26X purchasing advice

[RJG 26S]

I have just sold my 1991 26S that I enjoyed for the last 2.5 years and am shopping for a 1996 - 2002 26X. My family and I want more versatility and cabin space. I plan to keep it moored on my trailer when not being used and since the longest trips that I plan to do will be less than a couple of weeks I would prefer to not have bottom paint. I will be using the boat in both fresh and salt water. Unfortunately most of the boats that I am finding nearby in the Pacific NW have bottom paint.

Here is my dilemma: I cannot decide between two boats. They are both in excellent condition and similarly equipped.

1) 2001 has bottom paint and a 2000 Mercury 50 / 4 stroke
2) 1996 has no bottom paint and a 1996 Nissan 50 / 2 stroke.

The 2001 is about $3,000 more than the 1996. The 1996 has had the steering system upgraded after the original one failed. Is the difference in deck core material, ballast tank venting, and rudder brackets worth $3k? Can anyone comment on the difference between the outboards?

The admiral is getting tired of discussing this dilemma with me and so I am posing this question to all of you fine folks.

[nedmiller]

IF you can make sure that the motor is a good one, You would be so much happier with the 4 stroke. No mixing. Much quieter. I'm assuming it has EFI? If so, then starting is easier, IMHO. That said, you could sell the 2 stroke and add the $3000 difference and get well on the way to a new 4 stroke which would be even better. With the newer boat would be getting a boat that does not have the balsa core, which I think is important...less important if you can be sure that no damage is already done and you will maintain it properly. I don't think the vent issue is an issue. I have the vent aft and it doesn't give me problems. The conditions of the boats and conditions of motors here are critical. You also need to look at the trailers and see if there is a substantial difference. If one is a tandem, it is worth a whole lot more! Aluminum makes it even more valuable and useful!
Are the mods done well in each? Any mods that would be a negative?

SILK

[Duane Dunn, Allegro]

My boat is a '96, As long as the core is sealed and dry the material really makes no difference. In many ways I think the plywood is better than the foam core, it is heavier, but is easier to mount stuff to. In the 10 seasons I have had my boat I have never had an issue with the center vent verses the later bow vent for the ballast. You do have to watch out that it doesn't spill over when filling as the opening can be a bit close to the waterline depending on your boats load. My boat has the center fill in addition to the stern fill but I find I never use the center fill any more. The aft fill in on the older boats has a smaller diameter opening which may mean an extra minute or two filling and draining but this has never been a big deal for us. My boats aluminum rudder brackets are still in great shape after 14 years and I have not babied them at all. I think the larger blades with the rounded tips that came with the aluminum brackets actually help the boat steer better. The have more surface area than the late model rudders.

I had the Tohatsu 2 stroke 50 for many years. The Nissan 50 is a OEM Tohatsu. It was a bullet proof motor, started every time, never failed to run and required zero maintenance. Over the 8 years I had it I changed the plugs once and the lower unit oil once. I never winterized, just turned it off and put it away. The motor always started right up on the old gas that was left in the tank from the year before. Unlike what is mentioned above, there is no mixing of oil and gas with the larger two strokes. You keep the gas in the tank in the boat and keep the oil tank under the motor cowl full and the motor does all the mixing for you. I'd still be running it if I hadn't come upon a sweet deal to upgrade to the Tohatsu TDLI 90 two stroke I now have. You can't beat the low maintenance of a two stroke, no oil changes that you pay through the nose for. The two strokes also have more usable power and torque curve.

The 50hp carbureted motor is a great design, triple everything redundancy, it won't leave you stuck without propulsion. It's downsides are first, it's noise, and second it's gas mileage.

For 3k, I'd go for the '96 and put that money toward things that will make the boat more usable so you spend more time on the water.

[Catigale]

No brainer for the 2001 for +3k if you ask me.

[Phillip]

No brainer for the 2001 for +3k if you ask me.

I got to go along with this opinion 100%.
I also believe the 2002 X, at a fair price, is the best Mac bang-for-buck-for-quality, so you are pretty close.
Maybe you should check your HIN plate to make sure you are getting a 2001 Model before you buy.

Cheers
Phillip

[RJG 26S]

Thanks for the advice guys.

Along comes boat number 3, my current favorite:

This one is a 2001 26X also similarly equipped with a Nissan 50 2 stroke (P.L.U.S.), with a "new" (have not verified year) 4000# Capacity Aluminum "Tuff Trailer" for about the same price as the 1996.

Any comments about the Trailer or the Outboard?

[Phillip]

The gap between the 2 stroke and the 4 stroke is pretty big.....once again go with the 4 stroke (no-brainer), but when it comes to the alloy trailer, well....if it is a 'good' one, then that is a big plus on the Mac steel one, but you haven't filled out your profile so we don't know where you come from.
If you'r another Englishman, then you probably won't have a standard Mac trailer anyway.
Sooner or later you are going to have to pull the trigger on one of them......and it is always a trade off.
What are the asking prices anyway.

