MacGregorSailors.com

Well, those of you who did not start the season, just thought I'd share some pics of our 1st real race of the season. We had a good tune up race, in January, (No points)and then the February race got de-winded....really! No wind at all in the bay for hours, we called the race, and of course, when heading back to the launch ramp, wouldn't ya know it, it finally returned. So, it was nice to have some really good wind in the March race! I was in what we refer to as our yellow fleet. These pics were taken by the commitee boat by the Millers, on their Hunter 36 Millertime II. Very supportive, and Paula Miller also does our Website.
http://www.shutterfly.com/os.jsp?i=67b0 ... 499&open=1

Honestly, this was my very 1st race ever on my own boat, and wish that those big numbers meant I was better. I probably wont have any bragging rights for several years. Murv Barry, is our 'ol salt in the X fleet, great sailor, and well, his boat is legendary in how he set it up, he's always modding his boat, I call it Murvisized!

I have crewed in many venues, but this is the boat I wanted to put through the paces, and we learned alot Saturday, and as it is I can ONLY get better, right? To me it's all about fun, and learning how to sail more proficient!

We had a gentleman from Canada, who is town avoiding that white stuff way up north, who sailed his X,( I was too busy to really check out his neat double furler system) and we had a new member, who owns an "M" boat who was not there this time, but has boatloads of skill (sailed/raced Hobie cat 16' for 30 years, very seriously)
Only one Hunter 260 was there, also.

I invite all who are in the area to come on out and try your skill, or hone it in our racing fleet! Or just crew! I can easily sponsor you, and if well you want to join, that's OK also! Our club does not have reciprocals with other clubs/facilities. (as we don't own ours!) My point is not to plug our own club, but seek out a club in your area, and have fun using your boat!
Here's the link to our club's web page: http://www.vycsd.com/ from there, go to the race link.

I just wanted to make those of you out there smelling spring in the air, to get ready to smell the salt (or lake) water....It's boating season everywhere soon....HUH!

Nice to see that the 26D's are consistantly faster than the Hunter in both real and corrected time, and that in one race the Hunter 26 was beaten by a 26X on corrected time.

They're different to sail, but the 'X' can hold her own out there. I see they have been given a 359 PHRF to the 'X'. This does seem high, is that what everyone else see's them with elsewhere? What PHRF has been given to the 'M' in your fleet?

Good question Duanne, and this has probably got to be determined in the future....very near future, for sure! I am glad we now have an "M" in our fleet, and am looking forward to what is most assuredly an able crew aboard her too!

The Hunters do well, but IMHO only when stronger winds appear, she's in her element then. Same applies to Mac X, and M's. The classics are hands down the winners, and having crewed on Joe Dumbaulds boat "Patriot" I can tell you he has the boat and himself tuned, and down to a science. I learned alot from him, just not enough to apply it to my X yet!

We do not use spinnakers in our regata's, and can only pole out 1.5 X the "J" dimension without penalty! I have a furreled jib, and am looking at either adding a double roller, or just attaching a Genoa....it is better, all around IMHO!

Anonymous wrote:The X unlike the M is ment to be sailed
unballasted in light conditions. This is the major difference
in the models.

Where did you get that from or did you just make it up? This post went down as 'guest', but it has frank m written all over it. Your comments and opinions are extreme, unfounded, and are likely to get someone hurt one day.

Tom,
Thanks for taking the time to show us the pics. They are great and make me long to get my boat wet. Unfortunately, I won't get time until Mead Madness.
I'd like to come down and sail with you, Murv and everyone sometime. keep trying to get the time, but............
Well anyway, retirement is just 3yrs 9mths away now

Murvs boat.... yes great. I love what he's done to the interior. Like Murv too, a heck of a nice gentleman.
What about Rick Moyer? He still around? Haven't seen any posts by him or anything lately.

The fella from Canada you mentioned....... looks like the same boat that joined us up at Mead, back in January. Was his name Mark? He was traveling with wife, kids and parents, as I remember. Very nice people.

Speaking of Mead, are any of you guys coming up this year? Mead Madness starts April 23 and lasts for a week. Let me know. Any others out there also welcome. April 24 is our Founders day cup race (few rules, mostly fun). All are welcome to joint in that also. We gather at Callville Bay Marina.
SK

Testing and some follow up, also complements to anyone looking
into racing. Performance means safety and you learn how to make
a sailboat boat perform by racing.

Again for the benefit of those writing reviews: This is from the X brochure.

