tonto wrote:Heck if you don't want it, I'll drive out wherever and get it, that price is too good to pass up! Even if you didn't have the funds for a motor at the moment, you could just get a tiny 5hp or 10hp or something to "get you by" until you could buy a bigger one.
X vs M
- dlandersson
- Admiral
- Posts: 4937
- Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 10:00 am
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26X
- Location: Michigan City
Re: X vs M
Minn Kotas are 100-300 dollars.
- coolchange
- Chief Steward
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 7:13 am
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26X
- Location: Small town South of Portland Oregon
- vkmaynard
- Admiral
- Posts: 1011
- Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 7:02 am
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26X
- Location: Apex, NC - 2001 26X "Compromise" w/ 2010 Suzuki DF90A
- Contact:
Re: X vs M
Did you buy the boat?
I recently had my first ride on an M (Bill P's boat) during autopilot testing at our local lake. It was white-capping with occasional 1.5 ft waves. The floating dock was really getting hammered and acting like a bucking bronco.
All I can say about the M ride quality was WOW! What a huge improvement over the X. With no ballast and the mast down (less overriding inertia) the boat was super stable even with the 1.5 ft beam waves. We would nearly have been grabbing the life lines on our boat. The M seems to track much better with even with no rudders down.
The M was also less tender when moving around on the deck, most likely attributed to the 300 lb permanent ballast.
Today, I would personally consider giving up the extra 7 MPH top end to have the stability of the M. I still like the swing keel and cabin and deck lay out of our X.
Something to consider when looking at both boats.
Victor
I recently had my first ride on an M (Bill P's boat) during autopilot testing at our local lake. It was white-capping with occasional 1.5 ft waves. The floating dock was really getting hammered and acting like a bucking bronco.
All I can say about the M ride quality was WOW! What a huge improvement over the X. With no ballast and the mast down (less overriding inertia) the boat was super stable even with the 1.5 ft beam waves. We would nearly have been grabbing the life lines on our boat. The M seems to track much better with even with no rudders down.
The M was also less tender when moving around on the deck, most likely attributed to the 300 lb permanent ballast.
Today, I would personally consider giving up the extra 7 MPH top end to have the stability of the M. I still like the swing keel and cabin and deck lay out of our X.
Something to consider when looking at both boats.
Victor
Last edited by vkmaynard on Sun Sep 09, 2012 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Catigale
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10421
- Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 5:59 pm
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26X
- Location: Admiral .............Catigale 2002X.......Lots of Harpoon Hobie 16 Skiffs....Island 17
- Contact:
Re: X vs M
I wouldnt mind giving up the 7 mph under motor - its the 5 mph under sail I would miss,...even with a blue hull
(flame suit on...)
(flame suit on...)
- cptron
- Captain
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:08 pm
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26M
- Location: Hattiesburg MS. "Storm Walker" 2011 26m with ETech 60
Re: X vs M
Aaahhhh shucks Catigale, don't you realise that the blue hull makes it harder for you to see us as we pass you by? 
- bscott
- Admiral
- Posts: 1143
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 2:45 pm
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26X
- Location: Arvada, Colorado 2001 X, M rotating mast, E-tec 60 with Power Thruster, "HUFF n Puff"
Re: X vs M
MY
CB has a few nicks-nothing serious after 10 seasons 
If you had a choice between an
and
for $1.500 then it's heads you win, tails you win
Bob
If you had a choice between an
Bob
