MacGregorSailors.com

We have a 26M with a Tohatsu 40hp carburated 2-stroke. I get about 12 knots with the ballast dumped. It does seem to run well. I'm not sure if I have the optimal sized prop for this altitude. The dealer recommends running an oil gas mixture in the first tank which makes for a stinky exhaust for the first tank; after that the oil is automatically mixed. The boat does handle well under power; don't know about fuel consumption.

We started with a 50hp Tohatsu fuel injected but it didn't run well at all at 8000 feet so we went with the 40hp version. We went with 2-stroke becuase of price and weight. I don't know yet if we made the right decision; time will tell.

Consider the design of the boat in your engine choice. This hull design is a hybrid and sacrifices sailing capability for the added speed capability of a 50 hp engine. If you choose a smaller engine you still loose the sailing capabilities from the hull design and don't get the trade-off of the speed capabilities. In the long run you will probably not be happy with this boat. Get the 50hp or larger and you will love the or as much as the rest of us do. As for the range under power, unless you are planning to do some blue water sailing there will probably be some marinas with fuel docks available somewhere along the way. I have the Honda 50 with two 6.5 gal tanks and have only needed to find fuel once and that is because I always observe the 1/3 out, 1/3 back and 1/3 reserve rule and used half my fuel on the way out and there was no wind. Good luck with your boat search.

my 97 had a honda 50 when repowered was glad that she now has a yamaha 50,f/s,some of the motors are hard to find a repair shop or parts for once you leave your home area,,as for size the 50 is just great if you have a mate who does not like to go fast, mine 12-13 mph loaded with full ballast at wot,,and 16-17 no ballast fast enough for us ,usually only keep the 6 gallon yamaha tank on the boat as it takes several weeks to use that the way we use the mac,,we keep the tempo 9(which holds about 7.5 gallons in the shed and only use on long trips:D

I still can't believe people would choose a Mac and then get something under 50hp. Why not get a pure sailboat, then? Even with the 50, the Mac is a underpowered powerboat.

We have a hull with the accomodations and capabilities of a 25 foot $40,000 powerboat. Why not take advantage of it? Sure, the warranty is an issue, but if you use common sense the worst thing that can happen is you will have a boat you can resell later to a "pure" powerboater if need be.

The Tohatsu 90 I recently moved up to allows speed bursts of 28 knots, loaded down cruising speeds of 20 knots at 3500 rpm, and actually balances my 2002x better for sailing with a mere 315 pounds hanging off transom. It is narrow and completely clears water with helm seat down. It's time-tested PROVEN fuel injected engine block cost me 7 grand brand new.

The new technology evinrude DI is unproven. Evinrude was bought out by "Bombardier"(spelling?), a French company(reason enuff for me to avoid it). It along with heavier four strokes all cost upwards of 9 grand. My motor is as quiet as a four stroke and actually gets better fuel economy. The only real negative is high altitude 25% power loss, which a 90hp would more than offset if you didn't want to go fast, anyway. Some will argue, but if you research it or hitch a ride with me I will show you first hand. Anyway, had to get that off my chest..
Rolf

Rolf,

I don't know of any 25 powerboats with anywhere near the interior space you get in a Mac. I have only found one powerboat with equivilant space under 30'.

It is the 28' Bayliner 289 Classic.


My wife and I looked at many many boats at this years boat show and it was the only small powerboat capable of accomodating our family of 5. It has a reasonable transverse aft cabin/berth like the mac (it's actually led us to do some major reconfiguring in the mac so we will now have a aft cabin for ourselves), a nice dinette, and a vee berth. A great enclosed cockpit that can be had with a real back door rather than canvas. Unfortunately it's a $75k boat, too wide to really trailer and it's V8 sucks up the fuel. We have found some used ones for around $40k.

You had to go well into the 30' range to get any other boat with the interior space that the mac offers. Todays powerboats devote a large proportion of their volume to engines and outside cockpits. Most in the 30' range only have sleeping for 4 people. It's a shame, big bright shiny 39' cruisers with only two double beds.

Speaking of a mac power only boat. Take a look at this boat,

The SeaRay 390 Motor yacht.