Here are your sailing choices: (1) With the water ballast tank full and conservative sails, the 26 is an extremely stable sailboat, ideal for a beginner. (2) With the big genoa jib or spinnaker, it is a conventional self righting sailboat with outstanding sailing speed. (3) Without water ballast, it is one of the wildest and potentially fastest sailboats around. Under power (1) without water ballast, it is a rather fast conventional cabin cruiser, or (2) with the water ballast, a docile, heavily ballasted power boat. ... Quick, stable and responsive, the revolutionary MacGregor 26 is the fastest and best handling of any of the trailerable cruising sailboats.

The first Item (3) very clearly indicates the designer's intent that the boat be viewed as a movable water ballast (on and off) rather than fixed water ballast vessel. This use may or may not distress those currently controling MacGregor Yachts today. It is interesting that it hasn't been until 2003, that any one has instructed X owners in how to right a capsized X. PHRF racing rules changed in 2004. This really has
changed the raceability of the X. Making her very much more desirable
in that regard. Just to make all aware and in the hopes I will not be viewed as reckless in the future:

You use the high rudder as a lever or rock against the head door from
inside the boat to right her after letting all sheets go free. Chances are good she will already be pointing into the wind because she is very stable on her side. The side chines do that for her. This would not be behavior expected for the M or any more rounded hull form.

The X is the only Macgregor model intended to be operated under sail unballasted and just like any light boat she will capsize unbalasted. That
in no way implies reckless operation. It turns out to be a very easy thing to right them. The water will not even enter the hatch unless there are heavy waves, in which case you should be fully ballasted. No X has ever been capsized fully ballasted. The vessel heads up before that can happen.

I will also point out for the benefit of the press, that the M is the first power sailer that is not to drop ballast for motoring. She really is ment for geting some place with a smooth power boat ride and then casual sailing - not racing once there. I do think there will be a racing model that is less heavy than the current M. But that is just a Frank M opinion.

Frank (guest), I realize that 216 is what was given to an x in that fleet. We are not external by any means to any sanctioning body, but attempt to be "fair" so that the boats are more balanced in the sport. Whether or not our race results are recognized by anyone else in the world is not our concern....truly! We are simply a fun group who promote the sport and true fun of sailing, therefore I will not even attempt to argue with any claims you make.

You are known on this board and Sailnet.net 26x board as someone who is off on a tangent. That's OK, and as long as this is understood, your claims can all be taken with a grain of salt. I will never be an "authority" on sailing or Macs in general. I just impart what ever I think works, or solicit idea's out there from those who do know more than I do!

Your website has many impressive pictures, it's the words that concern some of us. I have invited you to our neck of the woods, and would love for you to prove alot of your claims of how well the X boat is at sailing. I will give you the helm, or you can crew, I'd love to better my sailing experience, and win races. So, based on what our PHRF rating is, do you think you can still beat a Mac 26 "D" classic? I think not! But the offer is open, if you have the time, I have the place!

Frank m said:

[quote="mighetto"]I will also point out for the benefit of the press, that the M is the first power sailer that is not to drop ballast for motoring.

yet MacGregor web site says re motoring:

Top speed is obtained with an empty ballast tank, no rigging, and one person aboard. With a full ballast tank, it will be about 3 mph slower than with an empty tank

Steve, Yes, Murv is tops in our book for sure. We met him at a launch ramp the 1st time out in our other Mac a few years back, and discovered an entire club of people just like him! I always related Yacht clubs to snobs and all around jerks, I found out otherwise in joining this club. Some genuine great people who are willing to help in any way to enhance a boating experience. And look at the cost.....initially $80.00 per year, and $40.00 after that. Most clubs I looked into where fast approching the $1,000.00 dollar mark. So, we don't have place to go and get drunk in....so what? And we don't have our own docks....so what? Our club is about people and the great boat experience to be had. Sorry, now I sound like I am really shamelessly plugging it. Nope, I just think there are many like it out there, but one must investigate, to be sure!

I unfortunately did not get to meet the Canadian, but I believe may be the same one. I really wanted to see his double furler setup, as I said, but the Marina we launch out of had a Sailing equipment swap meet going on and I always end up spending a couple of hundred bucks there, but save thousands...really! One of the items I picked up was a complete Fico Traveler system ($65.00, believe it or not!) that will be adapted to my X. I like Murv's setup, but can rig it like the one in the mod section also! They always seem to have these swap meets (2 times a year) when we have our races. So I rigged my boat, and rushed over to the swap meet, and well, was in heaven!!!! I like the one Minney's has up in Orange County also!

