Permanent ballast

[Indulgence]

I've run some searches and haven't found much discussion on changing over to a permanent
ballast arrangement in the Macs. We pull ours with a big Chevy Suburban with a 454 in it.
We tow our 5,000lb RV around with no trouble. I don't think I need to be concerned about the weight.
The trailer has dual axles. We seldom bother dumping the water ballast in the summer when
we park it in the yard beside the lake. (Yes, we always check ballast is full before leaving dock)
Seemingly the tires and suspension handle the extra lbs just fine.

The reason I'm curious about permanent ballast is, I think if the keel had the same
mass of (say) lead in it, as the weight of the water we carry, the boat would be "stiffer" and
not heel over so dramatically right away. I think this would let us carry more sail and sail
flatter on the water. It's probably a moron idea but I'd enjoy not being knocked over
25 degrees every time an errant gust comes along.

I saw where, on La Perla Noir, they increased the permanent ballast to some degree.
Jokingly, I am more inclined towards filling the whole thing with sand or birdshot or cement.

Any one have any comments or experience or ideas about this? Or maybe the topic isn't worth the bandwidth...
But thank you,
Laurie

[Chinook]

Just thinking of one negative to this idea. It would preclude operation the boat without ballast. When used as a power boat, running without ballast improves speed and efficiency to a marked degree. Permanent ballast would eliminate this option. One of the Mac's advantages is it's versatility to be operated differently under different conditions.

[Indulgence]

Good point. Might affect re-sale but not our usage of the boat.
I motor along with the ballast in place anyway and seldom run over 4-5 knots.
I think the fastest we ever pushed the old girl was 6.5 knots rushing to pick
up a guest waiting at the docks. When the two-smoker gives up the ghost
I might only put twenty horses on the back.
Thanks

[Currie]

Hi Laurie,

I think that permanent ballast could certainly be done on a Mac. If the tow-vehicle and trailer are up to the task you could tackle it a number of ways. I'd be careful about making sure that whatever ballast you used was:

1.) Secured - not allowed to move and cause damage
2.) Distributed - no heavy point-loads, like putting a large anvil under the rear berth
3.) Correctly balanced - so the boat still sits properly on its waterline

That being said here's why I wouldn't do it (in addition to what Chinook said): There are better sailing vessels in the same size and price range (used) that sail wonderfully, and aren't meant to plane. Since you don't do that anyway, is it possible that you'd be happy with a traditional sailboat in the same general size? The Mac has a semi-planing hull and transom that really drags in light winds. I recently sailed a J/24 and I couldn't believe how we were moving in the lightest breeze. Everyone accepts the Mac compromise because the boat is so versatile in so many other ways (like planing up, and light-trailering). Once you take that away, you've lost a major chunk of its appeal (for future buyers too). Just a thought, though. Like I say, no real reason you couldn't do it - that I can think of anyway.

Cheers,
~Bob

[Hardcrab]

I would think it would sit hard on the trailer.
The stock trailer bunks may not be up to it for the long haul.

More and better bunks would be my concern.
The more contact support, the better.

25 degrees of heel is considered level on these boats!
Perhaps you might consider a cat of some sort to remain level.

[c130king]

...25 degrees of heel is considered level on these boats!

Additionally, I think the fun factor is directly proportional to the degree of heel...up to a point of course (>35-40).

I would not want to lose the ability to power at "high" speeds.

Just my $0.02 worth.

Cheers,
Jim

[Night Sailor]

Many of us have thought long and hard about the tendency of light weight boats with ballast high up in the plan, like our Macs. The only thing I've come up with that really works without either losing the performance, multifunctionality or requiring lots of money and extensive modifications to maintain strength and reliability is .... smaller sail area. Use a smaller main, and jib. Or sails that are shorter and a lower aspect ratio so there is less pressure at the top of the mast.

[Boblee]

Our dealer here who is an accomplished sailor on many types of boats frequently remarked that most mac owners use too much canvas and that the most efficient heel is 10-15 deg, in my limited experience I have found this to be true but as I say my sailing experience is limited.
I reef very early and in the instances where I have been a bit late the speed has been substantially higher after reefing with a much more relaxed sail especially with the wife on board, I daresay if I could tune the sails better this could make a difference too.
As to heeling effect I spoke to a bloke who had just put new sails on his boat (not Mac) with a larger roach and very good material with full battens that kept them nice and flat, he was absolutely ecstatic in the effect on the heeling of his boat as well as the increased speed, maybe sails could have more/as much effect without the disadvantages?
Bob

[Indulgence]

Thanks for all the thoughtful input.
Let me elaborate a little,

I don't mind the heeling. We often "wash the windows" and yes it's fun.
We frequently sail with the thing over 30-35 degrees and I suppose that's fine too.
Yes, we reef early, reef often and carry less sail aloft than many. We agree we sail
faster and more comfortably in strong winds with reefed sails and a furled genoa.
We upgraded to C-2000 sails last season and keep them nice a tight with superb results.

I'm not so much wanting to sail flatter all the time, although the performance as noted
is better around 15 degrees than at 30. I'm trying to think of a way to make the boat "stiffer".
The lake where I sail most of the time has brutally gusty unpredictable winds. We've
been over 25 degrees to starboard and in seconds slammed over 25 degrees to port as
the wind shifted 180 degrees. Almost dunked a kid on that one!

Our MacGregor 26X is very tender during the initial heeling stages but tightens up once
the water ballast is above the waterline. I just think an equal amount of permanent
ballast, say lead?, spread evenly along the keel would produce a more sea kindly ride.

