Incredible "Secrets of Yacht Design" website located... [Archive] - Page 2

mighetto

02-01-2005, 01:59 PM

Skippy, I love your style. Review by the numbers. Are these the most offensive of my comments? Would they be less offensive from others? Lets elaborate.

#220
... boats that heel to much ... are to tender for motoring, anchoring, or even entertaining dockside, because of poor initial stability. ... excessive heeling ... discourages those new to the sport and makes the boat a poor cruising vessel because all accomodations are at an awkward angle when the wind carries.

comes from post #220, where I said.

This month, in the sailing magazines, there is recognition that IMS is dead. Even the owner of the last built non-TP52 IMS boat, a boat that betters all the TP52s, sees his vessel as a buggy wip, a useless thing, a Gimcrack now that the US has gone IRC to support this technology shift to movable ballast, and lighter materials. With that recognition is the halt of trends in sailboat design that I believe have contributed to the decline of the sailing sport in the US. We are talking trends to shorter head sails and boats that heel to much because under the IMS rules these vessels had rating advantage and boats that are to tender for motoring, anchoring, or even entertaining dockside, because of poor initial stability.

What is wrong with small head sails. Well, the head sail is the sail most likely in clear air. It makes sence owing to that for it to be a powerful sail. Also when the head sail is simply jib size, it can not wrap around stays which means poor pointing. Plus that trend ignores the greatest invention in modern times for sailing - roller furling which gives the sailor an easy way to maintain the vessel on optimum heel. What is wrong with excessive heeling? Well it discourages those new to the sport and makes the boat a poor cruising vessel because all accomodations are at an awkward angle when the wind carries.

I can add that Farr Designs is the source of the notion that IMS is the reason smaller head sails have been a trend in sailboat design in the last few years as well as boats whoes optimum heel is over 15 degrees. For reasons I do not pretend to understand, these two items represent loop holes in the box rules that when exploited by a designer generate a winning vessel in IMS races.

The Mac26m follows the trend. She is unable to untilize a Genoa on upwind points of sail when the wind is above high normal (say 15 or 17 MPH). She also is sailed on her ear, much further than a Mac26x in those winds, and this style is appealing to those who have been following IMS or have been US Sailing trained to think that looks correct.

mighetto

02-01-2005, 02:16 PM

#221
After the first day, below decks on any cruising sailboat is likely going to smell like puke. If it does not it may smell of diesel. No one outside of the most fatigued is going to want to "enjoy" the comfort there. And then they will be sleeping. If the crossing is several weeks the enjoyment is the same one might get in jail.

I had written:

Hi Jan. The Mac26x is a serious ocean sailboat. There are a couple of things to realize. First, no one outside of a race, will find any boat of any racing size on the ocean comfortable.

It took serious racers to make this point to me. In the modern age, boats are transported, not because it is dangerous to make a crossing, but because the cost of wear and tear on the yacht doesn't justify the "fun" of doing so.

After the first day, below decks on any cruising sailboat is likely going to smell like puke. If it does not it may smell of diesel. No one outside of the most fatigued is going to want to "enjoy" the comfort there. And then they will be sleeping. If the crossing is several weeks the enjoyment is the same one might get in jail.

So for the future, it is likely that boats that will be making ocean crossings will be more race boat like in the interior than house like. To ignore this ignores the availability of other modern tools besides boat transport like weather reporting.

Jan has since contacted me with the Idea that a 33 foot boat (the J100) should cost less than a Schock 40 because the Schock 40 is 7 feet longer. Let me rephrase. There should be no new designs of any monohull ocean going sailboat in the 30 to say 37 foot range. The J100 would be one of those vessels that in my view is limited to protected lake use only. The Schock 40, when crewed properly, is at least capable of sailing out of harms way when weather reports indicate that is a good idea. She is likely also able to motor out of harms way in those conditions but her engine is to modest to assume that the vessel can reach hull speed in a chop.

Let me add that professional sailors make 15,000 to 30,000 PER MONTH. Now tell me that isn't fun.

mighetto

02-01-2005, 02:16 PM

#250
Your gripe is with Roger MacGregor or the GP RWP, or with lubbers who will never see sinkers superior to vessels that after being swamped still float.

I wrote

I am not the first to present these notions. Roger Magregor put them into a vessel, the Mac26x. The Internet is an international public resource, developed by multiple countries desiring to foster freedom of expression. I have a right to present ideas. No one has the right to avoid being offended. This is however what the closed minded pretend. Your gripe is with Roger MacGregor or the GP RWP, or with lubbers who will never see sinkers superior to vessels that after being swamped still float.

If you are new to the sea then the term lubber as in "land lubber" or "land lover" may not be known to you. You may also not be aware of the battle multihullers have had getting the right to race PHRF or against any monohull really. In this battle the multihull owners were all labled "Mr Dangerous" because when a multihull is capsized - and all boats can capsize - they usually can not be righted unassisted by another boat. The offending refrain has been "well at least my sh*t floats when swamped". The year before last a multi did flip durring the Van Isl 360 race, a race now 4 years old that is gaining international attention. Rather than risk a night resque, the crew put on wet suits and waited for daylight. They were not harmed by this and the vessel was recovered intact. I think this proved something. Something about safety. But two years later, I still hear about it and then the claim that multihulls are dangerous and should be banned from ocean racing because they capsize and can not be righted. Jim Teeters failed to gain the sympathy of the jury and the judge because they think like lubbers. This ability to float is a big deal. Capsize is an event that can happen in any boat given sufficient sea conditions.

The Barnegat Bay A Cats race for the oldest perpetual trophy in the United States. Since 1871 these 28 footers have extended their centerboards and risked capsize. The class deserved more than the weight of Jim Teeter's style research. Jim Teeters sees weight as the critical factor in avoiding a capsize. 80 years of racing those A Cats has shown otherwise. The critical factor is crew. Crew that knows when to reef, when to extend the centerboard, when to retract and when to call it a day. Teeters likely attacked the A Cats for the same reason as the Mac26x, only the A Cat advocates did not have a judge and jury to point out the nonesence. Teeters and those supporting the TP52 had already drawn out 30 foot fixed keel boats that were to be the next big racing thing in US sailing. I connect the dots and offend Teeter supporters with a notion that we are a forgiving nation. Get out of the way, there is much to be excited about. US Sailing has reorganized. Soon American centerboarders will be retracting the foils as the designers intended in PHRF races, gaining the advantage over fixed keel vessels long known to have been possessed by them.

mighetto

02-01-2005, 02:26 PM

Please it's obvious from the posts, that Frankie knows everything. Please if we just sit and listen (ie don't reply), then we can all just enjoy his greatness.

I am great in monolog mode! Tradition does encourage posters to chime in now, however. Who will hit the 5,000 view mark? The countdown has started. Has any thread in the history of boat design.net been viewed so much in such a short period of time? And by so few Macgregor Yacht owners? The minions haven't even been called. Huzzah Huzzah, keep the comments coming by email, if not by a post. mighetto@eskimo.com

mighetto

02-01-2005, 02:44 PM

Hey did someone hack the view counter again. Lets start a petition

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/create.html

Stuck on 4978, how is this rat going to get his food pellet?

SeaDrive

02-01-2005, 03:19 PM

What does a Mac want to be when it grows up, and is fit to go to sea?

ForedeckShuffle

02-01-2005, 03:42 PM

What happens if you bolt two M26 carcasses together to form a cat? How about 3, with one slightly forward in the middle, is this a tri like the one Ellen is using?

woodboat

02-01-2005, 03:47 PM

Mighetto, I think you need to simply clear your cache. My view shows 5026 currently.

mighetto

02-01-2005, 04:33 PM

Love the drawings. A 44 footer with a beam of 12' 3 inches? She is water ballasted right? Love the Twin Keel configuration. Most Mac26x owners sleep in the bow section. The double berth on this vessel looks acceptable. The Life Raft under the deck table implies she will sink when swamped, but perhaps not. A water tight compartment or two, or air in the water ballast tanks, might keep her floating if capsized. The boat does not need to plane. Her hull speed is fast enough to do close to if not double digits. (40 foot at the water line.) But the large engine compartment and inboard outboard configuration is very interesting. Does she? Does she plane under motor power? I assume the prop can be lifted from the water like an outboard. Looks like she has the trendy small head sail. That isn't so bad. It allows self tacking. But I think future yachts should take full advantage of roller furling. That implys a 140 or greater Genoa. The mast head rig is wrong. Fractional should be looked into. If you change the rigging to support a full Genoa and then put in a lighter mast and fractional rig, you have a shot at making this vessel a true upgrade possibility from the Mac26x. All designs out of Road Island are suspect but this improves the situation :)

You know the Mac26x is fit to go to sea. Nice drawings nonetheless.

Skippy

02-01-2005, 07:14 PM

Are these the most offensive of my comments? Would they be less offensive from others?They would be less frequent from others.

Skippy

02-01-2005, 08:36 PM

[Spaghetto], ... My view shows 5026 currently.There Frank, you got your food pellet. Now ya happy?

sorenfdk

02-01-2005, 09:03 PM

Remember that the halt in production of the X was not known until recently to have been related to Jim Teeters.
Frank, I ask you again: Who "knows" about this?

gybeset

02-02-2005, 12:04 AM

Brother, I call you brother, for you have been baptized by finding the Secrets of Yacht design and you appear to be from the town in which I was raised. The town of Tubby, of 18 foot Potters that sail accross the Pacific.

The URL above has been rigorously reviewed by sailnet.net (t shirts now available) by sailing anarchy (burgees now available) and by the MacGregor yacht's web sites. It is as accurate as such review can make possible. (Highly accurate)

It has not been reviewed by boatdesign.net.

Professional designers of boats are not unlike professional designers of churches. Both groups of designers are expected by their customers to be well researched in the history of the design of boats or churches.

However both groups have respectively formed circles where they hold each others hands. The circles are closed. Even to lessons from history.

We outside of the circle are anarchists. Amatures to be marginalized. Especially when we ask why. Like why water ballast (a form of ballast used through out the history of sailing) is not used more frequently in sail boat design or why should a boat sink when swamped. Or if canters were so great why were they not used until ten or so years ago?

Those of the circle value being part of that circle. They fear free thought and expression because it may result in exclusion, excommunication from a club, a politically-correct party, that is closed to all but those who think like they do. To all that think other than monohull or lead on a long fin.

We outsiders, we anarchists, have a new and powerful voice. The voice of the Internet. It is that voice which has brought you an others like you AT LAST to this forum.

The Church of FOYD is now open (Future of Yacht Design). Huzzah Hazzah, There is much work to do. May I suggest reading the TP52 thread and the special issue of Sail on the future of sailboat design. (pay attention to the advertisements) Be prepared to be saved.

The Mac26x has the most widely accepted and scrutinized movable ballast system in the world. Its hull shape is the most widely accepted shape for those that make a living from the sea. The work boat hull form is far from slow. To avoid hazards (like pirates) and to get to market in a timely fashion they just had to be and are fast under sail.

