MacGregor 26 not good? Water-ballast in general??

[Tres Cool]

I've heard a few people say negative things about the MacGregor 26 and was wondering why?

I'm looking to buy a 24-28 ft sailboat and would like to stay with a "traditional" sailboat and not a cross between sail and motor. Some are trying to convince me that MacGregors are REAL sailboats but I beg to differ.

Thoughts on MacGregor 26 or water-ballast boats in general?

Thanks!
Tres

[Frosty]

Tres,-- you will not be looking cool in one of those things.

People call them a reall sailboat?---really

Ide have trouble calling them a boat.

Dont mind me---- welcome

[alan white]

I think the McGregor is extremely ugly. I saw one at a boat show. I pushed on the side. It pushed in a half inch. The question to ask a McGregor owner is not "how do you like your boat?", but, "How much sailing have you done?"
Nine times out of ten, the McGregor is a first boat (of any size).
The outboard is a marketing idea. If most all the owners are neophytes, and no seasoned sailors are trying to design big outboards into their boats, then the marketing is geared towards ignorence and not wisdom.
It is considered a niche market, and it is. It comprises a group of people who prefer to sail in fair weather, rarely going out of sight of land, who don't really feel commited to the idea of sailing, and often people who think about things as "products" that are "manufactured" by a "corporation" as the epitomy of legitimacy and reliability. It is a different way of looking at the boat, as if it were a car or a television set, as in, "We own a 2005 mcgregor!"
This is entirely fine. If that is how you approach sailing, then a McGregor is the perfect boat. It is also a bargain, meaning so many are made that economy of scale makes them less expensive (though it must be pointed out that they are cheaply made also, and not built to do much serious sailing).
This makes them very affordable indeed. I own a fifteen footer, a gaffer, and I would wager that it could not be built for less than the price of a new McGregor. You cannot push in the sides of my boat though.

Alan

[Tres Cool]

I appreciate your honestly.... its hard to find someone who'll give you it straight!

I think the MacGregor is a neat concept but do think its made rather cheaply. The outside windows are actually not even real windows but rather a black mask.

[alan white]

By the way, I'll add that a really good sailor could sail a bathtub to China and back, and there may just be some Mcgregor owners here on the forum.
It is the combination of three things that would make a mcGregor a very poor choice-------- an inexperienced sailor, a cheaply constructed boat, and the hubris to sail that boat beyond its customary capability.
Any two of the above factors, I say no problem. It's the three together that make for disasterous consequences.

Alan

[TerryKing]

The original idea was interesting: water ballast makes it a 'sailboat' and no ballast makes it a light planing 'powerboat'.

But you better make real sure you know what mode you're in. We had a nasty accident five years ago up here on Lake Champlain where a young girl and her younger brother were drowned when the 'driver' started up at night, put the power on, did a sharp turn and capsized the boat. It's still in the courts, I think. The gory details are here:
http://www.ne-ts.com/ar/ar-407capsize.html

I personally like a very predictable, highly functional boat whose personality I get to know well.

[Willallison]

I'm always a little bemused by the outpouring of insults that always erupts when someone is brave enough to mention the M word. The response is usually the same and runs along the lines of it's not a real sailboat and would never be considered by a real sailor (no finger pointing at anyone intended).

Like any boat, the Mcgreggor has its limitations. I doubt its designers intended that it cross oceans. It's no doubt incapable of pointing as high as a 'real' sailboat. Nor of performing as well under power as a 'real' powerboat. But (and leaving any build quality issues aside) for someone who wants a trailerable sailboat that can be used under power at reasonable speeds, in relatively calm conditions, I say why not?

[Frosty]

The M word thing. Ille not say boat as I dont want to mis-discribe it,-- has to be the most obvious starter.

To a yachty, and I dont include circumnavigators,the (M) is like one of those small bicycles for kids with stabalizer wheels on.

I think one of its biggest failures is perhaps thought of by its designers to be its most attractive features. A boat can not be designed to satisfy 2 totally seperate uses.

Ok you could have a compromise like a motorsailor which almost satifies two requirments but emphasis on compromise.

A sail boat/ ski boat can do niether very well at all. To the inexperienced this would not be understood.

[alan white]

I think if someone sells their motor boat and buys a McGregor, that is better than buying a new motorboat. Sailing is probably quite an adventure for a lot of Mac owners. Sailing teaches and rewards patience and ability.
It seems that what bothers many sailors about the Mac is that one of the chief elements of sailing is the utter commitment to the conditions presented.
Knowing you can't speed home in a matter of minutes breeds a kind of self-reliance. This brings one closer to the elements, to study weather, to inspect the boat thoroughly, and to understand navigation. Nobody goes sailing any more because they have to. We drive our cars at sixty miles an hour to get to our boats so that we can manufacture a destination and proceed at six knots towards that destination, working all the while tweaking sheets and scanning the water to get that last tenth of a knot.
I know that sailing, for me, is the one thing I do that puts everything in proper perspective. I see it as the ultimate expression of freedom, perhaps exactly because I have chosen to place myself in a position where there is no forgiveness for mistakes. This causes you to become more aware of what's going on.
I don't know if having a big motor and an easy way out will prevent Mac owners from experiencing that communion with the sea in the same way--- I doubt it. But maybe some will stop using the motor so much, and one day remove it entirely and replace it with something much smaller, or even get a real sailing boat. I hope so.

[Willallison]

Oh....what a load of plop!
80% of cruising sailboats spend 80% of the time under power (observation, not statistical, I admit - but probably on the conservative side, if anything)
And just because a Mac doesn't sail as well as many others doesn't mean you can't enjoy the challenge of eeking out the last 1/2 knot of its potential....the same as you would on any yot.

Frosty - how did you learn to ride? What's wrong with a boat that is aimed at the beginner? And who says you can't design a boat to do 2 different things. Granted, there may be more compromise than normal here, but so long as the buyer understands this, what's wrong with that?

Alan - I shan't bite at the 'better than buying a motorboat' line;) - other than to say that I'd never consider buying a snailboat....unless it could do 20 knots under power.... oh...that's rght a Mac can! Sadly, it still suffers from that seemingly insurmountable yot problem - its got no windows in it, so you can't see out when you'r inside....

oops....I think I bit afterall!:p

On the skiing thing, I absolutely agree - I reckon it'd be a pig both to drive and to ski behind.

[Willallison]

I just read Tres Cool's original post and realise we've not directly addressed the 2nd part of his question - whether water-ballast is good in general.

In short, to increase stability, you place as much weight as deep as you can. Water ballast has two disadvantages - 1, it's not particularly dense so requires a large volume for a given weight. 2, it can realistically only be placed inside the boat, so can't be located very far down. It can, and is, used very successfully to provide additional righting moment to some very high performance yachts. But as a sole means of keeping the boat upright, it definitely has its limitations.

[Frosty]

A water ballast is kinda Ok. Its the oldest method of ballasting a boat and of course a most obvious one. Just not often used in sail boats.

The only thing I got to say about it is that as Will says its restricted by the hull and that it not a partial ballast option.

Its iether full or not otherwise the water will be sloppping around and make worse the problem you are trying to cure.