Notice the overall shape and lines of the boat and hull. From when I first saw it I could easily see a very similar mac powerboat mod. Put on a hard bimini/dodger over the cockpit with a real glass front windows. Side and aft canvas panels like they use, some extended railings, the X interior of course, and you have a nice little power cruiser with the 90hp motor on the back

Rolf....
at the boat show.... I was quoted prices of engine and controls for the E-tec 90, under 7600.

So that 9K price is a little old

Did that include tax and installation for the Etec 90?

Amber Marine (Costa Mesa, CA - down the street from the Mac plant) did an '04 Tohatsu 90TLDI + controls + tax (7.75%) + install for $7200 in Oct/Nov.
He charged an additional $200 for an inner transom plate and some fabrication on the underside in the rear berth. Now that I've seen it, it's a bit much for a piece of painted 1/4" thick aluminum.

I could have fabricated it myself for next to nothing, but I didn't know at the time what additional transom support he had in mind.

Duane,
You're exactly right about the need for at least 30 feet in a cabin cruiser for comparable accomodations -- I just didn't want to exaggerate. One of my best friends has a Sea Ray 40 foot sedan bridge. Beautiful boat, two heads, two private cabins, and living area aft with an electric pull out sofa.

He paid $220,000 for this two year old $400,000 boat (when new). It has twin cats and he bought it hoping to ease his wife into more "comfortable" cruises to Catalina. Problem is, she still gets seasick, and I did too when I helped him pick the boat up from San Diego for the 90 mile return (those deep v hulls wobble!).

Also, he has to moor farther out at the island, more exposed to swell and wind, while I'm tucked safe all the way in on the string line (26 feet is biggest small boat limit). He has another slip he's thinking of buying a small daysailor for. He is very knowledgable and helped teach me everything I know about sailing, motors, and boats in general.

He has been amazed to see me arrive at Catalina during very rough conditions, certain I would turn back because of the Mac's "limitations". He still likes to bash the Mac's "quality issues" but meanwhile is reassessing the need for the Sea Ray and will probably scale down. I wouldn't be surprised if he finally chucked it all in for a Mac.
Rolf

To plane or not to plane, that is the question.

If you want fuel economy and cruising range, stay just below hull speed (7 mph) with a small 4 stroke. 10 - 20 hp maybe depending on cruising weight, bottom condition, and wind conditions? With rudders down in protected water, this is very comfortable and well controlled. The bow is down and visability forward is good. Alternate means of dumping ballast would be needed such as a motorized air pump.

If you want to plane, I think the Tohatsu TLDI 90 is the best choice. Lightweight, narrow motor head for easier boarding, fuel economy and emmissions as good as or better than the 4 strokes. Tohatsu reliability.
The X hull shape being flatter, would favor planing more than the M.
You should probably also beef up the transom with a steel cross member for any motors significantly larger than 50 hp, and of course the hull warrantee will disappear .

Most of the 50's, will get you on a plowing semi plane. You will be standing or sitting on a raised seat to see forward. Rudder up handling is a little squirrelly sometime, especially at lower speeds like 10-12 mph.
My tohatsu 50 2 stroke has never achieved more than 14 mph, but I think my carbs have been fouled from day 1. Just cleaned them last fall and will see if that helps this spring.

The 4 stroke 50s are all well and good, but a few things to remember is that they are wider and heavier (harder to board at the stern, may also be heavy on the helm. Some do not tilt up all the way either unless the steering is hard over, since the cables hit the deck.

If you really want to take advantage of the boat's strong points, seems like a big motor is the way to go, as long as there are some fuel stations along the way. If you are motoring against a current and strong headwinds, lots of power in reserve is a good thing. I like to mainly sail as an almost purist, but occasionally I need to get somewhere on time and the weather is not cooperating or I sail into a bunch of bloodthirsty biting flies and want to get out of the swarm. Also if you have to transit a narrow channel with a bunch of aggressive big power boats, being able to keep pace with them means reducing the number of big wakes that hit you as they pass. In these situtations, I would dearly love to have a 90 hp on the stern.





Otherwise, a pure sailing cruiser with a small motor might be a better choice.

Bobby,
I was going to Oregon to get the motor.. (no sales tax)

and transom reinforcements I have been glassing into my mac. not going to be any external additional metal.