I encourage those who are in the circle and wonder why to get a new email address and join in the discussions. We value FREEDOM and can be free to speak our minds here. The URL mentioned will be updated. There is a lot more.

Oh: Seattle Boat Show Saturday.

pirates on the seas, no doubt unchristian, may theire grappling irons from their TP52's never score your topsides halelluelia brother, praise the lord (not DouG!)

SA'er

02-02-2005, 05:21 AM

Ahh looks like Spaghetto has reared his ugly head again......... Good luck fellas, this guy is nucking futs

Spaghetto, just want to let you know that you are a looser. lol, lol, lol You have no place on the water (or internet) and should be droped off in the desert and never alowed to return.

Regards
SAer and hope to never see you there again.... lol, lol, lol

mistral

02-02-2005, 07:15 AM

thank you Dreamer, at least someone who shows us what MAC26 are in the real world, not in Mighetto-land......

Fair wind (not on a Mac26)
Mistral

Skippy

02-02-2005, 08:35 AM

I can't believe how freakishly entertaining the last 4 hours of my life have been.For anyone who might be looking for a little additional fun:

A Spaghetto Entertainment Sampler!

A View from Across the Pond (http://www.ybw.com/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/507378/page/10/fpart/3/vc/1)

Ballerina Science
Lesson 1
... bringing the bulb weight closer to the hull makes the boat faster like bringing the arms of a twirling ice skater in makes the ice skater twirl faster. ... The better design is to just get rid of the weight on the fin and put it closer to or internal to the hull. (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=31761#post31761)
Lesson 2
... This internal ballast rule applies to everything that moves: cars, motorcycles, planes, power boats and yes - even sailboats. ... If you own a sailboat boat with a bulb contraption on a fixed fin, you own a boat with a correction to a design flaw. ... why don't powerboats have weight on long thin foils? ... why don't sailors hang anchor like stablizers on 100 feet of rode dangling from the centerline? ... (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=32461#post32461)
Lesson 3
This ... prevents multihulls from competing because the space between the hulls is a big hollow. The effect of the hollow, ... lifts the hull from the water at speed. (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=35036#post35036)

Trolling Anarchy
Stupidity and Lunacy PNW Style (http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2833)
Mighetto's new looney bin (http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=5413&hl=)
Who killed Frank (http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9514&hl=)

Totally Precious, 52 weeks a year (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=5471)

The Troll Report
Installment 1 (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=35614#post35614)
Installment 2 (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=36370#post36370)

Design Anarchy(thru p.13, rated PG17) (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=34012#post34012)

Troll Humor (and IQ test)
Question: What did the movable ballast trained sailor say to the keel boat trained sailor?
Answer: Would you like fries with that order? (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?p=34281#post34281)

the Mac26X is related to hobies because they came equipped with Coleman ice chests (http://www.catsailor.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=Test&Number=32431&page=16&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1)

"Incredible Secrets" (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6106&page=1&pp=15)

"Paging Dr. Freud ..."
Zerr seems to be a psychology of fear behind zis sort of sinkink. Just below ze surrface, so too speek. Afterr awl, who vould vant to sail arround mit a big long duedel hangink down frrom ze hull? Mit awl zose dangerrous rreefs unt shoalss lurkink out zerr, who knowss vat might get chopped ofe? Betterr to keep ze "family jewels" safe unt sound inside ze hull, eh?
(INFINITE APOLOGIES TO ALL VOLKSDEUTSCHEN & DEUTSCHSPRECHER FOR MANGLING THE ACCENT/LANGUAGE SO SHAMELESSLY!!!!!!!!!!!)

SeaDrive

02-02-2005, 08:46 AM

Love the drawings.

Tanton's standard in drawing is perfection.

I thought I saw something yesterday that said 90 hp for 12 kts under power, but I can't locate it today. Since the design is from '93, I don't think you can call the rig proportions "trendy." The rig is carefully detailed for shorthanded sailing, and I will take Mr. Tanton's opinions over yours. Construction is Aluminum, and I doubt there is positive flotation. The water ballast would be in addition to lead in the keel(s). The protection of the cockpit is important in a real sea-going boat.

You know the Mac26x is fit to go to sea.

I know no such thing.

:)

dreamer

02-02-2005, 10:49 AM

mighetto

02-02-2005, 12:06 PM

dreamer

Mac 'n cheeze 26 Real World:

* A regatta of trailor sailors toured the Apostle Islands (not East Coast...not West Coast so no bitchin' there). The fleet consisted of your typical trailerable rabble: Catalina 22s (2), Precision 23, Potter 19 (2), Mac 26X. Everytime the fleet made port, the Mac was easily 1 hour behind. That was all taken care of when, in intense winds of 10...maybe 15 kts, the mast on the Mac 26 bent like an old q-tip right in the middle. According to the 'crew', the boat was rolling dramatically from side to side when the cheap-ass piano wire forestay snapped (pulled out of the 'fitting' on the end of the forestay which was some sort of pressed sheet metal number). The mast was so flimsy that they were able to repair it with...get this...duct tape! Didn't matter tho cause they motored back to the start and gave up (they no longer have that POS).

First ever report of a Mac26x dismasting. How can this be confirmed? Would the factory know? Oh the repair was made with duct tape. - good one. You had me going on that for a while. The Mac26x, owing to her engine, if not superior sailing ability, would always arrive first in a cruising fleet. 20+ MPH will git you 20 miles in an hour.

* We have 2 Mac 26Xs in our marina. One is a green slimer. The other is owned by an older guy. He goes out quite a bit. Never puts up the sails tho. Reason being, "too windy". Like Ghetto-boy, they too came from the stink-potter world. His wife likes the powerboat interior. She went out once with him...once. Now the only time she goes aboard is when it's in the slip. When he goes out, she heads over to the houseboat permanantly moored at the end their dock.

Well thats a damning review. The boat to own is the one your wife will cruise with you on. I know a similar owner. Something happened under sail. Something scared him. His wife is a sailor however, and she wants to go out on the Mac26x all the time. Her husband was so frustrated that she wanted to put the sails up on every outing that he bought her a sunfish. In time he will come around. This season he put in intermediate reef points. Beginners need not fly all the cloth.

I don't know anyone who takes these boats seriously. I think if I ran over one with my Baba I wouldn't even feel it.

True enough. We cruise frequently with a Baba 40. Her name is Murphy's Lawyer. She carries more head sail than all the cloth on Murrelet and does beat us. We also sail pass her on occasions.

But all of this is moot. Geheezer, I've been crusing BBSs since before you needed bifocals and I can attest that, without a doubt, you are the weirdest piece of fucked up fruitcake I've EVER come across. I can't believe how freakishly entertaining the last 4 hours of my life have been. Without question, CB has put up a valiant effort to 'ballast' your drivel (I owe you a cold one, CB buddy).

Hell, I want to buy Crank Boy a beer. We live in an owner driven world now. (Bush, just have to love him). Crank Boy needs his own boat. He shouldn't be spending his money on beer.

The only scary (notice one R in scary - which alludes to your mastery of the English language) part of this whole thing is when (not if) you corner some unsuspecting neophyte and fill their head full of your absolutely bizarro-world minutiae.

New to the sport purchasers certainly do find my material. I am confident that it is real scary to those with old fixed keel vessels (not Baba's your exempt) but thin fixed keel vessels with bulbs. My material is doing a great number on reducing the resale value of those sinkers. That and the fact that ocean insurance is so expensive for them. They need not read my stuff. Just contacting the insurance carrier will set them streight. The 30 to 37 footers are most susseptable to my posts. I do a public service to new to the sport purchasers in pointing this out. Do you really disagree? How does it go - the only thing that works on an old boat is the captain. I mean that offends even this owner of an old Mac26x. But when you can get a new Mac26m for the cost of a used 37 footer, you have to think.

I especially laughed when I saw that you posted the marina and slip where you keep your junk-o-la abomination. How often have you stepped in flaming bags of dog poo? Or maybe that plastijunk hunk has already been reduced to a molten glob at the bottom of the marina.

I have more faith in human kind than you do. This is why I was upset when given credit for the keel pocks on Tripp Gal's vessel where CB does his crewing. Her vessel suffered from electrolisis. This is something that happens when a boat or dock is not grounded properly. Mac26x vessels, have a mettle hanger that is in the water that might suffer as well but certainly the damage is insignificant to what can and does happen to fixed keels. Other Mac26 vessels have no mettle parts in the water.

Come by J19 Swantown and Murrelet any time. We are dog friendly. You will be reading about that in 48 north soon enough. Seriously, my wonderful wife has an article coming out in 48 north. It is all so Kewl.

PS it is cheese :rolleyes: Now tell me this isn't fun.

mighetto

02-03-2005, 03:44 PM

Very good summary Dr. Skippy. Here I was thinking I would have to google this nutball in order to get the whole enchilada. Now I feel enlighted. Well, actually I feel nauseous.
Kind of like eating a poorly cooked enchilada.
Get the whole enchilada at http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm

One of my crew, on dog doo patrol, was told by an anarchist, or an affiliate, that the Mac26x rigging is to light. For those with lesser vessels, it may look so. However the telephone masts common on displacement hulls are totally inappropriate for boats that plane or surf. These telephone masts create a lot of wind resistance. They are thick because the hull is sucked into the sea the faster the displacement vessel goes and at some point, if the sailor doesn't reduce sail, the stresses on the mast become huge and dismasting is the end result.

On boats that plane or surf, the stress forces on a mast are much different. Rather than the hull being sucked into the sea the faster they go they crest the bow wakes. In gusts they break from the sea. Because of this the mast doesn't move faster than the hull which is the definition of a dismasting.

The shrouds and stays on light rigged vessels are like the strings on a guitar. It is not appropriate to upsize them. They are meant to stretch in ways that contribute to sail shape and prevent dismasting. It is very common for a keel boat sailor to give advise regarding shrouds and stays that is totally inappropriate for boats that are meant to take light rigging.

asathor

02-03-2005, 09:36 PM

I really don't think you can invent a new kind of science just because your boats rigging seems to be adequate. Windgusts that change the windspeed from 15 mph to 30 mph instantly (or worse) does the same to all boats even McGregors - nothing weighing that much can accelerate that fast. Take your favorite boat to Tiera Del Fuego and see for yourself.

That aside I can understand that you are quite happy with your boat. Sales show that many people like that boat. God for them and McGregor - careful marketing is usually rewarded by a better match between product, seller and consumers.

I am quite sure that I do not wan't to convert to the McGregor religion. I sail a Freedom but that does not mean that I am not convinced that Gary Hoyt is god. And my computer is not an Apple even Jobs is a much cooler Guru than Gates - I am to cheap and change things a lot so I settle for a PC with an abundance of different and usually cheaper software.

A McGregor 66 however could get my heart beating quite a lot faster than the average boat, your included, however my wife has woved to never live in a basement. So now what - should I loose the wife and get the boat? Heck good wifes are hard to come by - great boats are a dime a dozen in comparison.