I am not sure why Rick Moyer has not been seen or heard from, he has not been at any functions for the past few months, I have missed some also, just other things going on I suppose!

Tom, Jim

Ah the 26d. Here is what I have been told. If a 26d or any MacGregor Classic is cruising with a larger vessel, and that vessel is sailing 8 MPH or so the Classic can ride the larger vessel's wake. They just get behind and stay there.

It really must be a hoot. Hunters now do the same. It is legal in any race.

The d is the favored model of the classics not necessarily owing to better performance but because of a quieter ride. The swing centerboard classics suffer from the board clunking about, I am told. The d dagger board vessels do not.

Even today ocean cruising monohulls are modified so centerboards do not make noise. It must keep tired crews awake. Of course once the board is jammed you loose the benefit of shoal draft and we just had a case of a Chinese crew in an EU built jammed centerboarder that practically starved themselves because they had to bypass communities in the south seas that other wise could have been visited for provisions. Down to the last bowl of rice, I was told. This happened in 2002, maybe last year, anyway the story was related by the crew of a 50 footer that just returned to Puget Sound. It is all about getting a story. I don't doubt this one.

All of the classics, regardless of board type are remarkably light for their size, but they were reviewed most likely unfairly by Practical Sailor who objected to the fixed centerline water ballast.

Of course almost every other builder of trailerables has copied that by now. Anyway average months of ownership for the older 26 models was something like 18 months, with owners often moving up to a power boat or multi-hull.

Somewhere in this story is the unfortunate sticking of a Mac65 in its mold and loss of about 3 million bucks to MacGregor Yachts - or the mold was recovered or insurance covered. I don't know. Anyway MacGregor Yachts smashed up all the molds except a Mac65 one and brought out the X. It passed the Practical Sailor reviewers and is even today is featured on that publication's web site and discussed here just recently See

http://www.practical-sailor.com/sample/boatreview2.html

"The PHRF handicap is between 240 and 250"

Anyway Practical Sailor had argued that off-centerline ballast made for a stable boat and it does. However, on centerline ballast of any kind makes for a speedy boat. MacGregor Yachts has always made speedy boats. How it got type cast as a builder of cheep boats is something I have been researching.

Apparently Classic owners raced all the good out of them. In 18 months, 5 years worth of sailing might be put on them. It wasn't construction but activity. Way more activity than any cruising boat would normally get. Well thats my theory. I do not believe MacGregor ever oriented its 26 line to first time purchasers or that they build cheep boats. They have, until recently, always been a racing oriented company.

The M and X suffer against the classic 26s in races because of weight. The X can drop 1400 lbs of that weight and not suffer. The designer intended it to be so. That is why the vessel has always been marketed as revolutionary. The company is controlled by those of a different mind set today.

The M, seriously, is the perfect old guys boat. The designer, I think purposefully designed her so that she lists when unballasted. You just are not suppose to sail or motor unballasted.

Because you are suppose to motor fast, the vessel is built the same as the X. In other words dry weight is minimum 600 lbs more than it might be if the boat were just meant to be sailed like a classic. And the weight is to the centerline because that means speed but not race speed.

The M hull form is more displacement like than the X and this is why 300 lbs of solid ballast on centerline didn't reduce her top end by 3 MPH. It is well known that the X will slow 1 MPH for each additional 300 lbs aboard. This is typical of planing hulls but not displacement or semi displacement ones.

The M really is a blue water pocket cruiser along the lines of a
Dana 24 or ETAP 26i. That is how I think of her. Unlike the Dana, however, she sports the luxury and safety of real speed under motor power and that is real speed even in small craft warning and worse conditions where and X is going to change course and run with the sea or stop down the motor and put up sail, perhaps even heave to or lie ahull because the ride at WOT is to harsh otherwise. The ride under sail, can be ideal in conditions where the ride at WOT is misserable for the X. Back to the M..

Like the ETAP 26i the M will not sink. She is priced only about 10,000 less than the ETAP 26i which is marketed as a "rough and ready blue water" pocket cruiser. Back to the X..

tThe X centerboard will cluck about in a confused sea. But if it bothers you lift it slightly. The clunking is likely less than a classic because the board is so far forward - it really is more of a forward rudder, like on the Schock 40s, rather than a centerboard. Again that is my opinion. I get to have them. I represent the manufacturer just as much as a dealer does - which is not at all.

Anyway, by all means get the boats racing to promote safety. I suggest
clubs have handicaps by captain rather than boat like they
do in golf if they must vary from PHRF. Put M owners
in 26d boats, however and let the X crews sail them as intended - IE
let them move the water ballast on and off the boat.

