unless it was my old 27 foot Vertue Class Sloop with 5500 lbs of lead in her deep keel. If things got really nasty I think an H26 would be quite seaworthy as a motor boat. No sail at all, or perhaps a scrap of jib to make the motion easier.
West Coast
Fred, Not to side track this discussion, but would you mind if I contacted you about your experiences om the West Coast of Vancouver Island? I am supposed to sail out of the Sound from Port Alice down the west coast in my H26 along with another boat at the end of this month. Paul pmeyers@cerrocoso.edu
Fred, Not to side track this discussion, but would you mind if I contacted you about your experiences om the West Coast of Vancouver Island? I am supposed to sail out of the Sound from Port Alice down the west coast in my H26 along with another boat at the end of this month. Paul pmeyers@cerrocoso.edu
The other bias
Bob Your orig post was specific about your expected area of use and particular boat comparison. Without getting into a debate about the term coastal use, I'd add that there is a major diff between sailors who speculate about a WB boats capabilities due to their traditional bias for lead in their keel and those who have actually owned a 260. I suppose everybody has an opinion about something but there are a few posts here by sailors who are very experienced, capable and helpful who are actual owners using the 260 to its limits. All water ballast boats are not created equal but many sailors lump them all together when posting. There have been documented issues with Macgregors, usually by inexperienced/new sailors(or, God forbid, power boaters w/50hp outboards who think they're sailors, excuse my bias) so I'd lean on the input of capable sailors with actual experience in these boats. There are volumes of opinions on WB vs lead but the fact is between the two trailer boats you've asked, having also done the research myself I subsequently bought a newer 260. We're trailering it extensively and using it for extended coastal runs, I truly believe it is a unique boat in this niche and will do everything you've described and do it well. Safety is left up to the captain knowing his limits and that of his vessel. Good luck in your search Michael
Bob Your orig post was specific about your expected area of use and particular boat comparison. Without getting into a debate about the term coastal use, I'd add that there is a major diff between sailors who speculate about a WB boats capabilities due to their traditional bias for lead in their keel and those who have actually owned a 260. I suppose everybody has an opinion about something but there are a few posts here by sailors who are very experienced, capable and helpful who are actual owners using the 260 to its limits. All water ballast boats are not created equal but many sailors lump them all together when posting. There have been documented issues with Macgregors, usually by inexperienced/new sailors(or, God forbid, power boaters w/50hp outboards who think they're sailors, excuse my bias) so I'd lean on the input of capable sailors with actual experience in these boats. There are volumes of opinions on WB vs lead but the fact is between the two trailer boats you've asked, having also done the research myself I subsequently bought a newer 260. We're trailering it extensively and using it for extended coastal runs, I truly believe it is a unique boat in this niche and will do everything you've described and do it well. Safety is left up to the captain knowing his limits and that of his vessel. Good luck in your search Michael
They are two different types of boats
I have owned a 2002 Mac26X and a 2005 Mac26M (which I still own). I have been on a H260 and seen the trailer, etc. There is good points about both boats but let me talk about the MacGregor, since I have owned one for 6yrs and sail it in a coastal environment on the west coast around Vancouver. The MacGregor has some special uses that most boats do not. It draws only 10" do water with no ballast which allows you to anchor in very shallow areas. This also means that you can launch in very shallow water; I have launched when motor boats could not. You can release the ballast at any time so you could be sailing with ballast and decide to motor (say because of coming weather)and dump the ballast. The danger of motoring without ballast is pure BS if you use your common sense. The SF Bay fiasco was cause but some idiot going out with no ballast, 12 people on board(only authorized for 6), kids down below and adults all up on deck(weight up too high). Then add to this that they were motoring quickly doing tight turns. The boat sails at about 5-6 knots,(not the fastest) but since it is a planing type of hull, in say a 2' chop, can get up on the step and sail on a broad reach much faster; I have had mine up to 8.5 knots. You can realistical motor at about 12-14 knots with a reasonable cruising gear; weight effects this speed. I normally have sailed it in about 3-4' short choppy seas in 10-15 knot winds comfortably. At about 20+knots wind it is not so comfortable. Since the boat has a flatter bottom and is water ballast it has a tendancy to quickly go over to about 15 deg. heal before stiffening up. In rolling seas from the beam you need to keep a bit of sail up to steady this action. I have also had this boat in 7-8' short seas and it handled it great. We were not fully under sail at the time of the squal but we did not feel unsafe. I like the trailer on the H260 better. Much more sturdy and I like the tandem axle. The MacGregor is a very basic boat and does not have all the systems installed that the H260 has thus the Hunter has more creacher comforts. I think that they are two diffent styles of boats. The H260 is a trailerable sailboat and the MacGregor is a trailerable motor/sailor. We now have a Hunter340 and love it. But those of us that have moved to larger boats from the MacGregor have ALL said that we miss the system simplicity for maitenance and the versatility of the Mac. It is sure nice to have been able to power up to 14 knots and make those slack tides in the passes without worrying. To be able to launch the boat when others cannot and not even get the back wheels wet, and no moorage costs. This is not meant to put down the H260 but to inform you on the MacGregor 26M.
I have owned a 2002 Mac26X and a 2005 Mac26M (which I still own). I have been on a H260 and seen the trailer, etc. There is good points about both boats but let me talk about the MacGregor, since I have owned one for 6yrs and sail it in a coastal environment on the west coast around Vancouver. The MacGregor has some special uses that most boats do not. It draws only 10" do water with no ballast which allows you to anchor in very shallow areas. This also means that you can launch in very shallow water; I have launched when motor boats could not. You can release the ballast at any time so you could be sailing with ballast and decide to motor (say because of coming weather)and dump the ballast. The danger of motoring without ballast is pure BS if you use your common sense. The SF Bay fiasco was cause but some idiot going out with no ballast, 12 people on board(only authorized for 6), kids down below and adults all up on deck(weight up too high). Then add to this that they were motoring quickly doing tight turns. The boat sails at about 5-6 knots,(not the fastest) but since it is a planing type of hull, in say a 2' chop, can get up on the step and sail on a broad reach much faster; I have had mine up to 8.5 knots. You can realistical motor at about 12-14 knots with a reasonable cruising gear; weight effects this speed. I normally have sailed it in about 3-4' short choppy seas in 10-15 knot winds comfortably. At about 20+knots wind it is not so comfortable. Since the boat has a flatter bottom and is water ballast it has a tendancy to quickly go over to about 15 deg. heal before stiffening up. In rolling seas from the beam you need to keep a bit of sail up to steady this action. I have also had this boat in 7-8' short seas and it handled it great. We were not fully under sail at the time of the squal but we did not feel unsafe. I like the trailer on the H260 better. Much more sturdy and I like the tandem axle. The MacGregor is a very basic boat and does not have all the systems installed that the H260 has thus the Hunter has more creacher comforts. I think that they are two diffent styles of boats. The H260 is a trailerable sailboat and the MacGregor is a trailerable motor/sailor. We now have a Hunter340 and love it. But those of us that have moved to larger boats from the MacGregor have ALL said that we miss the system simplicity for maitenance and the versatility of the Mac. It is sure nice to have been able to power up to 14 knots and make those slack tides in the passes without worrying. To be able to launch the boat when others cannot and not even get the back wheels wet, and no moorage costs. This is not meant to put down the H260 but to inform you on the MacGregor 26M.
- Status