Get real about that boat, in a few years it will be a money pit like all others. At best it is going to be like a bad marriage; you put money every month but it only gets exciting a few weekends a year.

I have had the same boat since 86 and plan to keep it. Why? Well, she over 18 now so I can take her out alone without mom coming along, and the wife doesn't even get jealous.

mistral

02-04-2005, 03:53 AM

The shrouds and stays on light rigged vessels are like the strings on a guitar. It is not appropriate to upsize them. They are meant to stretch in ways that contribute to sail shape and prevent dismasting. It is very common for a keel boat sailor to give advise regarding shrouds and stays that is totally inappropriate for boats that are meant to take light rigging.

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, come on Frankie, go on, give us another pill of wisdom YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, i guess if shroud are guitar strings you claim to be Andrè Segovia :p :p :p :p :p :p :p
i hope those guys from Southern Spar or Sparcraft, who are using Nitronic and cobalt rods to have stiffer and lighter shrouds on racing sailboat don't read your speechs, they'll probably die from laughing :) :) :) :)
so streching the shrouds make better sail shape ?????? :p :p :p :p
Frankie, take your guitar back and play yourself a "Serenata", you really need it

mighetto

02-04-2005, 11:22 AM

asathor

I really don't think you can invent a new kind of science just because your boats rigging seems to be adequate. Wind gusts that change the wind speed from 15 mph to 30 mph instantly (or worse) does the same to all boats even McGregors - nothing weighing that much can accelerate that fast. Take your favorite boat to Tiera Del Fuego and see for yourself.

Wish I could take credit for Ballerina Science. That was a good one. Wind gusts from 15 mph to 30 mph instantly are not uncommon in my sailing area and on Lake Mead, which hosts Macgregor races. These are not going to break masts. But they will rip sails. MacGregor put Doyle sails on the Mac26x vessels and I suppose with age these may now be susceptible. In any case, a gust from 15 mph to 30 mph is the perfect opportunity to get the Mac26x on plane. They are that light even fully ballasted. I suspect Melges are the same way. With a planing vessel you fall off in the puffs instead of pointing into them. Unlike a displacement vessel, the planing vessel will reduce her heel when falling off in a puff as she goes from forced mode to planing mode. This single aspect - falling off in puffs rather than heading up, probably explains why the US Sailing trained are unable to sail a Mac26x. For them the boat truly is crap because their training is inadequate for a modern sailboat design.

That aside I can understand that you are quite happy with your boat. Sales show that many people like that boat. Good for them and McGregor - careful marketing is usually rewarded by a better match between product, seller and consumers.

You can not go wrong with a MacGregor. That is what I was told by a Catalina Loyal who purchased a Mac26d as a placeholder for a larger Catalina. The MacGregor Yachts company has a wonderful track record of providing yachts that hold their value. But you are incorrect about marketing. MacGregor Yachts does very little. Advertising is all by word of mouth. Folks (engineers) figured out that the Mac26x was likely a slightly bigger minitransat; they knew Roger was claiming the boat could do 17 MPH under sail, that he had been honored in the Sailboat Hall of Fame, and that he was claiming to sell a 40,000 boat for 18,000. A used minitransat will run something like 40,000. These claims just are not that hard to believe when you look at what data is made freely available to boat designers from the minitransats. http://www.xs4all.nl/~blvrd/html/design.html. The notion that the minitransates likely are compromised by design rules and that Roger MacGregor was not so restricted further supports pioneer owner's decision to purchase. Word of mouth then popularized the craft all over the world.

Contrary to marketers of lesser vessels, the Mac26x was portrayed as revolutionary and because of that she probably was not intended for first time boat purchasers. This notion is supported by the interiors. Boats targeted for new purchasers usually are done in earth tones, these colors appealing to young women and their husbands. The Mac26x has always been done in pastels. This attracts more mature prospects.

I am quite sure that I do not want to convert to the McGregor religion. I sail a Freedom but that does not mean that I am not convinced that Gary Hoyt is god. And my computer is not an Apple even Jobs is a much cooler Guru than Gates - I am to cheap and change things a lot so I settle for a PC with an abundance of different and usually cheaper software.

Don't you love the Microsoft staff and their IPODs. In your face Guru Gates. carbon fibre tapered mast? Yamaha 4hp long shaft outboard ? Cat Rig? Centerboard, Trailerable. 21 footer. Hats off to Gary Hoyt. Right up there with Roger MacGregor. No doubt about it. They are even in the same club.

http://www.sailamerica.com/halloffame/freedom40.cfm

A McGregor 66 however could get my heart beating quite a lot faster than the average boat, yours included, however my wife has vowed to never live in a basement. So now what - should I loose the wife and get the boat? Heck good wifes are hard to come by - great boats are a dime a dozen in comparison.

The best design is the design your wife will sail with you on. Mine doesn't like the Mac65 either. Deck Salons, such a nice new term for the "dangerous" pilot houses that get ripped off when the boat capsizes. It definately is nice to be able to enjoy the view from below decks while eating dinner. MacGregor Yachts points out that the Mac26x will out motor the Mac65. Family members like to be able to get there fast on occasion.

Get real about that boat, in a few years it will be a money pit like all others. At best it is going to be like a bad marriage; you put money every month but it only gets exciting a few weekends a year.

Oh on this I agree. For a maintenance free vessel, I spend 2 to 3 hours for each hour out there. The work is mostly in reconfiguring the vessel from race mode to cruising mode and in carting material to and from the vessel. I spend less time refuling these days. The money pit is in the electronics. I am convinced that you can double the cost of a Mac26x with all the electronics you want. We have radar, GPS, auto pilot but gad zooks there are fish finders, wind measurement gizmos, water speed gizmos, weather plotters, Wi Fi, EPRIB, microwave ovens. Argh now in color. At least with a Trailerable you can avoid the cost of a slip if you want. We keep ours in the water all year. It is about $300 per month to do so. We have a 30 foot slip. I have a Wallis Marine cooker whose blower needs fixing. There is often something broken. If its boating its fun not work. The Mac26x is suppose to be as maintenance free as possible. I think that is true. There are few boats where the interior can hosed down for cleaning.

I have had the same boat since 86 and plan to keep it. Why? Well, she over 18 now so I can take her out alone without mom coming along, and the wife doesn't even get jealous.

This is a great statement because it fits so well with the notion that it takes a life time to learn a craft well enough to sail her really well. My wife thinks I have to much fun sailing alone and it isn 't "fair" unless she tags along. But I have parked her at a resort and done some serious sailing with her watching from shore. Do you think a US Sailing trained keel boater capable on your craft? Would it not take years of unlearning before compentency let alone competitive sailing?

mighetto

02-04-2005, 11:51 AM

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, come on Frankie, go on, give us another pill of wisdom YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, i guess if shroud are guitar strings you claim to be Andrè Segovia :p :p :p :p :p :p :p
i hope those guys from Southern Spar or Sparcraft, who are using Nitronic and cobalt rods to have stiffer and lighter shrouds on racing sailboat don't read your speechs, they'll probably die from laughing :) :) :) :)
so streching the shrouds make better sail shape ?????? :p :p :p :p
Frankie, take your guitar back and play yourself a "Serenata", you really need it

Don't know much about history,
Don't know much biology,
Don't know much about the French I took
Don't know much from Bethwaite's Book
But what I do know is that shrouds should stretch
and if they stretch as they are designed to do, what
a wonderful sail you will have.

La da da.. da da da

Seranata in the key of mighetto.

Seriously, we have the advantage of having Brian Toss, a rigger who makes his money by finding fools who have tightend turnbuckles beyond tune. Stretching the wire beyond recommended distroys the elastisity of the wire which really is meant to work like the string on a guatar. The shroud adjusters on the Mac26x, and Mac26m, are not only easier to work with, but they are also lighter and stronger and easier to see when replacement is necessary. Turnbuckels can be damaged and then made to look alright prior to the boat being sold. Brian will advise replacing all of them if you do not know the history of the used boat. Shroud adjusters have holes that you count when you have a good sail, note in the log and then use again when conditions are similar. The fact that they are less expensive than turnbuckles does not mean they are not better. How is that for a song. Can you dance to it? :)

I do like smilies. Keep up the good work!

Skippy

02-04-2005, 12:41 PM

I really don't think you can invent a new kind of science just because your boats rigging seems to be adequate.You know, that's an interesting point. The X's sail is so puny, it's never going to grab all that much wind. And as soon as it does get a gust or higher wind, the boat just heels right over and spills air. So there's nothing in the boat's design that will necessitate the heavier rigging. The boat just sits there, heels over, and capsizes. It's just like that T-shirt I saw once: "I don't have a drinking problem. I drink, I get drunk, I fall down. No problem!"

btw, our friends at SA have discovered that Frank is a tumor (http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/conditions/01/18/frank.tumor.ap/).

mistral

02-04-2005, 01:07 PM

mighetto

02-04-2005, 08:06 PM

You know, that's an interesting point. The X's sail is so puny, it's never going to grab all that much wind. And as soon as it does get a gust or higher wind, the boat just heels right over and spills air. So there's nothing in the boat's design that will necessitate the heavier rigging. The boat just sits there, heels over, and capsizes. It's just like that T-shirt I saw once: "I don't have a drinking problem. I drink, I get drunk, I fall down. No problem!"

btw, our friends at SA have discovered that Frank is a tumor (http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/conditions/01/18/frank.tumor.ap/).

David's parents had been auctioning off a bumper sticker reading "Frank Must Die" on eBay to raise money for the procedure. Skippy you are good. I spewed cola on that. Hoping David and all a great sailing weekend. :!:

mighetto

02-04-2005, 08:21 PM

it's simple, rigging is dimensioned regarding righting moment at 30° RM30, since MAC26 has a really poor RM30, is obvious that mast sections are light, that's all, no misteries, no strange ballerina math calculations, it's just a streight compromise design suited to cruise both with engine and sail in a very conservative way.

WoW, impressive sounding. A monohull that can be sailed at 17MPH is hardly conservative. This is how Roger MacGregor viewed the vessel when he was producing them. I quote

"Here are your sailing choices: (1) With the water ballast tank full and conservative sails, the 26x 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) Unballasted, it is one of the wildest and potentally fastest sailboats around. Under power (1) without ballast, it is a rather fast conventional cabin cruiser, or (2) with the water ballast, a docile, heavily ballasted power boat."

I suppose you have forgotten. THESE ARE NOT RACE BOATS. They are cruiser-racers. Revolutionary cruiser-racers. I can add that almost all the boats now sport Genoas and that compromise design is a term that in the modern age refers to a sailboat that can not both sail and motor well.

101

02-04-2005, 09:33 PM

pkoken

02-04-2005, 09:40 PM

Hey! I can't find the "Frank Must Die" bumper stickers to buy on eBay, can someone point me to the correct item#?

