ok,,,just starting to look for a larger boat than my santana 21. i want a versitile trailerable that can go anywhere fresh or salt and the mac 26m looks great but my concern is whether or not it can hold up to 3 or 4 month extended cruise in the carib. and in the future a short hop from south calif. to hawaii and back. ive heard that the mac isnt up to the strain, but i wanted to ask the experts,,the owners! everything i read about the 26m sounds great and looks great but the blue water capability i havnt read any thing about.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
G
gary
E
Ed
Trailerable
Bill, the 26M is a wonderful boat, but would not be suitable, at least for the Hawaii transit you suggest, in my opinion. The advantage of a trailerable boat is that you don't have to use the boat for long trips. You use it once you get where you want it. The 26M would be great for the Caribbean if you trailered it to Mexico. I would rent a boat in Hawaii, probably Tortola too.
Bill, the 26M is a wonderful boat, but would not be suitable, at least for the Hawaii transit you suggest, in my opinion. The advantage of a trailerable boat is that you don't have to use the boat for long trips. You use it once you get where you want it. The 26M would be great for the Caribbean if you trailered it to Mexico. I would rent a boat in Hawaii, probably Tortola too.
Yep Yep Yep
Well, it IS blue and since boats ARE made for water then it must be a "blue water-boat"! Seriously though, many 26Xs sail to the Bahamas from FL and to Catalina Island from CA. I would think the 26M would be no different. I know this is not the same as sailing to Hawaii. I would not sail ANY production coastal cruiser under 40ft to Hawaii unless I was very sure of the weather conditions, had sufficient backup safety equipment, had someone waiting to call the coasties if I didn't report my position every 12 hours and I would never take anything or anyone I care not to lose with me. http://www.a1sailboats.com/bahamas1.htm http://www.ne-ts.com/cr/cr-401bimini.html http://pstobo.popstogo.com/bahama4.html http://www.ne-ts.com/cr/cr-404bahamas.html Happy sails *_/), MArk
Well, it IS blue and since boats ARE made for water then it must be a "blue water-boat"! Seriously though, many 26Xs sail to the Bahamas from FL and to Catalina Island from CA. I would think the 26M would be no different. I know this is not the same as sailing to Hawaii. I would not sail ANY production coastal cruiser under 40ft to Hawaii unless I was very sure of the weather conditions, had sufficient backup safety equipment, had someone waiting to call the coasties if I didn't report my position every 12 hours and I would never take anything or anyone I care not to lose with me. http://www.a1sailboats.com/bahamas1.htm http://www.ne-ts.com/cr/cr-401bimini.html http://pstobo.popstogo.com/bahama4.html http://www.ne-ts.com/cr/cr-404bahamas.html Happy sails *_/), MArk
M
mrbill
define bluewater
while mac's do sail to bahammas, and to channel islands. I doubt these skippers are prepared to handle anything thrown at them by neptune. On a good day you can do it. on a bad day, it would be hell, and life threating. IMHO. besides where are you going to store fuel and water for 20 days? (the caribean may be more due-able due to short hops and good weather windows.... hawaii would be what 10 days, plus 30% safety factor? ) this type of thread seem to be MAC-baiting... hmm? do you really want to sail to hawaii? (and back?) the back part will be the problem... again IMHO....
while mac's do sail to bahammas, and to channel islands. I doubt these skippers are prepared to handle anything thrown at them by neptune. On a good day you can do it. on a bad day, it would be hell, and life threating. IMHO. besides where are you going to store fuel and water for 20 days? (the caribean may be more due-able due to short hops and good weather windows.... hawaii would be what 10 days, plus 30% safety factor? ) this type of thread seem to be MAC-baiting... hmm? do you really want to sail to hawaii? (and back?) the back part will be the problem... again IMHO....
D
Dana M26D
When thinks go bad...
they go really bad, really fast. After 31 years at sea (on ships) I've seen some serious gales come out of nowhere. Aboard a Mac in a gale, I would expect hull separation to be the biggest concern. I love my Mac and it's handles heavy chop very well. But, the Mac's deck-hull joint isn't up to handling an open ocean storm. In 26 footers, there is a world of difference between a MacGregor and a Contessa. A Contessa 26 could get you through a hurricane, but you wouldn't want to tow it very far with a mid-sized car. The designs are completely different, each presenting their own advantages/disadvantages. On the open ocean I'd also be worrying about the 26D's unsupported hull sides and insufficient structural bulkhead foundations. For it's size the 26D has a large high cockpit. It's scupper is not designed to drain it fast enough between waves, so it could stay filled and create a stability issue. However, with an eye on the weather, the Bahamas is a daysail away and is do-able with proper planning. Hawaii is a short flight to a waiting charter boat.