Cheers
Phillip

[Catigale]

That trailer is worth 3k in your pocket,easily. A 2000 vintage or earlier trailer that has been used in salt water may well be on its last legs.

Check the tongue where it attaches to the two beams going back - this is a known spot for rust out which drops the boat onto the road..

[RJG 26S]

I live in Moses Lake, Wa and plan to continue to sail in the Puget Sound, Columbia River, and various lakes in central and eastern Wa.

Here is the summary of asking prices:

Boat #1: $15k (2001 26X with Mercury 50 4S, bottom paint, steel trailer in excellent condition, located about 1100 miles away)
Boat #2: $12.5K (1996 26X with Nissan 50 2S, no bottom paint, steel trailer in ok condition, located 225 miles away)
Boat #3: $13k (2001 26X with Nissan 50 2S, bottom paint, new aluminum trailer, located 200 miles away)

What is the difference in fuel economy between the Mercury 4S and the Nissan 2S?

[Catigale]

In order of preference

3,1,2

If you will be trailering a lot, the trailer tips the balance for me.

[bscott]

Check out the condition of the sails, halyards and sheets. I replaced mine after I bought my used 01. I'd consider the aluminum trailer as the best buy so far. Especially if it were a tandem.

Bob

[Catigale]

Replacing sails ,under one boat buck

Trailer 3 or 4 boat bucks

[LOUIS B HOLUB]

No brainer for the 2001 for +3k if you ask me.

I think this is the best idea...since I've went thru this same decision in the past. Sold my 92 Mac S, and purchased a 99 Mac X. The "X" will be a keeper, and I'm just assuming the 2001 and the 4 stroker for 3K (plus) sounds reasonable to me (if it hasn't been abused with multi-thousand hours on the engine).

I've had no trouble with my 99 Nissan 50 2stroke (same as the Tohatsu), however, it had very minimal usage --

You'll enjoy the added head room in your "X"...believe me ! This was the primary reason for selling the "S".

Hope the "full" price tags are reasonable...some of the Mac' listings I've seen are outrageous, since "good shape" MacGregors hold their values well.

Hope you get a "Good Deal"

[Phillip]

Here is the summary of asking prices:

Boat #1: $15k (2001 26X with Mercury 50 4S, bottom paint, steel trailer in excellent condition, located about 1100 miles away)
Boat #2: $12.5K (1996 26X with Nissan 50 2S, no bottom paint, steel trailer in ok condition, located 225 miles away)
Boat #3: $13k (2001 26X with Nissan 50 2S, bottom paint, new aluminum trailer, located 200 miles away)

?

I would vote for boat #3 because:
1. the price is good
2. the alloy trailer is a great option
3. the 200 miles is better than 1,100 miles
but
the 2 stroke, although nothing wrong with them, are not quite as 'nice' as a 4 stroke, and price will always be lower.

In my mind;
boat #2 is a fair price...if in pretty good condition. Certainly wouldn't pay a penny more.
boat #1 is correctly priced....
boat #3 is very well priced to the point I would want to check it out closely. If everything is in good condition I would expect to pay $15 for that boat (because of the trailer), but keep in mind, when you come to re-sell, and the trailer is an old alloy one, you may be up against 4 strokes, so understand the 2 stroke was a lot cheaper option 'new'.

You need a photograph sent to you of the HIN # just to check it's true construction date.
Macs change their production year in July, so you can get a boat built 2nd half of 2000 being sold as a 2001 and you need to know how to read a HIN # to work it out.

Just my views
Cheers
Phillip

[RJG 26S]

I just realized that I made a mistake on the description of Boat #3, my fault I wrote it down incorrectly, it is actually a model year 2000, built in December 1999.

Besides that, I finally got some better pictures of it and realized that it is correctly priced. It is not bad, a weekend of detailing could make it look better, but the thing that concerns me are the numerous areas of slight damage or poor repairs such as a banged up corner on the sliding hatch, a missing sink faucet in the head, a steering control replacement that resulted in the steering wheel be mounted about 3/4" lower than the original, the bottom paint, or better yet, what is left of it looks really bad. It looks like this boat was used a lot and / or did not receive enough TLC.

Since in the grand scheme of things, over the long haul, a few "Boat Bucks" won't make that big of a difference, I am ready to pull the trigger on boat #1.

I will make arrangements to meet the current owner and take the boat out for a test run. Since the primary purpose of getting the boat out on the water is to verify that it won't sink - just kidding, I would like to verify that the outboard is running ok and currently capable of putting out close to its nameplate power of 50 horsies. While I realize that the boat's maximum speed is a function of many things such as hull smoothnesss, condition and type of propeller, load in the boat, wind, waves, trim, etc -

How much speed should I expect for a 2000 Mercury 50 4 stroke on a 2001 26X?

Would it be reasonable to require the test run meet, at least a minimum, WOT speed of say 14 MPH (12.3 kts)?