Unless of course the tanks are sided as in port or starboard, which would be a good idea but I doubt if the M has that>

[Raggi_Thor]

Here's another one, I have the impression it's better built than McGregor.

http://www.ybw.com/ybw/reprints/odin/odin.html

[Pierre R]

McGregor needs to be there in order to give meaning to the bottom of the boat scale in terms of quality and practicality. Who would we put there if it wasn't for McGregor.

I have known a lot of McGregor snailboat owners. It's true that for most of them they are first time buyers and bought at a boat show. During the first year of ownership, most of them that I talk to rave about the McGregor and its unusual design characteristics. They rave about its affordability and trailerability.

The second year brings them to wanting to keep the boat at a marina and enjoy the company of other sailers and boaters. Seems the McGregor is a lot to launch all the time for many of them and is just the wrong size to store in their driveways. Their disposition always remains positive towards the McGregor as long as they own it.

Soon the McGregor owner is out of boating, has a new or near new Sea Ray or an older fixed keel sailboat. Their disposition towards the McGregor has changed from raving about the design to bad mouthing the whole boat. They now do not have to justify their purchase.

After 40 years of boating they finally realize that Morris, Hinkley and Oyster build real sailboats.

[alan white]

Alan - I shan't bite at the 'better than buying a motorboat' line - other than to say that I'd never consider buying a snailboat....unless it could do 20 knots under power.... oh...that's rght a Mac can! Sadly, it still suffers from that seemingly insurmountable yot problem - its got no windows in it, so you can't see out when you'r inside....

I said that's what I think. Read it again. It isn't a line I'm selling. There's no arrempt to convince anyone. you'll note I always preface my opinion with "I think,,," or something luke that.
Don't assume just because someone says what they feel personally, that thay also want to ram their opinions down people's throats.

[kengrome]

Whatever you think about the boat, the owner of the company is a multi-millionaire because he was intelligent enough to capitalize on a project he did for his Master's Thesis in college when he studied the market and identified the best combination of features for the buying public.

Apparently they still want what he sells, and I'm sure he has adjusted his boats to meet the changing desires of his buyers. He also had to raise his price during the past year or so, now they cost a bit more than $20,000.

[Willallison]

Alan - I shan't bite at the 'better than buying a motorboat' line - other than to say that I'd never consider buying a snailboat....unless it could do 20 knots under power.... oh...that's rght a Mac can! Sadly, it still suffers from that seemingly insurmountable yot problem - its got no windows in it, so you can't see out when you'r inside....

I said that's what I think. Read it again. It isn't a line I'm selling. There's no arrempt to convince anyone. you'll note I always preface my opinion with "I think,,," or something luke that.
Don't assume just because someone says what they feel personally, that thay also want to ram their opinions down people's throats.

Alan - like you, I meant no offense with my remarks - if they were taken that way, I apologise.

Nine times out of ten, the McGregor is a first boat (of any size).


the (M) is like one of those small bicycles for kids with stabalizer wheels on.


It's true that for most of them they are first time buyers and bought at a boat show

Now, can someone please explain exactly what is wrong with a boat that is aimed at the 1st time buyer. Those of us with a vested interest in the industry want more of them, not less. Few people own their boats for more than a few years, before moving onto another. I see no difference here.

The trailerable issue is no different for a Mac than it is for any other trailer-sailor. Some people are die-hard trailerboat devotees - both power and sail. For others it's simply a stepping stone onto other, usually bigger, boats....

[Sailormann]

I've heard a few people say negative things about the MacGregor 26 and was wondering why?I have no issue with the fact that MacGregor has tried to produce a "powersailer", or with the fact that I personally don't find it attractive. I will also mention that there are other pure sailboats out there that can't sail much better or faster than it does.

My problem with the boat is the build quality, pure and simple. The boat is a toy, but it is not marketed as such. If MacGregor were to be forthright and advise that the boat was not suitable for anything but very sheltered waters and calm air, then I think that I, and a lot of other folks, would not comment on it in such a consistently negative manner.

With regards to water ballast... I don't think much of it, but it is not the worst thing in the world. My reasons for thinking so have been outlined in previous posts above.

[longliner45]

I must chime in ;I personally dont know macregor boats,,,but have some offshore commercial fishing experiance,,I know what it takes to withstand ,,,,, with that said ,many ,,many people work hard in factories machineshops and in the retail trades ,,all thier lives ,and the dream of owning a boat ,,finaly the day comes along ,,they look at dollars and size of the boat .I agree with sailorman ,,they dont know ,what they dont know ,,it would behove macgreger to mention the obove comment to new sailors,because Im sure they must make a better ,heavier and or capable boat for more expieranced folks kinda like going to a new resteraunt ,and your first meal is bad,,,,,will you go back ?,,,,,,,longliner

[alan white]

Alan - like you, I meant no offense with my remarks - if they were taken that way, I apologise.







Now, can someone please explain exactly what is wrong with a boat that is aimed at the 1st time buyer. Those of us with a vested interest in the industry want more of them, not less. Few people own their boats for more than a few years, before moving onto another. I see no difference here.

The trailerable issue is no different for a Mac than it is for any other trailer-sailor. Some people are die-hard trailerboat devotees - both power and sail. For others it's simply a stepping stone onto other, usually bigger, boats....

Thanks, Will.
Nothing wrong with a boat aimed at the first time buyer. As lomg as the boat is promoted for what it is. If the salesman at the boat show is the one doing the explaining, a lot is hanging on whether he's presenting the real facts. Magazines likewise tend to say only nice things about anyone who'll advertise in their pages. A few know exactly what they're getting into. For them, it is probably a good choice. For many others, they may find out later why sailboats don't have hundreds of pounds hanging off their ends, or why turnbuckles should have screw adjustments on their shrouds and so forth. For all they know, all sailboats are made that way.
Consumer reports tests cars, and nearlt everything else. Except sizable boats.
That gives the salesman a lot of leeway.

[Pierre R]

In defense of the McGregor for what its worth, the McGregor is cheap tuition into what can be a very expensive endevour.

The McGregor buyer spends $27k for the boat, trailer and mimimal gear, drives the boat for three years, realizes the quality and limitations, sells the boat for $14k and only pays roughly $14 k for tution. Not bad in this industry.

Now the McGregor sailor can increase his tuition by buying a Hunter etc. or he can stop paying tuition by buying something like and older Pearson.

Most must pay considerably more than $14 k for tuition into a degree in boat ownership.

[Willallison]

Aha! - The Marketing Department.... the root of all evil!

On this you will get NO argument from me....

[Raggi_Thor]

There is a lot of talk about the lousy quality of McGregor, but did any of you look at the German alternative "Odin"?

I don't think so :-)
So here is the test reposrt from Practical Boatowner:

Since the MacGregor 26X was introduced eight years ago, it has had the power-sailer market all to itself. And that’s surprising. When a new idea proves to be as successful as the MacGregor has been, other people are usually quick to copy it, or, at the very least, to borrow some key elements and present them in a slightly different package.

Yet, until last season, buyers who fancied a roomy trailer-sailer that would also motor fast enough to tow a water-skier had nowhere else to go, unless they tracked down one of Dufour’s Duos. The French giant built a hundred or so of its variation on the MacGregor theme, but never pushed them and still, apparently, has 60 or so sitting outside one of its factories. A Finnish builder had a go, too, producing a small number of a boat called the Vi:Ta, which didn’t prove successful. Although rumours have circulated from time to time about other projects in Europe, nothing else appeared until the Odin 820 was shown at the Dusseldorf Boat Show in January last year.