Maybe I should have looked for "Mighetto must die"?

Skippy

02-04-2005, 10:24 PM

http://www.brytrcorp.com/wst_page4.html

Wynand N

02-04-2005, 11:31 PM

Why us Lord.........?

SailDesign

02-05-2005, 07:54 AM

Wynand, you owe me a keyboard! This one's full of coffee..... :)

D'ARTOIS

02-05-2005, 11:41 AM

Frank, I have an idea :idea: . Why bothering around with that useless 50 hp creamwhipper. I have a 20 Mw gasturbine for you. Add wings to your Mcalfabet and you may fly too!

asathor

02-05-2005, 02:42 PM

By the way, did you know that someone got the prestigeous Darwin Award for strapping one of them to his Chevelle.

K4s

02-05-2005, 02:52 PM

Just a thought Frank,and please try to think it through,If shrouds are designed to stretch are they also designed to then shrink back too their original setting once the power is reduced after the gust?If not why are we not completely re tensioning our rigs after every sail,perhaps we're just lazy or perhaps you have made a mistake in your reasoning.
Sorry to all others in here,I have weakened and are helping to sustain this giberish,will try to stay away and watch this thread die as is the TP52 thread,when you refuse to answer it fades away.
K4s

DGreenwood

02-05-2005, 07:12 PM

After having attended a party of attorneys with my brother (he is one) and giving some poor soul, who said something stupid, a serious tongue lashing, my brother was clearly irritated with me. When I said "Whassup" he said ---"you know when somebody opens their mouth and their brains fall out on the floor, you should not feel compelled to run up and kick them". Good advice--- I never took it. Soooo...

Franks Fun Filled Fony Facts

Lets make a list...I'll start

#1 Riggers actually want rigging wire to stretch...it makes for a better performing boat.

DGreenwood

02-05-2005, 08:27 PM

#2 Lower ballast does not improve the stability of a sailing vessel...or did I misunderstand that one? I don't see how I could have?

frankofile

02-05-2005, 11:08 PM

#3 - Lift generated by the keel causes a boat to rise up.

#4 - Cod's head/mackerel tail is a fast, modern hull shape.

#5 - Slop in a centerboard housing creates a gybing board that improves pointing.

#6 - Bearing off in a puff, while beating, will cause the boat to flatten out.

#7 - The only purpose of a tiller is to facilitate cheating. (This was from the SA thread, I don't think it has come up here.)

#8 - The Mac26X is an etremely fast boat but doesn't often win PHRF races because it is penalized by having such a high handicap.

#9 - The Mac26X is superior to most modern designs, especially the TP52, for ocean crossings.

Etc, etc.

DGreenwood

02-05-2005, 11:31 PM

#10 Frank is actually a great unrecognized genius with a deep understanding of the world of physics and how they apply to this simpletons game of sailboat design. At some point in the future we will all awaken to the dawn of real sailboats whereupon we will take to wailing and flagellating ourselves for the abuses we have put upon the "Enlightened One"

asathor

02-06-2005, 12:52 AM

#11 Racing hulls are best made of flexible materials: A CB (Keel) that bends doesn,t break.

#12 Light boats are better because if you hit something it will not hit very hard or cause much damage.

#13 Water ballast is superior; because it's dielectric properties are similar to the water around the boat it causes less friction (enhanced by taking on matching local water as well).

#14 Square, tall hulls are better because they meet the water and wind head-on and repel them.

#15 If you drink your beer on the dock before you go racing you will not have to carry all that on the boat.

#16 The fastest hull shape is the barge because only one side of the boat touches the water.

#17 Retractable keels are the future because retracting it up into the boat reduces the boats displacement. Also by moving it to the lee side the hull will heel and the wind will slide over the top of the boat instead of hitting it square on.

#18 Down the road we may even see keels that you can lower further into the water - positioned deeper into denser water they will weigh less but have more power.

#19 Catamaran barges will soon be your first choise because the can hold enough solar panels to run a decent size electric motor or a fan to fillthe sails.

#20 Sailors always drink their beer before you go to bed so they don't wakeup thirsty.

mistral

02-06-2005, 02:44 AM

A monohull that can be sailed at 17MPH is hardly conservative.

we're all still waiting for you to demonstrate that.....
Mistral

asathor

02-06-2005, 10:39 AM

There are sales people frequenting this thread!

frankofile

02-06-2005, 03:22 PM

What do they sell?

asathor

02-06-2005, 03:38 PM

Hits or boats????

pkoken

02-07-2005, 09:14 AM

This is the BEST out of the one posted so far IMHO...

#13 Water ballast is superior; because it's dielectric properties are similar to the water around the boat it causes less friction (enhanced by taking on matching local water as well).

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:44 AM

Phillip Kohen

#13 Water ballast is superior; because it's dielectric properties are similar to the water around the boat it causes less friction (enhanced by taking on matching local water as well).

13, the magic number. 13 times 4 is 54 (er 52). It takes 52 years for the Mayan Calendar to repeat itself. We are so lucky to have seen the Turkey Product TP52s being produced in our life times. Note - the thread lives. Excellent! This Edsel requires further corrective spin. Huzzah Huzzah

There certainly is an excellent discussion going on about canting keels today. But lets keep on focus. The fellow who designed spaceshipone knew he was onto something when those in the field reached consensus that his design was nonsense. This is the way of every breakthrough product.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/fh359b.jpg
The notion that there could be a sailing vessel that a beginner could operate that could be configured for ULDB racing is such a breakthrough. That it could be produced at a cost one tenth of the consensus no less revolutionary than spaceshipone. Spaceshipone didn't need the tiles. Mac26x vessels did not need the heavy weighted keel. Both have shown us the future.

GOOD MORNING BOAT DESIGNERS

We leave the anarchists behind today.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:56 AM

There are sales people frequenting this thread!
You mean brokers. Here is the point that I am making apparently poorly. Well there are two. First, it is unusual for the broker to represent the manufacturer. In every case that I have looked at, the manufacturer specifically points out that the broker does not represent the manufacturer. Case in point. I had a broker tell me that if you wanted a shower you could not purchase a boat with solid flotation, you had to purchase a heavy sinkable deep keel boat to get a bilge deep enough to drain the shower. Can you see the manufacturer's head spinning over such a statement. It is the nonsense that brokers spew because they know that prospects remember only about 1/3 of what they are told. Those days are over because of the Internet. Today prospects can verify what the broker says with a click and post. The latest nonsense is that you can not get your new boat CE marked.

Second, every owner selling a used boat is a broker. Hence, is it surprising that my opinion might be found objectionable by owners of lesser vessels? My notions have been called nonsense for many years by those who would like my readers to believe that I offend everone. Even if true, the free expression of thought is viewed as a right. There has never been a right established that prevents one from being offended. There should be no new displacement monohull sailing vessels designed in the 30 to 37 foot range (that range is for planing motor boats) and monohulls should float when swamped just as multihulls do. If this offends the reader, so be it. Freedom of thought comes at the price of offending. The 30 to 37 foot displacement monohulls were acceptable in an age where all boats - even fast ones - could be expected to be caught in a storm during the life time of the boat. With modern reporting only thrill seekers and the incompetent can be expected to weather such conditions in the lifetime of the modern designed craft. Hence, those who continue to design new 30 to 37 foot monohull ocean sailboats limited to displacement speed, without making them tank like, are guilty of malpractice. How is that for a statement. No one will argue this. Well I predict no one will argue this with me.

mistral

02-07-2005, 11:36 AM

asathor

02-07-2005, 12:03 PM

+13
+13
+13
+13
_____
=52

To win a debate you must be believable.

I am not sure how much it would take to insult a Mayan, but I think a sacrifice is in order (no ketchup please).

mighetto

02-07-2005, 12:03 PM

Mighetto, What is the point here . . . are you just defending the MacGregor design or are you trying to state that the MacGregor design is the best? I am trying to figure out this thread . . . . I don't know if I can.
I defend my cruising log here. The thread is about myths debunked in my cruising log and the notion that the Mac26x is a baby killer. That later notion comes from a recent court case where a formerly well respected Naval Architect (NA) named Jim Teeters tried to shift blame for the deaths of two children from the drunken operator to the boat design. The reputation of Jim Teeters was ruined by his need to testify. Not only did a different NA (Taylor) testify that the boat could be operated safely but Teeters appeared to impeach himself by stating first that alcohal might be a contributing factor and then stating it need not have been. The judge even questioned his motivation for seaking to testify because all, judge, jury, even the family of the children viewed the case to be about drunken boating and not boat design. The operator got 7 to 10 years, the amount changing depending on who is posting. The Mac26x boat is no longer produced in the US, most now think owing to the case. Jim Teeters no longer holds his Director of Research position at US Sailing (probably owing to the case) and his efforts to promote TP52s through arguments likely used in the drunken boater's case failed. The Grand Prix Rule Working Party (GP RWP) rejected all Teeter's notions of stability calculations based on mathematics to which the TP52s were designed. It now appears that Jim Teeters needed court approval of his notions so that they would be persuasive to the GP RWP and the Mac26x, being a movable ballasted vessel, was the test case he chose to further vested interests in the design of the TP52s and smaller vessels with similar fixed weighted fin characteristics. Further impact of the Mac26x case likely is the demise of IMS and the rise of IRC in the Americas. IMS involves rules that boat designers can design to. This can cause the creation of foolish designs like the TP52s which are marketed as Transpacific vessels but in reality are buoy racers with characteristics making them not suitable for ocean crossing - characteristics like the SNAME capsize risk ratio which favor the Mac26x over TP52s for such work.

Boat designers are very lucky to have the TP52s and Mac26x cruisers. The Mayan calendar does not repeat itself except once every 52 years and these two boats are that kind of once every 52 year opportunity for boat designers to learn from. I seriously do not think it is my wisdom or ability to hold an audiance that draws readers. The success of the Mac26x and failure of the TP52 are just things that need discussion and if not discussed will result in another 50 years of stupid sailboat design.

asathor

02-07-2005, 12:24 PM

Mistral you must be a Democrat if you expect a debate to be rootet in facts, reality and evidence. (Democrats really don't get marketing, do they).

Gainsaying is much more effective today, all you have to do is repeat you statement a lot and people will start to believe you.

You are right though, there are a lot of places where boats of all kinds are welcome to race. There must be someone out there in a coastal PFHR fleet who has competed in their McGregor.

Maybe we should look at the owners association pages or at the manufacturers site. It's sure to be mentioned there. That would be a fun owners story that everyone who own one would like to read and talk about with pride. And the marketing people could show it to people and say: see we told you, this us the fastest monohull under 30'.

Fairytales are fun too, they are what dreams are made of. The web is a lot like that, one big fairytale mixed up with reality. Unfortunately some people believe everything that is said and written even if they have to say it themselves. The funny thing is that they are happy all the same (like in fairy tales).

mighetto

02-07-2005, 12:24 PM

+13
+13
+13
+13
_____
=52

To win a debate you must be believable.