they go really bad, really fast. After 31 years at sea (on ships) I've seen some serious gales come out of nowhere. Aboard a Mac in a gale, I would expect hull separation to be the biggest concern. I love my Mac and it's handles heavy chop very well. But, the Mac's deck-hull joint isn't up to handling an open ocean storm. In 26 footers, there is a world of difference between a MacGregor and a Contessa. A Contessa 26 could get you through a hurricane, but you wouldn't want to tow it very far with a mid-sized car. The designs are completely different, each presenting their own advantages/disadvantages. On the open ocean I'd also be worrying about the 26D's unsupported hull sides and insufficient structural bulkhead foundations. For it's size the 26D has a large high cockpit. It's scupper is not designed to drain it fast enough between waves, so it could stay filled and create a stability issue. However, with an eye on the weather, the Bahamas is a daysail away and is do-able with proper planning. Hawaii is a short flight to a waiting charter boat.
Puzzled!
Dana: I read the artical on hull to deck joints you referenced. Makes sense! But doesn't MacGregor (at least the 26X and M series)bolt its deck and hull together? At least thats what the Mac construction video shows. If this is what signifies an acceptable deck joint for a blue water cruiser, where did we go wrong? It also seems to me that a good Preventive Maintenence program and attention to the condition of the rub rail would prevent the conditions you refer to on nonbolted hull joints.
Dana: I read the artical on hull to deck joints you referenced. Makes sense! But doesn't MacGregor (at least the 26X and M series)bolt its deck and hull together? At least thats what the Mac construction video shows. If this is what signifies an acceptable deck joint for a blue water cruiser, where did we go wrong? It also seems to me that a good Preventive Maintenence program and attention to the condition of the rub rail would prevent the conditions you refer to on nonbolted hull joints.
D
Dana M26D
That's what I thought, until...
I had a good look at my bolts from the inside while pulling new cabling. Some had nuts & bolts and a few areas used large screws. I assume this was as they were too hard to get at with a nut. My factory VHS tape from 1988 only talks of nuts & bolts. I found a few loose nuts but most were tight. My deck-hull joint does leak slightly in rougher seas, but not enough to worry about. The MacGregor deck-hull joint is perfectly fine for the boat's intended use. It's a vertical overlap, which is the easiest to mold and assemble. This allows MacGregor engineers to design and build boats we can afford... Good for them. This is paraphrased from http://www.samlmorse.com/Index-6.htm -The deck adds to the strength of the boat, but, it is only as strong as the method used to attach it to the hull. Some builders use an out turning flange, some a vertical connection and others an in turning flange. The out turning flange must be small or narrow, because it would stick out too far beyond the hull. The vertical connection has many variations ~. The in turning flange is more popular because it adds strength to the sheer line; the wider the flange the stronger the sheer. The problem with this method is that it costs more to build the molds because it must be in two parts so the "piece" can be removed. The wider the flange the more surface on which to set the deck so the joint will be stronger. On a wide flange the deck can be through bolted, staggering the bolts so they are not in line. This is an excellent method as long as the flange is wide enough to provide structural support for the deck and the fiberglass bonding material is heavy and on both sides. On Tartan boats the hull to deck joint is an inward facing hull flange, bonded with 3M 5200 adhesive sealant, and with an integrally molded hardened 6061 T6 aluminum bar forming a full sheer length backing plate. Stainless steel fasteners sized to meet or exceed ABS standard for offshore use, are drilled and tapped into the aluminum bar, offering full serviceability from the outside of the boat. On the MacGregor it's just a straight line of fasteners, most with a small washer to spread the load on thin FRP. MacGregor doesn't use a backing blate or fiberglass bonding material as it would be over-kill on one area. It wouldn't make sense to build a blue-water deck-hull joint without bringing the rest of the hull, rudder, rigging, etc. up to blue-water specs. I love my Mac 26D and I think MacGregor designs the best trailerable sailboats. The recent changes in the 26M are excellent (I wish I had the money) and I highly recommend a MacGregor. It's just not the right boat to sail to Hawaii. Bahamas yes, Hawaii no. Buy a Mac 26M and sign up for this trip. It sounds like great fun: http://www.conchcruisers.net/ For the best advice on a 26M talk to this dealer who speaks from many miles of experience, including Bahamas. http://www.boats4sail.info/ This guy has done some island hopping around the Caribbean on his 26X. http://macgregorsailors.com/explore/exumas/index.php