Here, at last, was a boat that looked as though it could present a serious threat to the MacGregor. Or so thought John Wittey, who wanted a boat with a big engine that would get him home if the weather threatened to make him late for work. Having looked at the Mac, he thought the Odin felt more substantial. He also liked the sidedecks, because they allowed him to walk forward rather than clamber over the coachroof.

So he had a test sail, placed an order and then, believing it was a boat he could sell in the UK, negotiated the dealership with Volker and Gerda Lamprecht, the German couple who had given birth to the Odin.
John sold six boats at the Southampton Boat Show, and has found buyers for five more since. He’s now busy arranging over 100 test sails. It’s the sort of start most new dealers can only dream about.
But why has the Odin caused such a stir, and why have several would-be MacGregor owners decided to spend several thousand pounds more on the German alternative?

To answer that question, we need to look at the reasons why the Lamprechts started the project. They were MacGregor dealers in Germany who decided to create their own boat. They would keep the bits of the MacGregor they liked, discard those they didn’t, and add some features of their own. The design and development work was carried out in conjunction with Andrjez Palarz, a boatbuilder who sold MacGregors in Poland.




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

Poles apart?
Visually, the similarities between the Odin and the MacGregor are obvious. By nature of their dual-purpose roles, both have high freeboard, square transoms and rather squat rigs. I looked at the compromises in the MacGregor’s design in PBO 438 (June 2003): most of them apply equally to the Odin. To summarise, a sailing boat that can motor at planing speeds won’t sail as well as one that’s intended purely for sailing. And since it can’t be expected to compete with a dedicated motorboat under power, it’s unlikely to appeal to purists of either persuasion. Odin buyers are generally people who, like John, want something with a mast and sails yet which still lets them turn a key and motor home at 15 knots.

As for the differences between the two power-sailers, the Odin is more than a foot (0.3m) longer than her American rival, both overall and on the waterline. She’s 4.5in (110mm) beamier – because the European maximum width for trailing is greater than in many American states – about 800lb (227kg) heavier, and carries marginally more sail. Her centreplate is of lower aspect ratio and is ballasted with 110lb (50kg) of lead. It was originally glass-sheathed timber, weighing just 55lb (25kg), but the builders were persuaded to make it heavier when the North-German dealer, Dirk Kroll, announced his intention to sail from Germany’s Baltic coast, around the top of Denmark and down the other side to Holland. Because it was winter and he knew there would be lumps of ice floating around, he took the precaution of having the hull laminate increased around the waterline at the bow.

Following Herr Kroll’s successful voyage, all Odins have been built to what became known as the North Sea specification. Nonetheless, it would be wrong to think of the boat as an offshore cruiser. A keel weighing just over 150lb (68kg) is light for a 27-footer, and high-sided, water-ballasted designs with relatively low angles of vanishing stability are still more at home close to land in calm waters – like those that greeted me when I arrived in Grado, on the Italian coast between Trieste and Venice, to test her.


Top


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

Full speed ahead
Motoring trials came first. The propeller used initially on the 70hp Johnson four-stroke produced disappointing results, so it was changed for a test prop of coarser pitch. Then, with four people on board, the GPS showed our speed rising from just short of 8 knots at 2,700 rpm to 12 knots at 4,000 rpm and a maximum of 16.7 knots at full throttle. On an empty boat without a mast, Volker Lamprecht says he has recorded 24 knots.

Odins sold in the UK will have Honda or Suzuki engines as standard, though the Johnson looks nicely colour-coordinated with its white livery. Together with the Suzuki equivalent – which is based on the same engine – it’s also the only 70hp four-stroke. As most of the competitors are 75hp and the Odin is currently rated to carry a maximum of 70hp, the builder is hoping to have the rating increased in the near future. But whatever the pros and cons of the different engines, the Johnson proved to be quiet and smooth-running, powering the boat through the turns without cavitation or any reduction in revs.

When the time came to sail, we let the boat stop, opened the valves to fill the ballast tank, lowered the centreplate and rudders, and raised the engine. Once the tank was full – about five minutes later – we set the sails and continued at a more relaxed pace in 8 to 10 knots of breeze.

As with the Mac, sailing an Odin will be for the enjoyment of being out on the water rather than for the sensory pleasure of handling a thoroughbred. You can’t forget that it’s 50% motorboat and, when you consider that the wheel is turning two rudders and an engine, it’s no surprise that the helm feels lifeless.
On the positive side, we achieved speeds of between 3.5 and 3.9 knots to windward and tacked through 90°. It would have been an unremarkable set of figures for a conventional 27-footer, but was reasonable for a hybrid even allowing for conditions that showed the boat off to best advantage: flat water and the right amount of breeze for full sail. Any increase in the wind, though, and the Odin would have been over-powered. Our heel angle of about 15 or 20° in the odd fresher spell suggested she’s a boat you need to reef early.

Another pleasant surprise was the shape of the sails, especially the mainsail. On the other hand, it would have been nice to see some more extensive clew reinforcement on the cross-cut genoa. The sail was of such low aspect ratio that the sheet load ran across the bias of the 5oz cloth, causing notable distortion at the clew. The sailmaker has since changed the design to alleviate the problem, though Odin have suggested that upgraded sails may well appear on the extras list.

Returning to the performance and handling of the test boat, we accelerated to 4.3 knots with the sheets eased and, as when beating, could leave the boat to sail herself most of the time. Tacking single-handed demanded a little more energy, because of the need to move forward from behind the wheel to tend the Antal 7 winches on the coachroof. The search for a relaxed steering position also led to some of our helmsmen sitting outboard and steering with their feet; the small wheel gives you a limited choice of seats if you want to hold on to it.

Top


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

Motoring home
Should you decide that you’re not sailing fast enough to get home in time for supper, you drop the sails, raise the centreplate and rudder, lower the engine and open the valves in the water tank: the one in the transom to let the water out, and the other one under the forward berth to let the air in. That takes about four minutes. You then need to allow about another eight minutes of motoring to empty the ballast tank and reach full speed.

For the ultimate performance under engine, of course, you would lower the mast. But if you don’t want it to come down on its own one day, you will need far more rig tension than we had on our test boat in Italy. Apart from leading to excessive heel and generally poor performance, slack rigging imposes unfair strains on the mast, wire, chainplates and terminals. And while I would be surprised to see many Odin owners beating into more than 15 knots of wind, I’m sure that plenty of them will motor around at planing speeds. By so doing, even on a relatively flat sea, they will be subjecting the rig to snatch loads of immense proportions unless the rigging is wound down tightly enough. The biggest problem will be tensioning the lowers: with the cap shrouds close on one side and the coachroof the other, it’s a fiddly job.

Staying with the rigging, the mast and boom are extruded in Poland, but bear no indication of the maker and are finished in a simple and, in places, rather crude manner. The mast’s section and the diameter of the rigging both look on the small side: you have to remember that the Odin’s relatively low righting moment means they’re not countering the same lateral force as they would on a conventionally ballasted boat. All the same, the chainplates are attached below the decks to chunky-looking tie-bars.