I am not sure how much it would take to insult a Mayan, but I think a sacrifice is in order (no ketchup please).

First, this is not debate. In debate you are alowed to state falsehood and if the oponent is not smart enough to call you on the falsehood you score points. Lets not ever post what we know to be false here.

Second, and this is Mayan Zen, even 2 plus 2 equals 4 requires you to make an assumption. The assumption that your math is in base 10.

I think now we are lifting above the plateau. This is the first group to have gotten this far. Congratualations. I can not believe it. Look what happens when you leave anarchy behind.

mistral

02-07-2005, 12:26 PM

from Sailing Anarchy :
_________________________________
Honorable Mention:

There is simply no disputing the brilliance, in every facet, of the TP 52 class. The boats are phenomenal, the rule is solid and the number of boats is exploding. The TP 52 class is the best example of a proper big boat arena in many years. Take one look at the Farr designed Esmeralda and tell us that isn't nearly big boat perfection. Now let's see a TP 40, and a TP 70......
_____________________________________________________

are you really sure TP 52 are a failure???????

Mistral

mistral

02-07-2005, 12:34 PM

Fairytales are fun too, they are what dreams are made of. The web is a lot like that, one big fairytale mixed up with reality. Unfortunately some people believe everything that is said and written even if they have to say it themselves. The funny thing is that they are happy all the same (like in fairy tales).

i wouldn't dare to call Mighetto's speechs a fairy tale, would you????
i can just see a poor sailor claiming absurd statements, that's all!!!
i have a lier as a prime minister but i'm not proud of it, nor i think i have to lie to sponsor/sell a cheap compromise boat, that is MAC26, nothing else, not a babykiller, not a wonder of human craftship nor a amazing speedy sailboat. Just a cheap compromise boat to cruise without any need of performance.
That's why i'll never work in markenting
;)
Mistral

asathor

02-07-2005, 12:39 PM

His work has not gone unnoticed.

http://www.macgregor26.com/hall_of_fame_award.htm

As the 26x concept evolves it may qualify some day.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 12:42 PM

i'm still waiting......
come on Frankie it's so easy, take a GPS, a good steady wind day and astonish us all with Murellet's performance!!! Do you remember?? I expect at least 17mph, thast to say about 13.5 knots, as you claimed.
remember to take some picture.......
...and remember to switch your engine off......

fair wind
Mistral

First, Roger MacGregor has already done this. It is a fact that he has put this in print. The boat has been clocked at 17 MPH under sail. Second, I have confirmed 12 plus and Third, others have confirmed 17 MPH. The confirmed 17 MPH was posted on one of the macgregor yachts boards. The operator had a long down wind run. He was solo handling and fully ballasted. At the start of the run, he let loose the water ballast which drained - he was unable to confirm - fully. He left his fleet, consisting of multiple kinds of sailing craft, behind. Eventually an island blocked the wind partially and the boat slowed. The operator dropped his main, confirmed the boat was fully ballasted and sailed under head sail to the finish first. Plenty of witnesses. Very few owners doubt that in high normal wind the boat will do double digits ballasted. Why should this be so hard to fathom? The big difference in the design of this craft is the movable ballast. The kind of movable ballast that can be moved off the boat. There have been plenty of planing sailboats created that do double digits. 26 foot would be on the top end of those but with the minitransats, and Melges, not to mention multihulls, the claims are well within reason.

My suspision is that the keel boat trained have trouble because their training is to prevent planing rather than allow a lesser designed vessel to do so because that lesser designed vessel can be damaged while planing.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 01:07 PM

His work has not gone unnoticed.

http://www.macgregor26.com/hall_of_fame_award.htm

As the 26x concept evolves it may qualify some day.
I tend to think that it was recognition of the revolution being supported by Macgregor Yachts in the form of the Mac26x that got the Sailing Magazine writers who present the hall of fame award to give Roger the award for the Mac25. In January of 2000 - the time of the award - MacGregor Yachts was at the height of Mac26x production with 8 to 10 boats coming out daily. No other sailing vessel in this size was really competing successfully against "the concept" in the US and the vessel was being exported all over the world creating problems for those making monohulls in the 23 to 30 foot size everywhere. When this kind of thing happens folks have been known to PAY MANUFACTURERS NOT TO PRODUCE, which was a theory I held before finding out about the drunken boaters case.

The ability to make an even better concept is not disputed. The notion that the Mac26x should have a rotating mast like the mac26m has been a popular one.(though I think that would damage stability). Contrary to pervasive opinion, the mac26x did have a tall mast option available from Blue Water Yachts. However, there is something that the Mac26x has that can not be matched by any new concept. That is 5000 hulls in operation.

It will be a decade before that can happen in a vessel of her size, if even then. The Mac25 had 7,000 hulls over 14 years, I do not think 5000 were ever in operation at the same time. The number of hulls in operation increases the potential for informal one-design racing when two of like kind happen to find each other. Because of 5000 hulls only 500 owners will ever get their sails numbered and because of the 500 only 50 will actually race there is good reason to stick with at least the same hull and water ballast system. I suppose changes in fins, topside and mast could be carried to older hulls as the boat gets raced formally as a one-design. Well, why not?

mistral

02-07-2005, 01:29 PM

First, Roger MacGregor has already done this. It is a fact that he has put this in print. The boat has been clocked at 17 MPH under sail. Second, I have confirmed 12 plus and Third, others have confirmed 17 MPH..

ok so you have a amazing very fast boat, you currently do double digit downind, you get an incredibly high PHRF rating, you race (someone posted your results before in TP52 thread); These are all TRUE facts, you claim them too.
now just please explain why don't you outsail every other boat you race with???
maybe you're too generous and you want to share with them the joy of winning???
anyway i'm still waiting a snapshot of Murrelet in howling wind with foresail and your GPS clocking 17mph, and i guess i'll wait for the whole of my life;
MAC26 official site is not exactly what i'd call an impartial source of data for their boat, this is just marketing!!! there's not a polar diagram, wich will be a good issue to start evaluating boat's overall performance, nothing at all, no sharp informations about wind conditions, wave conditions, just "17mph downwind"; ok Frankie, i'll throw my old city car down from a high cliff, then i'll go around claiming "hey guys, my car reached 200mph, it's great, isn'it!!!!!"

mighetto

02-07-2005, 01:35 PM

i wouldn't dare to call Mighetto's speechs a fairy tale, would you????
i can just see a poor sailor claiming absurd statements, that's all!!!
i have a lier as a prime minister but i'm not proud of it, nor i think i have to lie to sponsor/sell a cheap compromise boat, that is MAC26, nothing else, not a babykiller, not a wonder of human craftship nor a amazing speedy sailboat. Just a cheap compromise boat to cruise without any need of performance.
That's why i'll never work in markenting
;)
Mistral
Even a poor sailor can confirm what the manufacturer puts in print. If the statements in print are absurd then they would not be verifiable on the water. The Mac26x hull design is 8 years old and this hull has become very popular. These hulls have the most widely accepted and scrutinized movable ballast systems in the world. Once rare, it is now common to spot these boats all over the US and especially off the coast of California where the run to Catalina Island (an ocean crossing in my book) is specifically mentioned in the brochure. I claim to be an expert on this boat by nature of having the most time on the water and owing to my willingness to discuss the vessel critically. A cheap compromise boat would not outlast all of us. This is the claim made by the manufacturer. He claims the vessel will outlast all of us. Mine has been in salt water for almost 6 years now. Original everything. The engine is fully depriciated. The sailboat has actually apreciated in value. The folks with remorse are the ones who sold thier Mac26x vessels. Do you not see this in your area of the world? But I love to chat about the marketing.

Take the TP52. In my opinion, marketers of the TP52 created a website called Sailing Anarchy to promote these vessels. For three years the vessel was hyped. I couldn't open a sailing magazine without seeing what I now view as paid-for-content articles. I even imagined handlers following the posts of those who might question the concept of a TP52. Contrast with the Mac26x. Dealers avoided the Internet. MacGregor Yachts hardly bothered defending the vessel. They did market her as revolutionary. Not everyones cup of tea. Word of Mouth created demand that is still exceptionally high. But you can only get new ones in Austrailia. Roger MacGregor doesn't work in marketing either. You should love the guy.

mistral

02-07-2005, 01:44 PM

He claims the vessel will outlast all of us. Mine has been in salt water for almost 6 years now. Original everything. The engine is fully depriciated. The sailboat has actually apreciated in value.

hey Frankie, don't joke, even a hard raced dinghy can hold on tight 6 years properly cared, you still know nothing about how much your boat will last, get back in 2020 and maybe you'll know what you're talkin' 'bout.
Anyway cheap doesn't mean easily degrading, cheap means low cost material, for me it's a point of honour not a shame, nothing to hide, just a consequence af a designer's choice; i wouldn't use epoxy, kevlar nomex and carbon on a normal family cruising boat!!

Mistral

mighetto

02-07-2005, 02:01 PM

[mistral]

ok so you have a amazing very fast boat, you currently do double digit downind, you get an incredibly high PHRF rating, you race (someone posted your results before in TP52 thread); These are all TRUE facts, you claim them too. now just please explain why don't you outsail every other boat you race with???

Well, 50 year old sailors do compete in the Olympics. So it is not my advanced age. You may or may not be a PHRF racer. The idea of PHRF is that even the slow boats should win their share of races. So having a fast boat means diddly in terms of the wins that should be expected. Does that make sense? The other notion of PHRF is that local conditions favor boats differently. So Lady Katie Too! out of San Diego was rated 215 for fully ballasted operation but that doesn't apply in other sailing areas. Lady Katie Too! stopped winning races with that rating and the restriction of fully ballasted operation. Truth is the boat is not racable unless raced as designed which means moving the water on and off the boat during a race. Only PHRF-NW has implemented a water ballast protocol that allows us to do that and this is the first racing season with that protocol. It changes everything. doesn't it.

maybe you're too generous and you want to share with them the joy of winning??? anyway i'm still waiting a snapshot of Murrelet in howling wind with foresail and your GPS clocking 17mph, and i guess i'll wait for the whole of my life;
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/wow2.jpg
She is in forced mode here. Fully ballasted. We definately did double digits on the down wind run. Winds were reported gusting to 30 knots.

MAC26 official site is not exactly what i'd call an impartial source of data for their boat, this is just marketing!!! there's not a polar diagram, wich will be a good issue to start evaluating boat's overall performance, nothing at all, no sharp informations about wind conditions, wave conditions, just "17mph downwind"; ok Frankie, i'll throw my old city car down from a high cliff, then i'll go around claiming "hey guys, my car reached 200mph, it's great, isn'it!!!!!"

I read a Dilbert that reminds me of the above. Wally made a report to his boss where it was clear that he had accomplished little but his report was that he had more than met expectations and had earned a raise. His boss - the pointy haired fellow - said he had not met expectations and would not get the raise. Wally said - well you can not prove that because to prove it you would have had to have given me written objectives and you do not do that. I get the raise anyway.

