26x Review in Boatworks Magazine

Rolf · Post by **Rolf** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:39 am

My 2002x is now a real power boat because of the tldi90 I got almost 2 years back. The extra torque is the main reason to get it, especially for dealing with open ocean swell and wind I regularly encounter the 21 miles over to Catalina. Boat is much more stable without ballast because of the extra 100 pound directly off the back. Doesn't hurt sailing, actually helps point better.

Transom is plenty strong, especially with minor reinforcement (aluminum plates).

The boat with 50 or less is like a Hummer with a 4 cylinder-- it'll get moving, but not efficiently. The extra torque is a Godsend for controlling boat when rough, even with an autopilot.

Ask oldtimers here (Duane, Chip) which engine they'd prefer.

Rolf

Mark Prouty · Post by **Mark Prouty** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 11:29 am

Rolf wrote:Ask oldtimers here (Duane, Chip) which engine they'd prefer.
Rolf

Speaking of Duane. I wonder where he has been. He sure provided some solid advice and information. He was really helpful to me when I was first starting out. That guy really knew what he was talking about.

Gerald Gordon · Post by **Gerald Gordon** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:51 pm

I thought the topic was Boat review not big engines. How about moving the big engine topic to where it belongs and let's talk about the boat review, please!

Post by **kmclemore** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 1:41 pm

Bobby T.-26X #4767 wrote:....meanwhile...the tohatsu 70 & 90 are the same powerheads and weigh the same (315#). so do the etec 70 & 90 @ 320#.

the increase in cost (from the 70 to the 90) is negligible, while the increased power allows you to cruise at 2/3 to 3/4 throttle, achieve excellent MPG, and still maintain 20 mph.

to me...it's common sense to go to the 90.

Hmm.. I'm certainly *not* an expert here on marine engines, but I've always thought that 2-cycle motors like the Tohatsu were most efficient at full throttle, not 2/3 or 3/4. Am I mistaken?

Chip Hindes · Post by **Chip Hindes** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 1:57 pm

I just do not understand this obsession of "Bigger"...

Most sailors don't understand our obsession with 50HP when any 26 sailboat can power acceptably most of the time with 9.9 or at most 18.

It's the HP equivalent of the lifeboat syndrome: "I have 50 HP, that is plenty. Anybody who wants mnore must be an idiot, have a death wish, or have a secret desire to break his boat." Etc.

In fact, there was one guy at the dealer when I ordered mine who was completely aghast that I was going for 50HP when so much less would be "enough" and tried to talk me into going with less.

The fact is, when it comes to HP, on boats as on cars, trucks, even lawnmowers, there is too little, there is enough and there is more than enough. It's just me, but in this area I feel there is really no such thing as too much. Those who want more have to accept some minuses: more weight, the need for transom reinforcement, compromised sailing perfomance, of course higher initial cost, higher maintenance, lower fuel mileage, etcetera. Weigh all the options, make your choice, go with it and have fun.

I drive a 5 liter GT Mustang when many are perfectly happy with the V6. Think 0-60 in six seconds and 140mph top speed ought to be enough for anyone? Think again. 75-100 extra HP from a supercharger kit would be just the ticket. Too much? Like I said, no such thing. And here's a flash: not once in the 15 years I've owned it did I long for the better gas mileage of the V6.

When I bought my boat I was completley unaware there were people routinely exceeding the advertized max, and even if I had known, my finiancial situation at the time wouldn't have allowed me to go bigger. With my current 20/20 hindsight, if I were buying today I'd almost certainly be looking at the TLDI or ETEC 90s.

In fact, I just put over $2K in repairs into my Tohatsu 50 and a bunch more in transom repairs from the accident, and I spent a quite few hours in research and consideration as to how this was the best opprtunity I will ever see to finance the cost of a bigger motor and installation both. Eventually I elected to repair the existing and not spend the extra several thousand, but if I'd had the money in the boat bucks fund, I'd have done it.

Bobby T.-26X #4767 · Post by **Bobby T.-26X #4767** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 2:39 pm

where can one purchase a new 158# 50hp outboard?
never mind...i found it!