Most of the rest of the hardware comes from well-known companies including Easymarine, Moonlight and Vetus. The genoa tracks run from just abaft the mast to the aftermost end of the coachroof and provide welcome support underfoot if, as I found easiest, you move forward over the top rather than shuffle along the narrow sidedecks. Without the tracks, life would be interesting: the diamond non-slip pattern is neat but not particularly effective.

Once at the bow, you find an anchor well, a couple of cleats and what appears to be the standard Polish arrangement for attaching the forestay to the stemhead fitting while leaving the mast-lowering tackle connected. The only significant omission is an anchor roller. Mounted on the end of a short bowsprit, it appears on the extras list for £470.

Other extras include the engine, battery, trailer, compass, fairleads, genoa and roller reefing gear (a hank-on jib comes as standard), and slab reefing for the mainsail. Your £21,000 or so (including VAT) buys a fairly basic package. John Wittey says his customers are typically spending about £35,000. When you consider that a Suzuki 70hp four-stroke outboard and the four-wheeled trailer between them account for nearly £8,500, it’s easy to see where the money goes.
Top


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

Down below
The differences between the MacGregor 26X and the Odin are immediately apparent down below. Whereas the Mac is bright, simple and even a little stark, the Poles have lined the hullsides with a soft, quilted fabric and incorporated plenty of trim in light oak. As on deck, you don’t have to look far to find imperfections, but the overall effect is of a padded and comfortable environment.

Headroom ranges from 5ft 10in (1.78m) at the after end of the saloon to 5ft 2in (1.57m) over the water ballast tank.

Stowage is adequate for weekending, though the space under the forward part of the berth in the bow and under the double berth in the stern is filled with polyurethane foam.

A simple galley lives to port by the companionway, with a door on the opposite side opening into the heads compartment. A surprise here is the battery, mounted inside a locker at chest height: a weight like that would best be stowed lower down.

Cleaning is made easy by the full-length interior moulding, while condensation should be kept under control by the foam above the deckhead lining.

Top


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

Weighty matters
Although the Odin costs more than the MacGregor, she couldn’t be described as an expensive boat. She needs a bigger engine because of her greater size and weight – the Mac is rated for 50hp – and, possibly, a bigger tow car. In Sweden, a further consideration is the need for the equivalent of an HGV licence before you can drive legally with something of the Odin’s weight behind you.

For your extra cash, you get a boat that, despite clearly being built to a price, feels more solid than her American rival and comes with a higher level of trim and interior finish. That was the consensus among the dealers I met; not surprisingly, you might say, though most of them started by selling Macs and are in a good position to make comparisons. Some have now switched allegiance and others currently have a foot in both camps.

Additional features on the Odin include cockpit lockers each side. There’s room for a pair of 22-litre petrol tanks in a separate compartment that opens from the stern, though switching the fuel lead from one to the other out at sea could be an interesting exercise. As an alternative, you can have a 40-litre tank with a deck filler. It would be handier for filling up at the quayside, but less convenient if you want to take advantage of cheaper petrol at a garage. Another option is a 45-litre tank built in abaft the double berth, which would keep the weight lower down for better stability.

To what extent the German-Polish newcomer will affect sales of the MacGregor is hard to tell at this stage. But whichever boat you prefer, it’s important not to judge sailing as a sport by the performance of a power-sailing hybrid. Plenty of newcomers are attracted to the concept and may never appreciate the fun that sailing can be in a boat that doesn’t have to fulfil dual roles. Like the MacGregor, the Odin is a compromise. Like the MacGregor, she’s also one that looks destined to succeed.

Top
Odin 820 Specifications

Specifications
Overall length 26ft 11in (8.20m)
Beam 8ft 2.5in (2.50m)
Displacement (including water ballast) 4,875lb (2,211kg)
Draught 4ft 9in (1.45m)
Ballast lead 110lb (50kg) - water 1,710lb (776kg)
Sail area 306sq ft (28.5sq m) (main & 100% foretriangle)
Engine outboard 10 to 70hp
Headroom 5ft 10in (1.78m)
Designer Odin Yachten/ Odin Yachten Polska
Builder Yachten Polska
Construction Odin hulls are laid up with a solid laminate incorporating a blue, moulded-in boot top. A plastic fender covers the join between the hull and coachroof mouldings.
The centreplate is raised by a line led back over the deck. It hinges on a bolt that can be reached below the table.
Distributor: Wittey Marine Sales,
Unit 17, Haddenham Business Park,
Thame Road, Haddenham,
Bucks, HP17 8LJ.
Tel: 01844 290890.
Fax: 01844 292431
Email: marinesales@witteymachinery.com
Website: www.witteymachinery.com

[Raggi_Thor]

Text above from http://www.ybw.com/ybw/reprints/odin/odin.html

[Frosty]

Ok,--- hands up of anybody that read all that?

[Raggi_Thor]

There are two quastions in this thread originally,
1) Sail and motoring (fast)?
2) Water ballast

Here is a nice swedish example of a good little sailboat with water ballast, the Campus 650 (now 660) from Fabola, http://www.fabav.se/, designed by Bernt Lindquist (quite famous in Scandinavia for his Diva 39 and 35).

LOA: 6.60 m
Bredd: 2.30 m
Draft : 0.25 - 1.20 m
Keel: 60 kg
Water ballast: ca 150 kg
Dry weight (on trailer): 455 Kg

Sails,
Main: 9.00 m2
Genova: 8.00 m2
Spinnaker: 22.00 m

[Willallison]

Ok,--- hands up of anybody that read all that?

:D :D

Raggi - the link you provided to Wittey's doesn't seem to work.... thou the YBW one does, so pics can be seen there.

To my mind, there are really two issues here (well, maybe 3 if you want to toss in any inappropriate marketing...)

1. Build quality of the Mac in particular - but which is certainly not an issue cinfined to this boat

2. An effective means of providing adequate righting moment without the enormous weight penalty that is detrimental to high speed under power

This latter problem is further enhanced by the fact that all of the examples shown to date are trailerable. But what if we set that requirement aside and went for a more substantial boat? Far greater initial stability could be incorporated in the vessels form and a retractable keel with a sensible lump of lead on the bottom could provide the required RM when sailing. There would of course be some compromise to the vessels ultimate sailing performance as a result of the straighter buttocks, but it would surely be a tradeoff many would be prepared to accept....

There was a (bloody ugly) superyacht built recently that was quick under power.. but I can't recall its name...

[Raggi_Thor]

I think many flat bottomed racers (sailboats) with deep short keel and a bulb, beaver tail for example, wighing one or two tons would cruise at 10 to 15 knots with a slightly larger inboard diesel than usual. Didi 26 for example, with a 30HP diesel and a saildrive?