MacGregor Yachts set some very high expectations with the Mac26x vessel. You want that kind of thing from your manufacturer. Then they put those in writing. Yes this is a form of puffery. I do not disagree But it is still a fact that the expectations were set high and they are being met. 5000 owners are not wrong. But I suppose you can wait longer. Just try to see. I suspect you are trying not to. No amount of time will help you to see in that case.

mistral

02-07-2005, 02:10 PM

mighetto

02-07-2005, 02:32 PM

Frankie, i'm not Russel Coutts, but that snapshot was taken in 10-12 knots of winds, 15 knots to be generous, sea is quite flat. And it was the old one that you showed us in TP 52 thread, remember when we laughed saying "Hey guy, ten knots of wind and a reef in!!!!!"
I can't believe you haven't any more impressive shot of your rocket boat !!
Mistral
Yea, same shot. They had it displayed at the boat show in Seattle. I do not disagree. The notion of 30 knot gusts had me scratching my head as well. But it is true that sails were blown out and a boat wiped out in the same race. The photographer asked me about my reefing in the conditions. I told him it was lunch hour and I needed to cook the soup. :) It is also true that in 10 to 15 knot winds the Mac26x actually sails FASTER when reefed. The owner's manual so states. The main is reefed at an intermediate point which is not the stock configuration, in the prior photo. We have found this intermediate point key to sailing in what we call hang glider mode which is a mode of sail fully ballasted that even a beginner can use to achieve planing speeds in normal wind without motor assistance. This makes a mast head style of sail similar to the Mac19. I think the Mac26x mast already to tall for normal wind. In high normal a lot of wind is spilled in the top fraction for example. It is handy to have that extra fraction in light conditions however.

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/raceday.jpg

These are pocket rockets in every sense of the words. But I doubt I have come close to even 40 percent of what is possible in them. Anyway, lets chat about stability. Specifically the CG and CB. I have to work late tonight, so how about doing that in say three hours. I should have the preparations for tonights work done by then and who knows, I might be on this computer until midnight depending on how quickly things go.

mistral

02-07-2005, 02:39 PM

i'm working on Pc too but, as I'm working, i think i'll have to shut down mozilla and concentrate on my work :-(((

mistral

pkoken

02-07-2005, 02:44 PM

Mighetto wrote: where the run to Catalina Island (an ocean crossing in my book)

Sorry Frank, having made the journey back & forth, around & sideways to Catalina island I can say two things...

#1 - Depending on your point of departure and sea conditions it's a 20 mile jaunt across a channel. For me sailing from Dana Point it was closer to double that.

#2 - I have seen a lot of strange and innapropriate craft at Two Harbors & Avalon, but never have I seen a Mac26x~ Hobie cats? Yes. Catalina 22? Yes. West Wight Potter? Yes. Sailboarders in Avalon? Yes. Mac26x No.

If a Mac26X made it to the island, I am willing to bet it was by motoring across in the early morning calm seas (something a powerboat is good at).

My final point is that if you believe sailing to Catalina Island is an ocean crossing you are beyond crack-smoking and well into general insanity. Please post your address so I may dispatch the nice men with the 'special' Mighetto jacket for you.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 04:19 PM

pkoken

Sorry Frank, having made the journey back & forth, around & sideways to Catalina island I can say two things...

#1 - Depending on your point of departure and sea conditions it's a 20 mile jaunt across a channel. For me sailing from Dana Point it was closer to double that.

Pillipe,you have no reason to apologize. I have been to Catalina a half a dozen or more times myself and have yet to spot any kind of MacGregor. Now you are not telling me you haven't seen Mac26x vessels at Dana Point are you? I have seen several there. Where do they go - Catalina Island is the answer. The manufacturer has made a big deal out of making that a destination for these vessels.

"Many areas have those wonderful sailing spots that are just out of reach! Here in Southern California a favorite spot is Catalina, an island about 25 miles off the coast. Getting there and back has always taken most of a weekend. You can be sure that sailors will use the dual nature of the 26x (motor and sail) to shorten the distance. After a short, fast commute across the channel in their power cruiser, they can spend the weekend sailing from cove to cove and anchoring for the night. Maybe they will even stay Sunday night and speed back at dawn on Monday. You can't do that in a conventional sailboat. If you have a favored place that is just out of reach for a conventional sailboat, consider the 26x."

#2 - I have seen a lot of strange and innapropriate craft at Two Harbors & Avalon, but never have I seen a Mac26x~ Hobie cats? Yes. Catalina 22? Yes. West Wight Potter? Yes. Sailboarders in Avalon? Yes. Mac26x No.

There was a nice Catalina 22 photo at Avalon last year. Looked very cool. A fellow on the Mac boards claimed to have taken a personal water craft there. Was never able to confirm that they have the range for that.

If a Mac26X made it to the island, I am willing to bet it was by motoring across in the early morning calm seas (something a powerboat is good at).

Perhaps. You like to think of this boat as a power boat. But The hull and constuction are pure sail boat and they certainly can plug along with the Catalinas and Potters in afternoon blistering winds (did you not see the photo). But lets face it, the boat can not carry the fuel a power boat does. The designer didn't make a bayliner power boat here. The motor is the primary safety feature and the range of the vessel under engine power alone just long enough to avoid hazards predicted by weather reports. But the engine is still the secondary power source.

My final point is that if you believe sailing to Catalina Island is an ocean crossing you are beyond crack-smoking and well into general insanity. Please post your address so I may dispatch the nice men with the 'special' Mighetto jacket for you.

I have seen that to-Catalina stretch of water in a state I would wish no small boat in. The crossing is hazardous because in shallow water winds can whip up waves that are steep. The Mac26x was made to handle that if she has to. Every Island off the coast of California has been visited by a Mac26x. They are that worthy. In any case. Travel agents call a trip from Miami to the Bahamas an ocean crossing. I like my special jacket in black not white. Send the nice men with smilies :) :rolleyes: :cool: and :p

Now tell me this isn't fun. Did you really let go of a Catalina 27? I wouldn't have done that.

frankofile

02-07-2005, 04:30 PM

Mighetto wrote: where the run to Catalina Island (an ocean crossing in my book)

Sorry Frank, having made the journey back & forth, around & sideways to Catalina island I can say two things...You can understand how Frankie got this wrong though. I mean, it is in the ocean with swells and large sea creatures and all, and on a hazy day you can be out of sight of land for a large portion of the trip... pretty scary if you don't know wtf you are doing. Not to mention all the pleasure, commercial, and military shipping traffic you've got to watch for and dodge around!

mighetto

02-07-2005, 04:35 PM

You can understand how Frankie got this wrong though. I mean, it is in the ocean with swells and large sea creatures and all, and on a hazy day you can be out of sight of land for a large portion of the trip... pretty scary if you don't know wtf you are doing. Not to mention all the pleasure, commercial, and military shipping traffic you've got to watch for and dodge around!
Look blame Roger Macgregor for building OCEAN sailboats and nothing other. The facts of life are that global circumnavigators report having the most trouble off the coast of California. It is notorious. Granted, things are getting calmer past Santa Barbara going south. Ocean swells are no big deal in a small sail boat. It is boats that are larger that have trouble with them.

frankofile

02-07-2005, 04:44 PM

The facts of life are that global circumnavigators report having the most trouble off the coast of California.Put down the crack pipe Frankie. Idiot.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 04:49 PM

Put down the crack pipe Frankie. Idiot.
I am burning rubber and laughing gas - just like starshipone. Doesn't mean I am wrong. This is breakthrough technology we are chatting about. That it could appear simplistic, even idiotic, is the halmark of sound engineering. :)

Hey I am having way to much fun. Kewl it please! ROTFLMAO.

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 05:55 PM

The success of the Mac26x
What success? It is out of production!

and failure of the TP52
What failure? Almost everybody agrees that the TP52s are the most exiting thing that has happened in sailboat racing during the last couple of years. Almost all of the rock stars of sailing have raced them and loved it. Even Russell Coutts plans to sail on one this year!

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 06:00 PM

I tend to think that it was recognition of the revolution being supported by Macgregor Yachts in the form of the Mac26x that got the Sailing Magazine writers who present the hall of fame award to give Roger the award for the Mac25.
Yes of course - why didn't I see this before! They wanted to recognize Roger MacGregor for the Mac26x, so they presented him with an award for the Mac25. That makes sense!

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 06:03 PM

The facts of life are that global circumnavigators report having the most trouble off the coast of California. It is notorious.
And those who might be just a little afraid of the Southern Ocean are just whining kids who know nothing!

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 06:10 PM

Remember that the halt in production of the X was not known until recently to have been related to Jim Teeters.
Frank, I ask you again: Who "knows" about this?

pkoken

02-07-2005, 06:22 PM

And those who might be just a little afraid of the Southern Ocean are just whining kids who know nothing!

Perhaps they wouldn't be scared if they were sailing a Mac26x... In any case, regardless of your boat~ Cape Horn has nothing on Point Conception and the DEADLY COAST OF CALIFORNIA!!!

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 06:34 PM

Perhaps they wouldn't be scared if they were sailing a Mac26x
No, they'd be too stupid to be scared!

mighetto

02-07-2005, 06:53 PM

Søren Flening

I don't understand your question? Sorry. Who could be those who have read my stuff. Let me give you this to chomp on. Consider it halfed baked but please consider it.

A former Alaska Airline aircraft maintenance engineer and Mac26x owner has been helping me with this. He has been doing work on Mac26x vessels so they will support larger outboards. Folks want that for reasons I can not understand. Let me start with how MacGregor Yachts taught us to think of stability as it relates to the Mac26x.

The notion presented is of one of those punching toys. You know the clowns that you punch and they right themselves. That is how we are to think of stability on the Mac26x. I do not own such a toy but I do have a beach ball and I have run this experiment in the hot tub. If I tape a weight, even a small one, to the bottom, and turn the ball upside down it will always right itself - even with the jets of the hot tub turned full up.

So the report that the Mac26x righted herself in a test pool when plunked upside down doesn't surprise me. But this notion is met with disbelief by those trained by US Sailing. The centerboard even retracted is not going to change the result. This has to do with the shape of the cabin top. It isn't flat enough to provide inverted stability. As long as the boat has the weight of the ballast tank structure and yes even motor where it is she is going to right her self even without water ballast. Unlike lesser designs, the Mac26x has not one but two compression poles. So having the deck salon ripped off by sea action doesn't appear to be a possibility.

So how does the idiotic training of MacGregor Yachts compare to the confused consensus of naval architects and sailboat designers?

Here we are to recognize that torque called the righting moment (RM) is related to the boat's displacement. This is definitional. The displacement multiplied by the horizontal distance between the Center of Gravity (CG) and the center of buoyancy (CB) is the definition of righting moment. That horizontal distance is called the righting arm (CZ).

With that recognition, we are to see that the more displacement the greater the righting moment. Then we must accept the notion that a boat's heeling angle can be pulled past 90 degrees.