I had a good look at my bolts from the inside while pulling new cabling. Some had nuts & bolts and a few areas used large screws. I assume this was as they were too hard to get at with a nut. My factory VHS tape from 1988 only talks of nuts & bolts. I found a few loose nuts but most were tight. My deck-hull joint does leak slightly in rougher seas, but not enough to worry about. The MacGregor deck-hull joint is perfectly fine for the boat's intended use. It's a vertical overlap, which is the easiest to mold and assemble. This allows MacGregor engineers to design and build boats we can afford... Good for them. This is paraphrased from http://www.samlmorse.com/Index-6.htm -The deck adds to the strength of the boat, but, it is only as strong as the method used to attach it to the hull. Some builders use an out turning flange, some a vertical connection and others an in turning flange. The out turning flange must be small or narrow, because it would stick out too far beyond the hull. The vertical connection has many variations ~. The in turning flange is more popular because it adds strength to the sheer line; the wider the flange the stronger the sheer. The problem with this method is that it costs more to build the molds because it must be in two parts so the "piece" can be removed. The wider the flange the more surface on which to set the deck so the joint will be stronger. On a wide flange the deck can be through bolted, staggering the bolts so they are not in line. This is an excellent method as long as the flange is wide enough to provide structural support for the deck and the fiberglass bonding material is heavy and on both sides. On Tartan boats the hull to deck joint is an inward facing hull flange, bonded with 3M 5200 adhesive sealant, and with an integrally molded hardened 6061 T6 aluminum bar forming a full sheer length backing plate. Stainless steel fasteners sized to meet or exceed ABS standard for offshore use, are drilled and tapped into the aluminum bar, offering full serviceability from the outside of the boat. On the MacGregor it's just a straight line of fasteners, most with a small washer to spread the load on thin FRP. MacGregor doesn't use a backing blate or fiberglass bonding material as it would be over-kill on one area. It wouldn't make sense to build a blue-water deck-hull joint without bringing the rest of the hull, rudder, rigging, etc. up to blue-water specs. I love my Mac 26D and I think MacGregor designs the best trailerable sailboats. The recent changes in the 26M are excellent (I wish I had the money) and I highly recommend a MacGregor. It's just not the right boat to sail to Hawaii. Bahamas yes, Hawaii no. Buy a Mac 26M and sign up for this trip. It sounds like great fun: http://www.conchcruisers.net/ For the best advice on a 26M talk to this dealer who speaks from many miles of experience, including Bahamas. http://www.boats4sail.info/ This guy has done some island hopping around the Caribbean on his 26X. http://macgregorsailors.com/explore/exumas/index.php
J
JonBill
I agree with Gary
I agree with Gary as he put it very simply yet profoundly and truthfully. Nope, Nope and Nope. The Mac 26M or any MAC for that matter is not a bluewater boat. I've sailed both and love my Mac but it isn't designed for bluewater sailing. Use it for what it's designed for and for it's versatility and you'll have all the fun you can imagine. Use it for what it isn't designed for and you're courting disaster. The bottom line is the Mac can't sail in heavy weather. You would have to sail both type boats in heavy weather to know what I mean. If you want to sail bluewater then buy a bluewater boat. For the cost of the Mac the outboard motor to make it a dual purpose inland waterway boat and all the add on's you'll need to have a really good time then you're up there approaching the cost range of a comparably sized bluewater boat. So buy one if that's what you want to do. When I lived in Puerto Rico a long time ago and sailed the Caribbean I looked at a Venture back then, but didn't buy it I opted for a fixed keeled Hunter and it was the perfect boat for bluewater crusing in a mid-size price range. The Venture might have made it around the Islands ok if you could have avoided all significant weather features all the time (and squeezed enough provisions into it) but you're gambling with your life. So what's the point? However for the inland waterways of Texas (and we have an enormous amount of inland waterways down here to explore) I wouldn't but a Hunter. I went with the Mac for a lot of different reasons; draft being one of them, dual purpose being another, portability being another, price, etc. Kindest Regards, JonBill
I agree with Gary as he put it very simply yet profoundly and truthfully. Nope, Nope and Nope. The Mac 26M or any MAC for that matter is not a bluewater boat. I've sailed both and love my Mac but it isn't designed for bluewater sailing. Use it for what it's designed for and for it's versatility and you'll have all the fun you can imagine. Use it for what it isn't designed for and you're courting disaster. The bottom line is the Mac can't sail in heavy weather. You would have to sail both type boats in heavy weather to know what I mean. If you want to sail bluewater then buy a bluewater boat. For the cost of the Mac the outboard motor to make it a dual purpose inland waterway boat and all the add on's you'll need to have a really good time then you're up there approaching the cost range of a comparably sized bluewater boat. So buy one if that's what you want to do. When I lived in Puerto Rico a long time ago and sailed the Caribbean I looked at a Venture back then, but didn't buy it I opted for a fixed keeled Hunter and it was the perfect boat for bluewater crusing in a mid-size price range. The Venture might have made it around the Islands ok if you could have avoided all significant weather features all the time (and squeezed enough provisions into it) but you're gambling with your life. So what's the point? However for the inland waterways of Texas (and we have an enormous amount of inland waterways down here to explore) I wouldn't but a Hunter. I went with the Mac for a lot of different reasons; draft being one of them, dual purpose being another, portability being another, price, etc. Kindest Regards, JonBill
- Status
- Not open for further replies.