[alan white]

Sure. Look at Nexus Marine's St Pierre dory. Twenty seven feet, same basic hull as a sailing version, cruises at 12 kts. Light weight is the key. The 27 is under 3000 lbs. More than any other thing, the power to plane by sail alone, when run through a prop, will also make the boat plane, and if the power if enough, it will plane ever faster. The dory can't plane by sail power because it lacks the wide bottom and the big sail area, but if two dories were tied together 9made into a cat) and had enough sail are, they would do the same as the motor would do for a single dory.
And the dory's hull is very narrow aft at that.
If the McGregor can do 15 kts with 40 hp, a better version of the same principle would have a light engine down low in the middle of the boat, the hull would be same weight but twice as strong due to better design and materials, and that boat would be a good performer under sail or engine.
It's just that people who design fast planing sailboats wouldn't put that kind of power in the boat even though if they did, the boat could plane under power to even greater speeds than by sail because once planing, if the boat is upright, it isn't restricted to hull induced wave trains.
It is possible to put twice the power into a planing sailboat than it would ever get from the wind (and stand up). An engine (gas) with 30 hp could push a planing 20 ft 10 kt sailboat to 20 kts if the engine was light (like a Rotax or even a 4-stroke motorcycle engine that weighs 70 lbs, for example).
McGregor isn't even beginning to push the envelope in the hybrid concept. The reason no expensive boats are built to the same concept is because of alliegence to either sail or power as a pure sport. Anyone who would build a very fast planing sailboat would have a natural aversion to using a powerful engine, and the same could be said about power-boaters asking why they would want to put a tall stick and long keel (or ballast) on a motorboat.
Yet, the concept could produce a sailboat that outsails most sailboats that is also a powerboat that outpaces most other powerboats of the same power and weight! and it could be done safely too, able to cross oceans as well as any light boat such as a multi or offshore racer.

[Pierre R]

Alan, that is a very interesting thought.

[Willallison]

The reason no expensive boats are built to the same concept is because of alliegence to either sail or power as a pure sport. Anyone who would build a very fast planing sailboat would have a natural aversion to using a powerful engine, and the same could be said about power-boaters asking why they would want to put a tall stick and long keel (or ballast) on a motorboat.


This is certainly a valid point, but I come back to those yachties who use their boats almost entirely for weekend &/or coastal cruising. They spend a significant proportion of their time under power. Surely the prospect of being able to travel twice as fast would be an enticing one...?

For those who race their boats, or who are less inclined to motor, I agree, this would never be a boat for them.

[alan white]

Alan, that is a very interesting thought.

47 seven thoughts, actually. Amazing what happens when you drink too much coffee! I wonder if I'm full of it?

[Frosty]

Yes --if you drink a lot of coffee you will be full of it.

[Willallison]

What happens if you drink a lot of crappy coffee...?

[Frosty]

You will be sick!!

[alan white]

This is certainly a valid point, but I come back to those yachties who use their boats almost entirely for weekend &/or coastal cruising. They spend a significant proportion of their time under power. Surely the prospect of being able to travel twice as fast would be an enticing one...?

For those who race their boats, or who are less inclined to motor, I agree, this would never be a boat for them.

I'm exactly the person who has no desire to go twice as fast as hull speed. I like rowing, but then my boat is about the equivilant of a Herreshoff 12 1/2. I might desire a small diesel in an equal scantling 20 footer.
You're right though--- and most of those weekend warriors are motoring for lack of energy to put up the sails---- aren't Mac owners just less wealthy versions of those people? And aren't they a majority?
And aren't yachts OUTRAGIOUSLY expensive? Oh yes they are! Ridiculously so, which is hardly the way it used to be when fishing was done from sailboats. Then, the poor man's yacht was a reality. Now when I look out across the bay (here in Maine) I can spot ten or fifteen millionaires in my view, and maybe one or two non-millionaires.
So we are the lucky ones who beat the system by working on boats. To the rich, buying a used boat is more scary than if we bought one because they
do very little themselves except maybe wax the hull, if that. They have to pay huge sums of money for work to be done, more in one year, in some cases, than I've ever paid for a whole boat. So they dream of buying a big new boat, and its funny, but they have to spend almost 200k for what I consider to be a cheap boat, such as a thirty foot Hunter (they comprimise--- they wanted a Crealock).
My last cruiser was a Carter 33. bought from Steve Callahan, who wrote "Adrift". The boat could not be replicated for under 225k today, I think. I paid 8.5k for it, and it was in very good shape.
Now picture the neophyte wannabe sailer. He isn't rich, and he knows less than a fraction of what the discriminating rich guy knows about boats and sailing in general. The idea of paying 100k for a well found yacht of 26 ft or so scares the bejeesus out of him. It is no wonder the brand new Mac appeals to him. He won't be working on it himself, like the rich guy, because he doesn't know how. He wants new for that reason.
And there you have it.

[Raggi_Thor]

What do you think about using an outboard inside a modern light sailboat?
You can probably cruise at 12 knots and lift the outboard, seal the well and move the engine and fuel from side to side.
Is this too complicated?
This weight moving arrangement will of course occupy a lot of space.

I've had one large mug of coffe today :)

[luvnwater]

Back ten years agor M made sailboats with dagger boards and a place to mount a small O/B on the back. I think its a 26d

[alan white]

What do you think about using an outboard inside a modern light sailboat?
You can probably cruise at 12 knots and lift the outboard, seal the well and move the engine and fuel from side to side.
Is this too complicated?
This weight moving arrangement will of course occupy a lot of space.

I've had one large mug of coffe today :)

I like your reason for editing. Hahahah!

[Pericles]

Courtesy of The Cheap Pages I have spent an enjoyable number of hours reading a book published in 1906 detailing sailing boats from around the world. http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.friend.ly.net/%7Edadadata/smyth/01_06/06_TOPSL.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.friend.ly.net/%7Edadadata/smyth/mast_n_sail_06.html&h=264&w=369&sz=13&hl=en&start=28&um=1&tbnid=IV9ZcOk6h5oVjM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=122&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dspritsail%2Bbarges%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN

Using BS 1088 okume ply and epoxy it seems a reasonable task to reproduce some of these vessels, by a combination of S & G methods using moulds mounted on a strongback and then couldmoulding with strips and panels to achieve the desired scantlings. This presupposes a carvel style rather than clinker/lapstrake, but that's not impossible either.

A double ended 70 footer Scottish Zulu with deep forefoot and sharply raked stern with bowsprit mounted jib and lugsails on foremast and mizzen, would make a fabulous world cruiser.http://www.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/smyth/01_06/05_70_ZULU.gif

The fishing boats of the past were well thought out seaworthy vessels, without the need for heavily ballasted keels. The hull shapes went well on all points of sailing, in weather that would appall today's sailors.

"Shetland Line Boats

Among the Shetland Islands small boats of the Norwegian model are everywhere used, both for inshore fishing and for ferrying across sounds and firths ; and, until the last quarter of the century, larger boats of the same build were alone used in the long line and the herring fisheries.

The small line boats run from 10 feet of keel upwards, some of the larger haddock boats measuring about 12 feet keel. Sexerns (or six-oared boats) run from 20 to 23 feet. All these boats, however, are much larger than appears from these figures, as both stems are greatly raked.

They are also high at the bows and quarters which helps to keep them dry in a seaway. They are built of light materials, and have very few timbers. Being so light in the frame, they are buoyant and lively, and under skilful handling will come through a good deal of rough weather. They must, however, be kept end on to a heavy sea ; their low waist makes them dangerous in a broadside sea. Where a large herring-boat or a cod smack would be 'laid to' under low sail, Shetland fishermen would consider it safer to keep a sexern under oars, heading straight through the sea.