Eventually as the boat is pushed past 90 degrees, the CG and CB will come into vertical alignment as they are when the boat is at rest right side up. This is the point where the righting moment is zero and it is called the Limit of Positive Stability (LPS).

Now comes the assumption: Everyone assumes that once the LPS is reached the boat will invert and stay that way until wind or wave action push it right way up. But this isn't true with the most seaworthy of shapes, those being the sphere and the log. It is only true with shapes that have until recently been sailboat shapes. The shape of the top deck of the Mac26x and Mac26m makes that assumption incorrect.

It is similar to when 2 + 2 no longer equals 4 because we are no longer working in base 10.

All those nice curves showing the angle in degrees against the righting arm suddenly lose their predictive value. We can no longer predict just from math when a sailboat will invert and stay that way or even that it ever will.

It takes 120 lbs at the top of the jib to hold a Mac26x on its side with the mast parallel to the water. Unballasted with sails up, it does not appear that the Mac26x can turn turtle. When plopped upside down with no sails she rights herself. Completely filled with water she rights her self and can even be sailed (though not fast).

Of course there is still capsize risk. In sufficient sea, all boats can capsize. Nonetheless, this vessel, when capsized floats and the hatches are positioned that except by wave and wake action they can be left open without water entering the interior. That would be operator error however. I really want to see the Teeters video now. The conclusion I come to is that you can get stability (the ability to stay right side up) by adding displacement to a traditional looking sailboat, or you can get stability with additional flotation (buoyancy) on a boat shaped like a Mac26x or m. CG or CB this is the question. With CB you get the benefit of boats that when swamped may not sink as well as a faster sailboat when there is light wind.

frankofile

02-07-2005, 07:25 PM

The notion presented is of one of those punching toys. You know the clowns that you punch and they right themselves.That's how I think of you, but I'd hardly call you stable.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 07:29 PM

Perhaps they wouldn't be scared if they were sailing a Mac26x... In any case, regardless of your boat~ Cape Horn has nothing on Point Conception and the DEADLY COAST OF CALIFORNIA!!!
Cape Scott has had the largest waves recorded and I have rounded Cape Scott in my Mac26x. Several other Mac26x cruisers did so earlier and even Mac26 Classics have done so. This is all about waiting out the gales and storms and rounding with the knowledge that modern reporting provides. The relevant knowledge including current and slack water times as well as high water and weather and season. Even a battle ship will change course when the going gets deadly.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 07:35 PM

That's how I think of you, but I'd hardly call you stable.
But you love me anyway right :?: Blame Roger Macgregor

"A ballasted sailboat is very much like the inflatable toy with a weight in the bottom that kids use as punching bags. The weight makes the toy return to vertical after it is poked."

Roger MacGregor didn't allow himself to become part of the group grope consensus building mentality currently characterizing naval architects and boat designers in the US today. He has an army of sailors now trained to think correctly rather than by concensus. These are running the PHRF and major races now explaining why you have things like IRC and movable ballast taking hold. Soon the buoy race courses will be returned to Olympic style. Just a few more years. We don't want to push to fast. It is great to sail in modern times. :rolleyes:

FranksaDork

02-07-2005, 07:46 PM

[QUOTE=mighetto]http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/wow2.jpg
She is in forced mode here. Fully ballasted. We definately did double digits on the down wind run. Winds were reported gusting to 30 knots.

So Frank, explain this to me. If you were doing "double digits" on that race, how come if the boat I was on never got past 7.5 knots, you finished roughly 3 hours behind us on a 12 mile race.

Edit: Excuse me, a 15 mile race.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 08:02 PM

[QUOTE=mighetto][IMG]She is in forced mode here. Fully ballasted. We definately did double digits on the down wind run. Winds were reported gusting to 30 knots.
So Frank, explain this to me. If you were doing "double digits" on that race, how come if the boat I was on never got past 7.5 knots, you finished roughly 3 hours behind us on a 12 mile race.
Edit: Excuse me, a 15 mile race.
Dork, were you on a planing sailboat? If you were on a displacement sailboat, you would not have exceeded hull speed. Did you record 30 knot gusts? The story I have is Dynamite.

The committee boat failed to look to the east as I was screaming to last place finish. She pulled anchor after the boat I was racing for last told them she had not seen me. The boat that use to be called Sea Witch came from the West. I watched the committee boat pull anchor in daylight but figured they wanted me to blast a finish horn when I crossed where she would have been. We both got to harbor at about the same time.

You will recognize that the finish was close to the no wake zone. So no motoring fast was involved. Note:

I could have taken ANY TIME I WANTED after the boat I failed to catch because the committee boat left a half an hour early. It was a great race day. The only way I could have come close to catching the next to last finisher was planing speed. Unbelivable I know. You know the boat. Why not confirm with them when they tied up and when then noted I was in harbor.

The time meant little to me since I was last. But if this ever happens to you know that there is no defense for the committee boat. When it leaves before its time you get to take ANY TIME YOU WANT in the order of finish. Had I done so, I still would have finished last because I owed the boat that finished right before me time. Now you make me think I should have protested. Let it go. And

excuse me - admit it, you saw me on J-dock same time cleaning up when you were didn't you? Does 3 hours behind you really make sense? How about half that time?

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 08:05 PM

I don't understand your question? Sorry. Who could be those who have read my stuff.
I have read your stuff, and I don't know that the production of the Mac26x was stopped because of Jim Teeters. I just know that you have stated this as a fact without coming up with any evidence.

With CB you get the benefit of boats that when swamped may not sink as well as a faster sailboat when there is light wind.
Oh Frank - where do you get it from? It's hilarious!

pkoken

02-07-2005, 08:08 PM

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/wow2.jpg

Look at this boat! Sailing with a reef in and there isn't even a whitecap on the water- Gusting to 30 knots my ass! You are looking at maybe 10 knots of wind here...

sorenfdk

02-07-2005, 08:13 PM

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/wow2.jpg
She is in forced mode here. Fully ballasted. We definately did double digits on the down wind run.
Didn't you see the "." between the two digits?

mighetto

02-07-2005, 08:28 PM

I have read your stuff, and I don't know that the production of the Mac26x was stopped because of Jim Teeters. I just know that you have stated this as a fact without coming up with any evidence.

Oh Frank - where do you get it from? It's hilarious!
I do the best I can. This is what I know. The only boat produced by MacGregor Yachts at the time of the children's deaths was the Mac26x. The last run of a boat as successful as the Mac26x was 14 years. The X was in year 7 of production at the time of halt. The company had just placed an advertisement in a publication for new boat purchasers for year 8 and it was a new advertisement, not a rehash of an old one. I personally was told that the X would be produced with the Mac26m when I viewed hull number 5 of the M roll off the assembly line .The manufacturer, prior to the X had always produced more than one boat. The day after my visit the factory was closed to visitors. The company did not raise the price of the X to slow demand prior to carting off 4 mold sets capable of at least 800 new Mac26x boats, according to the factory representative Bill. The notion that 911 caused business insurance to rize so high that production of the X was halted is hilarious. But this was kicked about for some time. It is hilarious because of the world wide distribution of the product. 911 would have little to do with international demand. The notion that buisness insurance would be raised after a paid for number had been produced (5000) and that that insurance price raise is related to Jim Teeters and by association US Sailing's objection to the design fits. From this businiss man's perspective the halt in production was directly related to Jim Teeters involvment in the 2002 July 4th drunken boater's case. This fellow from Alaska Airlines was the first with the theory. Apparently, in the transportation business this kind of thing is common. The notion has been widely accepted on this forum. Only Roger MacGregor would have proof and he isn't talking. Makes you think that perhaps legal action against Teeters and US Sailing is contemplated. But I have no indication of that. Why is this important to you?

FranksaDork

02-07-2005, 08:32 PM

Didn't you see the "." between the two digits?

My eyesite isn't as good as it used to be. :)

Frank. The highest gust we clocked was 22. That picture was taken around Hunter Point (squaxin in the background). We passed you about 2 miles before you even got there. You hadn't even rounded the island yet. 3 hours sounds about right. And no, I wasn't on a boat that saw you at "J" dock. I was in the bar and had dinner and numorous drinks when we saw you motor by (once again, about 3 hours later).

frankofile

02-07-2005, 08:50 PM

It seems pretty clear that ol' Frankie doesn't even know what planing is, let alone know when he is on a boat that is planing.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:12 PM

My eyesite isn't as good as it used to be. :)

Frank. The highest gust we clocked was 22. That picture was taken around Hunter Point (squaxin in the background). We passed you about 2 miles before you even got there. You hadn't even rounded the island yet. 3 hours sounds about right. And no, I wasn't on a boat that saw you at "J" dock. I was in the bar and had dinner and numorous drinks when we saw you motor by (once again, about 3 hours later).
Dork. Cool. As this story gets older and older, I will be coming in at midnight and the gusts will be clocked at 60 MPH. But Dyno will still be AWOL. Seriously, I could have taken anytime I wanted for the finish. There isn't a bar or diner place at Swantown any more. You must have seen me motoring from a perch at Tugboat's. In which case you have damn fine eyes. Anyway it is all about stories. Yours is as good as mine at this point. And I am not complaining. The photo was the prize that day. And Murrelet appears to be screaming in the photo. I was approaching Hope Island enjoying the rest of you set out your spinakers. Naturally I was last. I have a trouble with starts. But I had passed at least one vessel prior to reefing. The boat is capable if not her crew. If I had had a camera ready the photo to take was Strider. Identify yourself and a beer is yours tomorrow night. :)

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:17 PM

It seems pretty clear that ol' Frankie doesn't even know what planing is, let alone know when he is on a boat that is planing.
Lets go over this once again. The MANUFACTURER DEFINES PLANING. This is a word that is made up by the manufacturer. The definition of planing that is used by Melges will be different than that used by MacGregor. On a MacGregor, however, we have advantage in that we know what the wake looks like when planing under motor power. But 12 MPH is definately planing. We can split hairs over if 7.5 MPH or 9.5 MPH is planing but not 12 MPH. Not on a boat that is 26 foot.

Well, I have to quit for the night owning to the need for a network administrator who will not be available until the morning. Will see some of you tomorrow. Frank free day tomorrow on this forum. Enjoy.

pkoken

02-07-2005, 10:31 PM

Naturally I was last. I have a trouble with starts. But I had passed at least one vessel prior to reefing.

And the boat you passed looked like this, right?

http://www.yachte.com.au/classes/images/optimist-boat.jpg

tranmkp

02-07-2005, 10:36 PM

its pointless. please. dont feed this individual...

FranksaDork

02-07-2005, 10:42 PM

And the boat you passed looked like this, right?

http://www.yachte.com.au/classes/images/optimist-boat.jpg

Hey. Ain't that kid planing? :)

pkoken

02-07-2005, 10:44 PM

Hey Look! He raised the centerboard and CHANGED THE DISPLACEMENT of his vessel!