Anyway - I am headed for the boat. Average months of ownership for an X appears to be 40 or more. Mine is over 5 years old. There just isn't anything better in a monohull under 40 foot - sail or power. The M is close but she doesn't plane. Boats that do not plane are for old guys:>)

I will be 50 in December.

Anonymous wrote:Yes it is Frank Mighetto. Sorry, I haven't figured out this list yet.

My comments and opinions are certainly not extreme or unfounded, and I do not appreciate comments regarding me likely to get someone hurt one day - especially since we are headed to the west side of Vancouver Island. I am just so tired of all the spin about the new model.

When you make stuff up and state it like it's fact, then it is misleading and unfounded. When it is your opinion and 99% of the population disagrees with you, then it's extreme. You polluted sailnet and now you are doing it here. Nobody wants to hear it, why is that so hard for you to understand?

Frank,

The M is no more of a bluewater boat than the X is. Neither is built for true open water. They are both extremely light weight construction boats that serves great in protected waters but would be cracked like eggs in rough open water.

The difference between how a Mac is constructed and a Dana is night and day.

Frank M - spewed- "The lengh of the 65 is her week point Two have actual cracked in half."


PLEASE, PLEASE, back that statement up with fact, I heard this rumor before, and I truly believe all 100+ Mac 65' boats made are still in existance. Please prove me wrong with real resources, as I am eventually going to get one, the sooner the better! I just hate for product falacies to exist without proof! The only one that may just be a half hull, is the one on top of the Mac HDQTRS in Costa Mesa, Ca. You can see it on the left hand side of Roger's factory! The rest of the roof blends into a wave, beautiful display!

So, another rumor, or can you back it up? I won't go into the many other things that can have holes shot into, it would take me forever, and a be case in futility I see!

Well, I am with you. I vote for rumor as well. The spew came from the broker for BraveHeart, a Mac 65 out of Gig Harbor, that was for sale a year or so ago. He made the statement to me at the Seattle Boat's Afloat show. It should be easy to track the fellow down. Since the fellow was a broker and I was a prospect it is odd that he would puke up falsehood. Well perhaps not odd at all. We see that with M dealers vs X.

IN ANY CASE, I think all of us saw that AC boat break in half. Length makes for a displacement boat that can go fast, but it also makes a weak point. The AC boat was to have floated but the air bags were not enough; add a fixed fin to the configuration and double weak. Many blue water cruisers believe 38 to 42 is the ideal size for a monohull. That is pretty small. In fact since most of these are inboards there may be more space on a Mac26x. That of course can be disputed.

What is not in dispute is that both the X and M motor faster than the Mac 65. This is in both brochures. Also in both is 17 MPH under sail but I really doubt that for the M. At least not sustained. The X will get on plane even fully ballasted and stay there for 30 minutes or more. I do this in normal wind, not 17 but certainly 11, 12 and 13M PH.

If you were trying to run to the side or ahead of a storm, this is what you want. Furthermore, if you hit doldrums you want to move the water off the boat and be able to use what wind is there. You do not want fixed water ballast. The X movable kind has big advantage in a blue water vessel because a stronger hull can be made without sacrificing sailing performance in light wind.

I will say as well that the worst of boat models today are vessels that are monohull and are not capable of doing 10 MPH or so. The Dana 24 is one such TURKEY. Why build them? It would be better to stop that and just fix up the old ones and the Flikkas. The only reason these small turkeys can get insurance is that ocean crossing is not nearly as dangerous as is pften portrayed. The risks of freeway driving are larger. Anyway Danas and really all under 40 monohulls must be fitted out like tanks to take the bad weather they will get caught in because they are so slow.

Prior to modern electronics and reporting that was acceptable. Today it really isn't. The objective is to avoid harms way by knowing when to make passage, when to change course to avoid storms and where the all weather harbors are so that if you need to go with the flow you know where you will be staying. You do that with modern electronics and by diligently checking the reports.

Of course having solid flotation is also a good Idea. Just do not think the Dana 24 has that. Slow and Sinkable - nope not a blue water cruiser in my book. The Etap 26i is Slow but not Sinkable - perhaps a blue water cruiser in my book.

Now is a canter a blue water cruiser? - Attend the Oakland Sail Expo - see the shock 40 and tell me about her. You build ocean racers and ocean cruisers for that duty. Where is the shock 40 in that regard. I understand there is a sink and there are berths and that owing to a forward rudder she will do well upwind.