DUNDEE WHALEBOAT

At least one case is on record of a Shetland crew being thus driven to Norway in a six-oared boat, and after they had been given up for lost, they returned home in safety. More remarkable still was the case of two girls from Unst who were blown out to sea when trying to cross a sound with a small boat loaded with peats. They, too, managed to keep their frail craft afloat till they reached Norway. One was eventually sent home ; the other accepted an offer of marriage from a young Norwegian, and remained.

The Shetland sexern is not unlike an ordinary lifeboat in appearance, or the Dundee whaler, and is a survival of the model of the old Norse Viking longship. A good many of these boats are still used in the long line fishing at what are locally known as 'haaf' stations, but they are being fast supplanted by large herring-boats from Aberdeenshire. These haaf stations are harbours within easy reach of the deep-sea fishing banks, and generally situated near some outlying point."

Therefore, why spend thousands and thousands of dollars on a boats with a hull that a thumb can distort, when the methods and materials exist to build a proven design that will be stronger than even the originals were.

Whilst long overhangs are very pretty, it's waterline length that governs displacement speeds and 19th century fishermen need to get their catches ashore with minimum delay. Finally and if only----

The cost of one of these boats, including steam hauling gear, sails and other outfit, used to be from £500 to £600, but cannot now be quoted at less than £700, owing to increased cost of material and other causes.

One recently built at Fraserburgh was 66 ft. keel and 70 ft. over stems ; 21 ft. beam outside gunwale, and 20 ft. inside plank ; 7 ft. deep inside, and 40 tons register. The carpenter's account was £430 ; iron work, £52 ; sails and outfit, £150, and steam hauling gear, £105 ;-total, £737 ; and the following outfit of sails, etc., was provided:

Get building,

Pericles

[mighetto]

I encourage those interested in these MacGregors to check out my web site
http://www.eskimo.com/~mighetto/murrelet.htm and comment. Almost every tab involves stability. These are not motorsailers because they do not carry the fuel needed for passages of more than about 100 miles. (of course if there is wind the range is infinate).

The questions regarding the vessel stem from a July 4th 2002 event where several children died owing to a drunken operator now serving out 7 years for his deed. The episode involved firing rockets from the bow hatch. The boat never was on trial but a TP52 promoter used the episode to try and halt a move away from fixed keel sail boat design. Owing to that, the Mac26x is the most significant sailboat design in all of history because clearly the concepts advanced are becoming main stream today.

The TP52 thread will be active the next few months owing to the transpac.
http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=5471&page=133. It is interesting to note that a Stanford student is crewing on Morning. I have been expecting him to discover Roger MacGregor - who is honored in the sailboat hall of fame and introduced the movable water ballast X vessel shortly after being so honored. His Mc65 is racing in the transpac and is crewed by real sailors from Australia. (I am so dissapointed in the quality of US race boat sailors.) Things have to change and yet I thought the low point had already been met. Even though Macgregors are not sold as race boats there is race heritage and I suspect the Mac26x is an outstanding race trainer for future race boats. Looking forward to discussion.

Oh - you need to be an adult to view my web page. There is no nudity but parental controls on the IE browser prevent viewing. I like that. I think the same is true for Sailing Anarchy. Also one of the great disappointments last week was Apple's Iphone. Java applets are not supported. You need those for sailing calculators. Sigh, I thought Jobs got it. I suppose on some level every person is clueless. That includes me. So please comment - even rudely. We are here to learn from each other.

Frank L. Mighetto
1999 Mac26x out of Friday Harbor

[Raggi_Thor]

I wondered where you were :-)

[marshmat]

So did I ;) Good to see you chip in on your favourite race trainer, Frank.
(For the newbies- Frank is probably the most vehemently fanatical proponent of the McGregor hull, surpassing even its designer's enthusiasm for it. Search the forum for a thread called " TP52s " if you want to see why ;) )

Now for a question that we still can't seem to agree on:
Now, can someone please explain exactly what is wrong with a boat that is aimed at the 1st time buyer. Those of us with a vested interest in the industry want more of them, not less. Few people own their boats for more than a few years, before moving onto another. I see no difference here.
What's wrong with an inexpensive boat designed to get newbies hooked on boating? Absolutely nothing. For people new to boating, not sure whether they want to sail or motor, not sure what they need and not willing to spend a fortune to find out, the Mac26 is pretty much ideal. The problems come when people try to get serious use out of one and find that it's really not meant for much more than a Force 3 on a weekend trip to the next island over. It's got some clever but somewhat misguided marketing behind it, so it's often seen as something it's not.
Water ballast is more or less essential for a trailer sailer, as solid ballast would be too heavy for most tow vehicles. In most trailer sailers, the tanks are fore and aft; in the Mac they're port and starboard on either side of the centreboard- but are not intended to run one-full one-empty as raceboats (whose water ballast tanks are often high on the sides,almost wing-like) do, it's either all full or all empty. As mentioned before, it is very dangerous to run with half-ballast as this introduces free surface effects that can greatly increase the risk of capsize.
In short, my opinion on the M26: A good choice for someone new to boating who's not yet sure what he wants or needs. A poor choice for someone who already knows where and how he wants to cruise, and wants something well built and seaworthy that he can trust when beyond the range of easy help.

[longliner45]

how many of these boats have capsized? longliner

[mydauphin]

First Water Ballast... 95% of the worlds ships used water ballast
100% of the megayatchs used it for ballast and trim

But if you dont know what your doing with it, I guess you could really screw it up.

Now the MacGregor 26
It is kind of a big boat to trailer but you can. Dont think I can park it in my house. Kind of silly driving or powering it around on with mast up, lots of wind resistance. Bringing mast up and down must be a real pain.
I dont think I would want to be on it in any kind strong winds or seas like 20kt, 4foot seas.

So it is good for inland sailing on a lake. But you know - you can buy a fairly decent sailboat used rather cheap.

But honestly I like sailboats, been on one once or twice...
But I think powerboats specially slow ones are easier to work with.
I think the MacGregor 26 is the worst of both worlds.

However I complement the people who invented it. May be one day I will have time to use it.

[mydauphin]

Yep, MacGregor 65

A big, fast sailboat used in racing. All most bought one.
The hull was so little it would fly. People used to strip them of all interiors reinforce them and race them, but they didnt last long.

But that was a fast sailboat...

[alan white]

MacGregor is not producing time-tested designs. Their efforts have been to attempt to capture a particular market, and they have decided that in order to capture that market, they must build a boat differently in order to avoid comparisons with existing boats, which would necessarily out-class an inexpensive same-goal competitor on a point for point basis.
The marketing would be aimed at non-sailors. The marketing would hinge on a particular way of buying rather than depending on deep analysis of the product. In fact, the way of buying and the deeper analysis could be said to be mutually opposite logics. The way of buying would depend on an avoidance, either accidental or on purpose, of conventional wisdom. Conversely, a deep analysis would consider all conventional wisdom as valuable.
Conventional wisdom has spoken here. It has said that the boat is not fit for much more than nearshore jaunts in moderate to light weather and relatively smooth seas. I agree. And I wonder how many would have sold had each and every salesman mentioned this up front.