I don't really want to go to a different boat. I like my Waterbago Mac and it's gunk-holing
live aboard go exploring abilities. Like the rest of you, I've mod'ed it to the point where
I'm really quite comfortable. Now I want it to behave itself.
Laurie

[rmduthie]

There is a post from one owner who filled his centrboard with lead. You could try that, but would have to alter the lifting arrangement like he did. I put about 10Kg in the bottom of mine, but unlike him, I used lead shot and resin. He poured melted lead in, a little at a time!

[delevi]

Lauire, To piggy back on the last post, I had a custom daggerboard made with 150 lbs lead at the bottom 15 inches. I suppose the same can be done with a centerboard, or better yet, have the whole thing made of lead which would be 650-700 lbs. Since you don't care about motoring speed, this would be a terrifc mod for you. The keel itself will provide equal or greater righting moment than your water ballast, so you can run it empty up to moderate winds. In heavy air, fill the water ballast and you have yourself a super-stiff boat with more than double the righting moment you have now. I would have done this myself, but was cautioned about sufficent stregth of the daggerboard well, and not to exceed 200 lbs. The Black Pearl, however, used a 500 lb keel on an , but the trunk area was reinforced at the factory. Not familiar with the centerboard arrangement, but if you could reinforce that area, and have a lead keel made, you would have a sweet sailing machine. Of course, you'll also need to invest in an electric winch, or at least #48 self tailer. This certainly would cost munch, much more than filling the ballast tank with sand, but it would be a much better performing boat and filling the ballast permanently has its downsides. Consider the likelihood of spreading all the ballast evenly when pumping it in through a 3" opening. You may also run into a hull ballance issue. If the is ballasted anything like the , the majority of the water ballast is in the front third of the boat. Sand is approximately twice as heavy as water, so you may cause the bow to dip significantly down. Not sure if the 700 lb keel would do the same, but might be worth exploring.

Leon

[baldbaby2000]

I poured about 60lbs of lead in mine. I also ran a stainless steel pipe from top to bottom for extra strength. Had to add more pulleys and a stronger cheek block for the uphaul line. The main thing is that the trailing edge on the stock daggerboard is not very strong, so if you put a lot of work into modifying it like I did, and then hit something and damage it, it needs to be repaired rather than replaced unless you want to do it all over. I think Leon has a nice setup because his weighted keel is custom and very strong. I'm not worried about the trunk. I've hit many things and no damage to the trunk.

Dan

[ronacarme]

I would not do it.
1. The dual axle trailer running gear may handle the extra 1400-1500 # of boat weight bouncing on down the road, but I doubt Roger designed the frame, tongue, etc. for it.
2. The added boat weight will additionally stress the hull while trailering.
3. 1400-1500# of lead would be hard to fix securely to the hull...to do it inside requires ripping out and replacing part of the cabin floor......to do it outside risks it falling off in part or whole and would likely degrade flow over the hull and thus increase drag and slow the boat.
4. 1400-1500# of lead would be hard to add to the centerboard as in the latter part of 3. above, would overstress the rig in a blow by subsantially stiffening the boat (reducing its ability to heel), would require designing and adding adequate CB lifting gear, would stress the part of the hull carrying the lifting gear, would overstress the current CB pivot support structure on the hull and CB. As to the latter, a few years ago the UK mag PBO included a first person story by the skipper/owner of a 1996 X whose stock, NONweighted CB dropped off the boat and still presumably resides on the bottom of the Bay of Biscay.
5. Past reading suggests to me that initial tenderness (ease of heeling thru the first 10-20 degrees) may be best resisted by a wide beam and hard chines (unlike the X hull) and that long narrow hulls, with heavy ballast spaced below the hull, tend to be initially tender and harden up only when noticeably heeled.....so 1400# of lead in the CB may not kill the initial tenderness.
6. For reasons stated by others above, and IVO 1.-5. immediately above, I fear the modifications proposed would cut resale value and number of interested buyers.
I suspect the best cure for the problem may be a different boat.
Good luck.
Ron

[Erik Hardtle]

I added 138 pounds to the centerboard of my X: (check out more on my website)


Ok.. just go back from the sea... er... river trials...

Powering... seemed to do just fine... was doing 17.5 mph for about an hour... hit a few 1-2 ft waves no banging, seems just as before. Boat seemed to sit a little lower in the water.. as if wife was inside the cabin (175lbs) (she wasn't) or the ballast tank was full (it wasn't)

Sailing... (no water ballast) nothing quantitative.. just a feeling... on a close reach with 10-15 mph winds, heeled slowly... not as quick or sudden as it used to.. felt more like a keel boat heeling... got a heel of up to 30 degrees doing 5.3 mph... didn't round up into the wind like it normally would do. Filled the ballast, less heeling... same "keel boat" feeling with it slowly heeling... not sudden heels.

Hitting bottom: it works like a 'boat brake" I purposely went into shallow water while sailing... boat came to a slow stop... just cranked it up a little and it continued along. The new wire connecting to the board does sing a little while sailing... nothing annoying.

Overall I'm pretty happy with the performance.

[Indulgence]

Erik,
I like your weighted keel idea. Seems like a better plan than pouring lead or
sand in the ballast chambers. I had no idea the centerboard was hollow!
How dumb is that. Also like the look of your boat, smart paint job.

Too late this winter for me to tackle such an extensive mod. The delay will
give me time to collect lead from somewhere. I read about one guy in Good
Old Boat who took the lead plates out of old batteries and melted them down
for ballast.

Thanks posting that,
Laurie