Maybe if he changes the displacement enough his boat will just lift off the water and float away into the sky...

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:46 PM

Is that an el toro? We pass sail boats all the time. It is this fact that indicates my sailing compency is the issue and not the boat. Then the victems may or may not pass us later. I have some photos of vessels I have passed under sail. But I chose not to share those. Their captains know who they are. My wife and I are seriously considering building a little boat similar to your photo. They have a build program at center for wooden boats. Build a Boat - Test a Marrage. Something like that. The cost went from 800 to 1100 just recently. They must have added some counseling.

mighetto

02-07-2005, 10:48 PM

its pointless. please. dont feed this individual...
How would you know. You are a wimp ;) Post or prepare to be boarded. Sorry really have to go. But it is great to know there are party folks this time of evening. I do miss onefatdiva.

pkoken

02-07-2005, 10:58 PM

How many of the boats you pass are anchored versus the amount just standing still?

asathor

02-07-2005, 11:44 PM

Apparently x26's are all over the place. Sorry about doubting.

CT 249

02-08-2005, 12:44 AM

Yeah, I know I shouldn't feed the moron troll, but this is *&^%$#@ing way over the top even by Frank's standards.

"Lets go over this once again. The MANUFACTURER DEFINES PLANING. This is a word that is made up by the manufacturer. The definition of planing that is used by Melges will be different than that used by MacGregor."

No, you hopeless case, the manufacturer does NOT define planing.

Planing is a naval architecture term. A boat is planing when its centre of gravity rises above its static centre of gravity, due to dynamic lift generated by boatspeed.

MacGregor cannot define planing. The only reason MacGregor uses "planing"` in a different manner than Melges is because MacGregor seems to be dishonest while Melges know the truth.

Lies, lies, and more lies, Frank.....just as usual. Do you know the meanings of truth and honesty?

:confused:

sorenfdk

02-08-2005, 05:16 AM

I do the best I can. This is what I know.
If it is what you know, then why do you write a sentence like this: "The Mac26x boat is no longer produced in the US, most now think owing to the case." (Italics by me)?

Why is this important to you?
It all has to do with your credibility and your way of turning your personal beliefs into universal truths.

frankofile

02-08-2005, 09:37 AM

Frank is a clown and a buffoon. He destoyed his own credibility with his very first post in the TP52 thread. You can't read that gibberish and take anything he says seriously.

Skippy

02-08-2005, 10:55 AM

Spaghetto: The MANUFACTURER DEFINES PLANING.

McGregor also defines the term "17 MPH". :)

mighetto

02-08-2005, 06:54 PM

CT 249

Yeah, I know I shouldn't feed the moron troll, but this is *&^%$#@ing way over the top even by Frank's standards.

"Lets go over this once again. The MANUFACTURER DEFINES PLANING. This is a word that is made up by the manufacturer. The definition of planing that is used by Melges will be different than that used by MacGregor."

No, you hopeless case, the manufacturer does NOT define planing. Planing is a naval architecture term. A boat is planing when its centre of gravity rises above its static centre of gravity, due to dynamic lift generated by boatspeed.

Sounds good to me. A boat is said to be capable of true planing when the displacement/length ratio is under 150. The math shows that both the X and M vessels are capable of breaking from displacement speed and reaching a true plane. The X is significantly better at planing; her D/L is 137.59 vs the M's at 145.61. It probably will take abnormally strong wind (20 knots perhaps) for the M to plane fully ballasted where that potential in the X is evident in 12 knot winds, perhaps less depending on the point of sail. The X has a planing Dribbly style hull form. The M has more of a traditional rounded River sailboat form.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/macXplane.jpg
The marketing material cover picture for the X (above) shows her on plane; no wave form is visible on her length. The M, (below) while cooking in good wind, is at displacement speeds as indicated by the wave form on her length. She is also being sailed at a noticable heel, more like a traditional displacement sailboat. These two pictures portray a vast difference between the sailing styles advanced in the two at-first-glance similar powersailers.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/macMdisp.jpg

MacGregor cannot define planing. The only reason MacGregor uses "planing"` in a different manner than Melges is because MacGregor seems to be dishonest while Melges know the truth.

Glad you said "seems to be dishonest". Because that is the appearance we are addressing. One definition of truth involves consitant. Hence a Baptist does not visit the Galapagos Islands because what he or she will view there is not consitant with church teaching. The same is true with the sailing religion. Your training is not consistant with the notions I, really Roger MacGregor present. MacGregor Yachts defines the X as a planing sailboat. MacGregor Yachts defines the M as a surfing sailboat.

Lies, lies, and more lies, Frank.....just as usual. Do you know the meanings of truth and honesty?

I only post what I believe is truth. Honestly. Lets try to come to a happy place. The manufacturer gets to define what is a "planing sailboat" and what is a "surfing sailboat". How is that? NAs get to define planing.

mighetto

02-08-2005, 06:58 PM

If it is what you know, then why do you write a sentence like this: "The Mac26x boat is no longer produced in the US, most now think owing to the case." (Italics by me)?
It all has to do with your credibility and your way of turning your personal beliefs into universal truths.
The universal truth about the internet is that arguing credibility is a waste of time. I could claim to be Robert Perry and you might be unable to verify that was not the case. Hence it is best to concintrate on what is said. What is correct about that and what is incorrect. Do you really believe that Jim Teeter's didn't have anything to do with the halt in Mac26x production? If so why not just say so? No one cares to defend this man. Not even he cares do do so.

pkoken

02-08-2005, 07:17 PM

Sounds good to me. A boat is said to be capable of true planing when the displacement/length ratio is under 150. The math shows that both the X and M vessels are capable of breaking from displacement speed and reaching a true plane. The X is significantly better at planing; her D/L is 137.59 vs the M's at 145.61. It probably will take abnormally strong wind (20 knots perhaps) for the M to plane fully ballasted where that potential in the X is evident in 12 knot winds, perhaps less depending on the point of sail. The X has a planing Dribbly style hull form. The M has more of a traditional rounded River sailboat form.

So according to your logic Frank, if I cut a plank so it matches the D/L ratio of 150 or less it is a planing sailboat? There is more to making a planing sailboat than some magical displacement to length relationship... maybe the ability to carry enough sail to generate the power required to GET ON PLANE!?! Sadly the Mac26x does not have this sail area, and if it did it would not be able to carry it in a breeze as is clearly shown in your "10 knots & reefed" photo you have posted so many times.

asathor

02-08-2005, 08:01 PM

This is what the sea may look like at about 40Mph wind.

The owner of the boat in front has not yet fully recovered.

First he got beaten by a TP52 (see above) and now this.................

frankofile

02-08-2005, 09:03 PM

The marketing material cover picture for the X (above) shows her on plane; no wave form is visible on her length. The M, (below) while cooking in good wind, is at displacement speeds as indicated by the wave form on her length. She is also being sailed at a noticable heel, more like a traditional displacement sailboat. These two pictures portray a vast difference between the sailing styles advanced in the two at-first-glance similar powersailers.Ha ha ha! My god Frank you are so dumb! Could you have brainwashed yourself? Has memorizing sales brochures robbed you of the power to think?!? Other than a couple minor differences, those boats are the SAME. They are going about the same speed, at practically the same angle of heel, and they ARE NOT PLANING. They both clearly have bow wakes a foot or so back, and certainly neither one has risen above its static position. If anything the X has a more pronounced bow wake than the M.

Wow, that was pretty darn funny. Tell us another good one!

pkoken

02-08-2005, 09:08 PM

Maybe MacGregor has defined sailing at (far less than) hull speed "Planing"... This would make sense as apparently in the land of Mighetto manufacturers get to make their own definitions for their marketed material.

By the way, my motorcycle has 2366 horsepower when I push it up to 45k rpm... I am the owner I say it is so in writing here in this forum!

pkoken

02-08-2005, 09:11 PM

Let us convene the Church of the Deluded & Idiotic...

First order of business is to promote our (sole) congregation member Frank Mighetto to chief ArchBishop, head voodoo priest-king-of-the-highest

Huzzah, Huzzah!

sorenfdk

02-08-2005, 09:19 PM

http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/macXplane.jpg
The marketing material cover picture for the X (above) shows her on plane; no wave form is visible on her length. The M, (below) while cooking in good wind, is at displacement speeds as indicated by the wave form on her length. She is also being sailed at a noticable heel, more like a traditional displacement sailboat. These two pictures portray a vast difference between the sailing styles advanced in the two at-first-glance similar powersailers.
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/macMdisp.jpg

Frank, I think you by mistake posted the wrong pictures (just as you did on your webpage), because these pictures show no difference in neither wave system nor heel angle.

gybeset

02-08-2005, 09:29 PM

Turds

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it was Ted Turner that said to a designer about the 12mtr ?Mariner's?
stern "even a turd is pointy at both ends"

Spaghettos powerboat with a mast is not turdshaped, like a powerboat it is like a turd cut in half.

Rule to know

1. turds are fast (slippery by design) like a watermelon seed
2. conversely to have no turd characteristics may be slow !!

Am I exhibiting Spaghetto-like logic, should i stop reading his design secrets NOW ??

sorenfdk

02-08-2005, 09:31 PM

Do you really believe that Jim Teeter's didn't have anything to do with the halt in Mac26x production? If so why not just say so?
As I wrote in an earlier post: I don't know if Teeter's testimony had any influence on the halt in Mac26x production. Neither do you - it's just pure speculation!

No one cares to defend this man. Not even he cares do do so.
Most everything you have posted here (and elsewhere) is BS, so there's no need for Teeter or anyone else to defend him!

pkoken

02-08-2005, 09:35 PM

skinny boy

02-08-2005, 10:47 PM

So where is the magical reference that says that D/L of less than 150 means a boat is a planing boat?

According to the Annapolis Guide to Seamanship there is no such claim. The following link also seems to indicate under 90 D/L defines a planing boat which means the poor Mac26x does not qualify to plane so sad to see the mighty fall at the whim of a pen. Surely all these guys are just conspiring to keep the Mac 26x down.

http://www.sailbuyersguide.com/articles/boatpages/ComparingTheRatios.cfm

Of interest to you also should be the math behind the following.

"Another point of differentiation between coastal cruisers and true passagemakers can be readily seen by the side view showing the area (A) above the water to that of (B) below the water. The lower the ratio, A/B, the better. While true oceangoing fishing trawlers have A/B ratios under 2, it is difficult for a yacht with adequate accommodations to achieve this. It is P.A.E.'s opinion that oceangoing passagemakers should strive for A/B ratios of between 2.l and 2.7. It has been found that many popular "trawler styled" boats on the market today have A/B ratios in excess of 4, making them inadequate, if not dangerous, for offshore work."

The Mac26x comes in at a whopping 6! By the standards of powerboat and sailboat design it is considered inadequate, if not dangerous, for offshore work. So both industries think the Mac26x just doesn't make the grade. As they say the math doesn't lie, only Franky does.