Alan

It is, perhaps, a revolutionary marketing scheme, but the boat itself is not an engineering triumph at all. Nothing has been "invented". If I decide I want to build a boat that is a sailer and also a pontoon boat, that does not make me imaginative. It merely makes me a marketing genious if I can sell thousands of them. Bear in mind, I am selling to the uninformed, and not turning an existing sport on its head. The uninformed have nothing to compare with. They did not buy a normal sailboat because they not only didn't ask seasoned sailors what to buy, but they also decided that asking what experience had to say was not important.

[Pierre R]

After looking at Mighetto's blog I can see what you mean about enthusiastic.

He even tries to change the definition of heavy weather and blue water to suit the McGregor. The numbers for the McGregor might suggest blue water but the build quality definitely does not.

[HDSW]

There seems to be a lot of opinions floating around about the M26 and I am not sure how much of them are based on experience and how much on hearsay. I have been sailing for 45+ years on a wide variety of sailboats including Victories, folkboats, C&N, S&S, Swallows, Carters, Westerlies, J24's, Hunters, etc. I have had extensive offshore and local racing experience, cruising and passage making both in the Channel / Western seaboard of Europe and the West coast of the USA. I have been the owner of a M26 for the last 2 years which I have sailed in the Pacific North West.

First let me say that anyone who takes a M26 or any other boat out in conditions that they or the boat are not prepared for are in serious danger; the sea is totally unforgiving.

Talking specifically about the M26 I have been very surprised by it in a number of ways:

I think that for the price point it is remarkably well made. Mine is 5 years old and looks like new, the hull and fittings show no signs of undue wear and are remarkably solid. You would have to push remarkably hard to get the hull to deform. Is it a C&N or an S&S? No it's not, but then it’s not sold as such. All in all I have seen much worse build quality on boats which are much more expensive, and it does have windows!

I too was rather dismissive of it as a sailing boat and it taught me a lot very quickly:) It is not a standard sailboat at all, nor a motor boat. It has very unique characteristics both as a sailboat and a motorboat and is considerably more complex than either in use. It has been a very interesting experience for me and has yet again reinforced the knowledge that boats and sailing are a continuous learning process. I have to say that the idea that they are beginner’s boats is a little surprising, I would much prefer to learn to sail on a small Catalina or Hunter than a M26; they are a lot simpler!

Within the limitations that it has it is a good sailboat. It isn’t going to be the best pointing boat out there, nor the most stable. I wouldn’t like to go blue water in it but then I wouldn’t like to go blue water in any 26 footer. In strong winds it is not as stiff as I would like but then I have had a 3/4 ton race boat lay flat in the water too. It will teach you how to sail and it will do that well.

With regard to the specific question about the water ballast I would say that this works remarkably well. It, along with the centerboard and twin (very large) drop rudders, gives the boat a unique sailing characteristic, as I said it is not a stiff boat but is rather better than I expected.

As far as the marketing goes I was never told by anyone that it was an offshore cruiser and I’m surprised that anyone would think that the majority of its purchasers were interested in offshore, heavy weather use. The extensive documentation that comes with the boat is very clear about usage and what is dangerous practice in the M26. Personally I am now of the age that when heavy weather is in the offing I’m heading for the harbor and I must admit a 50hp motor and 20 Knot speed to get me there is very comforting.

The bottom line is that this is an interesting boat which can introduce people to the sport easily and cheaply and they can learn how to sail on. Like any boat it should be only operated within its limitations and that of its users and learning those limitations is a key element of sailing. I think a person who was taught to sail on a M26 by a reputable school or experienced sailor would be much safer than a beginner on their own in a conventional keelboat who thinks that they are “safe” boats because that’s what “seasoned” sailors have implied in forums such as these. A M26 is not inherently more dangerous than any other boat, its people that cause tragedies not boats.

Finally I would say to all those armchair critics (of anything) that they should cultivate an open mind and look on every boat, sea condition and landfall as a great learning experience rather than the opportunity to push some ill informed prejudices; you'll find it much more fun!

[Willallison]

Marshmat - In short, my opinion on the M26: A good choice for someone new to boating who's not yet sure what he wants or needs. A poor choice for someone who already knows where and how he wants to cruise, and wants something well built and seaworthy that he can trust when beyond the range of easy help.

But why, I ask again? Is there suddenly something wrong with, or naive about a person who would like a trailerable sailboat that has greater than average performance under power? Sure - there are compromises to be had, just as there is with almost any design decision. But just because these criteria don't suit most "real" sailors, doesn't mean they only suit inexperienced ones.
This last post, by HDSW (welcome BTW), proves the point.

The choice not to go blue water sailing is more often than not one that comes as a result of experience, rather than a lack of it!

Build quality &/or marketing are really separate issues IMHO

[HDSW]

Thanks Will

Um, well actually I do go blue water but I have an 80ft Ketch in Mexico with dual 300hp Mercedes engines and all the latest systems for that :). I still head for the harbor when there is a hurricane warning though.

The reasons I have the M26 here in Seattle are:

1. I can trail it to my local lake in 10 mins, the Puget Sound in 30 mins and be in the San Juans in a couple of hours. I can even be in Canada in a morning; thousands of miles of wonderful shoreline. Try that with a keelboat.
2. The wind is rubbish for decent sailing here because of the mountains so all too often you end up motoring home anyway.
3. When it rains (and it does!) I have a comfortable cabin and cover.
4. It draws so little with the ballast out that I can just pull it up on the beach for a picnic or overnight in the islands without worrying about anchors or slips.
5. I can leave it in a car space in a secure public store next to the launch and not pay exorbitant moorage or layover.
6. It actually very interesting to sail; there are all sorts of additional combinations of rudders, centerboard and ballast to play with which I have not had before.

So it lets me sail whenever I want, wherever I want, cheaply and without too much hassle.

Of course I can’t set off for Hawaii in it and I have to put up with the sneers of the "proper" sailors..

Every boat is a compromise and the M26 does have a place at the dock.

[marshmat]

Is there suddenly something wrong with, or naive about a person who would like a trailerable sailboat that has greater than average performance under power?
Absolutely nothing wrong with that, no. I think of the boat that way because most of the McGregors around here show up in the driveway of people who are interested in getting into boating, but don't know what their style is. So they get an inexpensive boat that's a bit of everything and do short trips with it for a few years. Once they know what boating's like and have a better idea of what they want to do on the water, the M26 tends to be sold to another newbie as its first owners switch to either a sailing or motorsailing yacht, or a motor cruiser. Not everyone's this way of course, but that's how the Macs tend to be used around here. Nobody seems to trust them beyond sight of land, but they get you to nice inland lakes where keelboats and big stink-pots can't go as well as being able to cover a fair chunk of inshore waters if the weather's OK.

[rwatson]

I sold my Macgregor over 4 years ago (after 18 months) for financial reasons. Over the years, I have read a lot of stuff and had a lot of things said about MacGregors. I researched the fatalities in the macgregor in that famous accident - anyone who puts eleven people on a Macgregor with no ballast doesnt have any idea. I and other owners used to get nervous with 6 people. Its only a big dinghy after all.

