Macgregor 65

[Krusti]

I've just noticed a 1987 Macgregor 65 for sale in California. After quite a bit of upkeep he wants $159,000. That seems like a paltry sum (one that I could never afford unless I sold everyhting I own and go into hock for the rest of my life, just in case anyone thinks I have more money than brains!) compared to what other boat owners are asking for boats half that size. Excuse the pun but why is that Macgregor so inexpensive when it is obviously a very nice boat?

Krusti

What a dream to own a Macgregor 65!! Oceans here I come!

[Chip Hindes]

Excuse the pun but why is that Macgregor so inexpensive when it is obviously a very nice boat?

Here's the link.

Every time one of these shows up it sparks a new thread and new round of comments. I still have a copy of the brochure photo of two of them on a close reach on the wall behind my computer, right under that of my own X boat. I think it is a truly beautiful boat, and similar to a Corvette or Ferrari, looks like it's doing 25 knots when parked at the slip.

This one I believe is the older, somewhat less desirable (from a cruising standpoint at least) racing version. It is easily distinguishable from the later, pilot house cruising version by the latter's dual wraparound black windows, very similar in appearance to the Mac 19 or 26M on some serious steroids. I believe as well the racing version was originally sold as a stripper with very sparse accomodations, befitting a racing boat, while the pilothouse version was much nicer inside.

As well, I believe the reason they're low priced is, just like all MacGregors, it was very low priced compared to the competition even when new. Somebody may correct me, but I believe a later, fully equipped Pilothouse Mac 65 sold for around $200K new, the R version considerably less.

[ssichler]

The boat has pretty limited appeal. For a racer 1987 has to be a museum piece. For a cruiser the layout is horrible - look at that tiny galley with a single sink. A Catalina 30 has more usable space. But Krusti if you can find us a cheap slip in Moosejaw I will go in halves with ya;)

[KayakDan]

Whoa! You're gonna need a SERIOUS trrailer and tow vehicle for that one!

[Krusti]

Ssichler I could find you a slip in Moose Jaw (Wakamow park) but I don't think we could sail any where. It wouldn't matter anyways because even my half would cost, the house, the farm, all my vehicles, (not to mention my marriage!!) so I would have to live in the boat and California sounds just fine!!

Krusti

[RandyMoon]

That would stick out from my 25' slip. That is a good looking boat.

If I were going to spend that much, I'd be looking at a 35' boat will more modern gizmos.

[DLT]

yeah, beautiful boat, but not really my cup of tea...

[Scott]

Definitely my cup o' tea.

[Bobby T.-26X #4767]

seriously, though...
wher do you park it?
there are few (if any) places in SoCal.

[Dimitri-2000X-Tampa]

I think this one has Frank's name on it. What's the hull speed on it? I wonder if it is a planing hull, anyone know?

[DLT]

Definitely my cup o' tea.

Really? Did you get a look at that interior? Don't get me wrong, the pilot house version would be great. But, If I'm gonna have a boat that big, I want more out of the interior than this racer offers...

Actually, even then, 65' may be just too big for me... The canal behind the 'retirement' home we haven't yet built is only about 80' wide and the entrance requires a few turns and would therefore be real difficult, if possible, for a boat this size.

~40' is probably the biggest I can go, and even then its gonna be tight!

I'd be happy with something around 35', but would prefer some sort of retractible keel... Yeah, I know, good luck... There are a few examples, but I'm gonna have to save my pennies...

Of course, all of that is way into the future. I'm still content with my Mac...

[Rolf]

One major strike I hear about the 65 is that because of their tiny beam they can break in half by closely spaced waves in following seas-- for that reason nobody dares use one in race like the transpac-- the Molokai channel is notorious for these conditions. Any one have actual proof of this?
Rolf

[Chip Hindes]

One major strike I hear about the 65 is that because of their tiny beam they can break in half by closely spaced waves in following seas-- for that reason nobody dares use one in race like the transpac-- the Molokai channel is notorious for these conditions. Any one have actual proof of this?

Not absolutely sure, but I'd say I doubt it greatly.

For one thing, last time I searched for the whereabouts of some of the 65s, I'm pretty certain I ran across one of these that had been running charters in the Molokai Channel for at least five years.

[Tom Root]

While many see the 65' Mac is a poor cruiser, some see the advantage of the long narrow hull as a plus! Both models (Pilothouse vs Non~Pilothouse) offer an area back beyond the ladderwell which can easily serve as a 'Garage' of sorts as it has been referred to by it's owners. There is a large area for storage, spares and whatnot.

I have said many times that I can see a Mega~Mac in my future, just haven't convinced my other half on the whole idea of long~range cruising as yet!

The non~ Pilothouse version even has a bathtub, and something that was a plus for the 1st mate actually. Just how many boats do you see even in that length with a doggone bathtub? Of course I have heard that it makes about the best cooler for beer out there also! Actually a shoal keel, Pilothouse with a bathtub would be the ultimate for me, but alas, these are not available, but I imagine I could outfit one with a tub!

The boat mentioned in the 1st post here is 'Barking Spider' I presume? Nice boat and outfitted/preserved well.

Two were looked at by us here in San Diego, both non~pilothouses. One had some mighty huge blisters, above the water~line believe it or not. And the other sustained damge by what was described as a soft grounding and the area around the head door was tweeked between the inner liner and the lower deck liner in such a way that only removing the whole deck, popping it back in, and re~installing, would have cured!

The way I see it, is... even though 10 people could supposedly be berthed in a Mega~Mac, to cruise, it could only be done comfortably with about 5 or so, and all stores/outfitting required for any serious passages.

BTW, they can and have been trailered across the USA. Yes, they are on a flatbed, but knew of one that went from San Diego to Forida on a Semi~ride, so it IS possible!

I have talked to many people who brought these boats through Panama, and all Good reports were offered. Besides the naysayers who haven't done long passages on these boats, only heard the Bad and Ugly from them. One joker said he HEARD one split down the middle like a zipper. And he said that was because they were molded together. I called him on such a accusation, as I went to the factory several times in the '80's and '90's when they were being produced, have the brochures and saw all phases of assembly with my own eyes.

People perpetuate negativity when they percieve only one type of boat is right for them. In my opinion, no one has yet to build a similar~ faster, and sensible craft such as this Mac~Monster! But again, that's just me I presume!

I still revere Roger Macgregor as the builder of the best boat built for the buck, bar none, owned three models so far for over two decades, and can't see myself in any other brand!

Ahhh, the 65'.....Some day perhaps.......

In the meantime I am actively seeking a crew position, and will gain knowlede and experience hopefully so I can make a wise decision, and hopefully cast off my landlubber lifestyle for the South Pacific and beyond!

[Scott]

But, If I'm gonna have a boat that big, I want more out of the interior than this racer offers...

If I had a boat that big I would want something as narrow beamed as the mac 65. Can you say FAAAHAHAHAAAAST!!! Didnt the original advertisement state "Fastest production Monohull ever produced"?????

If I could afford a boat that bigI could probably afford to deck it out too.