Craig wrote:My tohatsu 50 2 stroke has never achieved more than 14 mph, but I think my carbs have been fouled from day 1. Just cleaned them last fall and will see if that helps this spring.

Get that baby fixed, man. My Tohatsu 50 is noisy as hull, stinks, and gets crummy mileage, but a dog it's not. I get 14 mph ballast in, loaded for cruising; 17 loaded but with ballast empty.

You might look at the prop as well.

i get a kick out of the over-kill issue regarding the infamous "limited warranty".
1) only the "original" owner gets a warranty.
2) and after two years it's gone.

i personally never had a warranty.
i purchased a used, six month old '02-X.
if something breaks, i fix it myself.

recently, i've seen two brand new M's go thru Amber Marine. Both installed the Tohatsu 90-TLDI.
if the sink pump doesn't work, or the chainplate leaks, do you honestly believe that the dealer will say..."Oh, you had a 90hp (which, by the way, weighs less than a Suzuki 70hp), so you void the warranty on everything whether or not the 90hp caused it".
what a joke.

if the sink pump doesn't work, or the chainplate leaks...so you void the warranty on everything whether or not the 90hp caused it

To my knowledge, nobody has ever said the whole warranty would be voided, and no dealer or reputable manufacturer would do so.

In any case, it's not the sink pump that you need to be worried about, it's the hull, because repair of a damaged hull is what's going to set you back serious dollars, and that's what's likely to be damaged by an improperly installed larger motor.

Others have addressed the engine size issue pretty well, including the issues of the larger the motor, the lower and less noisy and stressful the motor rpm, and the advantage of being able to run from a storm to safe harbor in less than half the time it would take you at hull speed. What I haven't seen mentioned is the boat's response to throttle. If you're starting to get sideways to the waves in heavy seas, that burst of a lot of power from a larger motor can save your bacon. The amount of power available not only affects your acceleration, but your braking in reverse, as well.

I'd also like to address the expectation of 150 mile range with 24 gallons of fuel.

It's been my experience, and from what I've seen from published tests, that the formula used for displacement hulls' speed, often works pretty well for planing hulls, to determine the speed beyond which the stern wave starts to separate, the bow starts to rise from the boat climbing its bow wave, and the fuel mileage starts to drop. The X's 23' LWL results in a calculated hull speed of about 6.5 knots. I suspect that regardless of what size four-stroke motor you use, this will be the speed of best efficiency, and the efficiency at this speed may not vary significantly with motor size, until you get down to the 9.9-15HP sized motors propped to run this hull speed at their torque peak rpm with relatively widely opened throttle (i.e. most efficient motor operation).

We're talking about 50 nautical miles per 8 hour day of powering at this speed. An X can hold 24 gallons with either two 12 gallon Tempo LPT12 or four 6 gallon Valu tanks. Counting on getting all that fuel out of the tanks, ideal weather, and 6+ nmpg at this speed, to achieve 3 days powering for 150 nautical miles is, IMHO, foolhardy, even with a four-stroke. Even at hull speed, my cruise planning would count on a fuel stop (and dumping the 3 gallon Sani-Potty) at least every other day and no more than 100 nautical miles, if a significant amount of sailing were not to be involved (and an upgrade to the 5 gallon Sani-Potty wasn't done or an additional tank wasn't brought along). That's barely the 1/3 reserve most recommend.

A refueling range of 100 miles might not be conservative enough in some circumstances. Maintaining the same hull speed over water, a 2-3 knot current on the bow could reduce your speed over ground, resulting in only 75% to near 50% of the miles over ground per gallon and per hour. Since that could stretch your 8 hour day to near 12 to 16 hours, you might want to bring that speed over water up to +/- 9 knots to maintain 6.5 over ground, but then your engine's spinning faster, with heavier throttle, and using more fuel than under ideal circumstances. The little 9.9-15HP motor that's optimal at hull speed might be screaming along at or near WOT trying to hold this higher speed over water. And this is only a 2-3 knot current. There are other factors, such as head winds and wave height that can increase your fuel consumption. I've seen ours nearly double with the Whaler when we have to come off plane in heavy seas.

You also might want to explore alternative powering plans, such as 7 hours/day at 11 knots at 5 nmpg, covering 150 miles in two days versus three days at hull speed, with a fillup of about 2/3 tank every day.

--
Moe