Tohatsu Japan

gotta go now...
United to Tokyo.
need to stop by the bank first.
the exchange rate, duty, and shipping is a real killer.

bottom line...if 158# is the magic number, then "fuggettaboutit"...
there's no such animal (158# 50hp) available in the U.S. today.
that's why the dealers are installing 243# 50's and 380# 70's.
and, Mac Corp. is honoring the "2 year, original purchaser" warranty.

and...BTW, they're honoring it because the boat is capable of handling it.
still waiting for the first claim...

Rolf · Post by **Rolf** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 2:53 pm

Me mine, TRY it, You'll LIKE it. The bigfoot car analogy is baseless. Remember, this is a POWERsailor, with a flat bottom meant to go fast. High speed powering was the main selling point of the boat for many of us, combined with cost and accomodations of course.

Although I regularly cruise along at 3500 rpm doing 18 knots, the safety of CONTROL IN ROUGH SEAS is the main reason I made the upgrade. It's probably not necessary for small lakes or river, unless you want to do some real waterskiing ( I've hit 28 knots inside LA Harbor with no gear/ballast/people aboard--mast up!)

That said, I RARELY use full throttle.

Input from people like Duane along with others here convinced me the transom was more than adequate to support the extra 100 pounds off the back-- two years of flawless performance pretty much prove it. If the back breaks off I'll still be able to sail home using built in flotation (didn't Roger claim that?)

Mark I think Duane has tired of chiming in on these same subjects over and over--I'm sure he's still reading it all tho. I don't mind "re-educating" the newbies time to time (forgive my pomposity)
Rolf

LOUIS B HOLUB · Post by **LOUIS B HOLUB** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 2:53 pm

My Mac-X does just FINE with a NISSAN 50 HP strapped on the back...Plenty of POWER

Rolf · Post by **Rolf** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:04 pm

Why have "FINE" when you can have "GREAT"? What's "fine" to you is "a slug" to me.
R

Mark Prouty · Post by **Mark Prouty** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:16 pm

Gerald Gordon wrote:I thought the topic was Boat review not big engines. How about moving the big engine topic to where it belongs and let's talk about the boat review, please!

You are correct. This thread has been hijacked by big engines. I ordered Boatworks magazine and anxiously look forward to reading it. I should recieve it in a few days. If someone else doesn't do it before me, I will provide a transcript of the article. Frank M says this review is quite an honor.

A positive review like this can really improve the retail value of our "classic" 26X boats.

ps: I love my 115 Suzuki. I was raking around it today and was tempted to start it just to hear run!

Moe · Post by **Moe** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:36 pm

The most egregious error in this review was in the section about resources for information about this boat. The author listed the little-used Sailnet Mac26X list and OMITTED MacGregorSailors.com! This mag doesn't have a letters to the editor section, but does have an address for the editor. Perhaps he needs to be swamped with some emails.

awolfe · Post by **awolfe** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 4:52 pm

Sorry, one last "Big Motor" post please...

Those who want more have to accept some minuses: more weight, the need for transom reinforcement, compromised sailing perfomance, of course higher initial cost, higher maintenance, lower fuel mileage, etcetera. Weigh all the options, make your choice, go with it and have fun.

CHIP, I agree. I bought my X in 1998 w/ Nissan 90. It was the first 90 ever placed on a Mac by The Anchorage in Lyons, Co. (Great people!) They have since sold scores with the 90. At this altitude the 90 is the LEAST hp I would want. But I had a "need". I really wanted to be able to ski behind my boat...

, I know, I know its not a ski boat...

FYI, to this date (knock on fiberglass) I have no stress cracks or any negative results that I can tell...

However, when sailing, I really would like to be faster, especially on a close reach. But I gotta' say that even if I threw the d--- motor off, the Mac just isn't that fast......or am I the problem?

The only time I was a fast sailor was on my 14' catamaran 30 years ago! (Like they say, "the older I get, the better I was)

...yeah, you shoulda' seen me then.

Tom
Annie's Song

Zavala · Post by **Zavala** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:18 pm

Moe wrote:The most egregious error in this review was in the section about resources for information about this boat. The author listed the little-used Sailnet Mac26X list and OMITTED MacGregorSailors.com! This mag doesn't have a letters to the editor section, but does have an address for the editor. Perhaps he needs to be swamped with some emails.

Moe -- Before you start the lynching, check one more time. I can't locate my copy right now, but if memory serves, the sidebar included a mention of something like "there's an active users forum at macgregor26x.com" -- which is the redirect from Heath's original domain. I'll confirm when I fine my magazine....