The other day one old salt gave me a lecture on how ugly things like stern hung rudders, outboards etc etc. I said "you are into boating for the aesthetics". he said "yes, of course". I said "I am into boats for aesthetics too - the aesthetics of the places that boats take you to. " I would be as happy on a raft ( with a decent toilet, shower and a warm cabin of course) if it was in some picturesque waterway.

Macgregors take a hiding for their sailing ability - well they are only about 6 knots slower than the speediest boats in their class, and thats just walking pace. Sailing is a nice experience, and I have done my time "around the sticks" - and realised that the only difference between winning sailing boats is the amount of money the owners can afford. No way am I stupid enough to spend $100k on a mast!!! Sailing is great when you are not in a hurry, the sun is out and the breeze is good.

Power is good when 1) The engine runs, 2) The wind and weather is bad, and you want to drive from inside a warm cabin 3) You need to actually get somewhere fast

If you can show me a more cost effective way of getting comfortable speed with great internal comfort, I would be very interested.

The 'pointy caravan' is easy to tow home (saves marina costs) and easy to tow around the country. It fits into lakes, is not too scary offshore in reasonable weather. Mr Macgregor deserves all the sales - to people (and their families) who arn't into the expensive death defying heavy weather offshore trip, or the ego trippers who hang their self esteem (and their wallets) on finishing first after circling around the same old circuit week after week.

Anyone who 'does a number' on macgregors, is just not appreciating one other dimension to the on water experience - and I wont buy Nikes or Ipods either, there are plenty of better value options out there.

[hansp77]

There has been some good comments in this thread.

I am always curious about the ctitical frenzy surrounding M26's, enhanced because my Uncle owns an older one (not the X), and I sail on it quite regularly.

This was not his first boat, in fact it must be around his 4th or 5th.
It wasn't a lack of experience that lead him to it, but rather his accumulated experience and assesment of his own needs.
He keeps it parked on its trailer in a secure marina, directly in front of the ramp, 5 minutes from his home, ready to go. You drive in, reverse it in, and you are in the water in 10 minutes. In summer, he can get a few hours sailing in on weekdays after work.
He day-sails it in our local Bay, at least every week, mostly with his wife and young 2 boys, a friend, or on his own, for this reason naturally avoiding bad conditions, and would never take it into blue water.
Every year he trailers it far away to Lakes Entrance (with his normal car- a Cherokee) another sheltered sailing ground, for some cruising with the family, made easier and more affordable by leaving the ballast at home;) .
For him it works well. He knows what use he wants out of his boat, and he gets it. He wanted this particular boat and model bad enough to ship one over from the states (at a considerable saving) and feels confident of the value of his investment holding well in comparison to other boats (due to continued demand).
Hell, all he does is sail in it. There is an outboard on it, but I would be surprised if it is powerfull enough to get it beyond hull speed.
Of course he has dreams of one day getting a bigger boat, more blue water capable, but until the day his needs require this, and the day his wife and kids are ready for blue water sailing, then the M26 fullfills his particular needs very well.

I can't say it is the boat for me. Even though I am a inexperienced sailor and am no where near heading into blue water myself, I like it that my boat is designed and built to take me there (as it took the previous owner). I look at all the stays on his boat, and they look like they could all together be wound up as the strands within just one of my fore or aft stays. Other elements of the construction are equally alarming to me- major load bearing bolts, attatchments and fittings simply screwed or bolted straight through the thin deck with no backing or support. And it goes on.
Also, the sailing is not exactly how I prefer it, very heavy on the helm (my boat is light as a feather) heels very easily and sort of fragile. But I think what others have said is true, it certainly has tought me alot about sailing.
This is a boat with a specific use in mind, built and designed for.
Use it for that, and you should be fine. Just like everything else, take it beyond that, and you are taking your life into your own hands.

Often it seems to me that a lot of us boat owners (me included) are like those big city 4xwheel drivers (SUV's). We have them all over the place here- cars built specifically for off-road use, never leaving the bitumen. We like the idea that one day, maybe, if we ever want to, we can just take-off and drive up a mountain. Most of us never do- kudos to those of you who do take your blue water capable boats to blue water regularly. I would like to one day- or so the dream goes.
For those that are content to drive their family around in a daggy econovan instead of a Hummer, because it will get you to where you want to go- kudos to you too.

[Olivebank]

Having NO boat is what I call having a "bad" boat. I hate labels. But, in all honesty, we bought an extremely well built, solid, sturdy OLD (needing tons of work!) boat rather than trust our fate to a brand new Clorox bottle. Egads, did I say that? I didn't mean it, honest. Of course, if I had unlimited financial resources, I might go for an Island Packet....
Best regards,
Olivebank
http://www.eastcoasthorizon.com/Claymore/index.htm

[RonR]

Unfortunately may have to await my next coming to afford the time to enjoy fixing up an older boat, such as the OLIVEBANK -Claymore .....Lovely job BTW.and lovely web site.

We retired 6 yrs ago, bought our 1st ever sailboat......Yes, a Mac 26X and have loved the experience ever since, and wherever we go, so goes the Mac.

We sail the summer months in Prince Edward Island,Canada, then spring and fall (4 months) Alabama, and 4 months in the south of Texas. Always in protected waters(ICW, coastal bays, etc) Six years into it and still neophytes. To some this may not 'be sailing' but, who cares......???:) :) :)

[Squidly-Diddly]

the water ballast tanks, installed through round hatches cut into the tanks. These could be used to transfer a lot of weight quickly and safely from side to side so that using water as ballast (vs lead carried deep) could become an asset not a 'compromise'.

Also nice to have 60 gallons or so of fresh water.

The bags could also be rigged to "blow" for as low pressure compressed air would be one way to pump the water from side to side.

Also, the fixed lead keel needs to be replaced with 6-8 marine batteries. If the batts go dead they will still function at ballast. It would also be nice to be able to toss the weight overboard in emergency, or loan out a batt or two.

Both these mods could be done without effecting the existing dynamics of the boat, just some interior fiberglass cutting and remodeling that wouldn't even need to be re-finished cosmetically.

PS due to tightening regs, it might be useful to install holding tank bags as well.

[Guillermo]

Yep, MacGregor 65

A big, fast sailboat used in racing. All most bought one.
The hull was so little it would fly. People used to strip them of all interiors reinforce them and race them, but they didnt last long.
But that was a fast sailboat...
Well, not only for racing: when I was living in Mexico I introduced one of my best mexican friends into sailing. We jointly bought a 1986 Mc Gregor 25 (not water ballast but a winged keel) and sailed it from Key West to Cancún in a week or so, and after that just in Cancun´s surrounding waters.

A few years later this now salty seafarer divorced, bought a McGregor 65, got a new girl and went to cruise westward around the globe, which took them 4 years. At that time I was already back in Spain and he wrote me from time to time telling adventures. Around 1994 they arrived to Barcelona and came to visit me and my family to Vigo. My friend said the McGregor 65 was a fast one and, although always looking for good weather windows when passagemaking, they managed to safely handle some ocasionally pretty strong bad weather.

Cheers.

[Olivebank]

First of all, RonR, thanks for the kind words!! Like I said, the only "bad" boat is NO boat....! Enjoy your Mac!
And Guillermo... I have to wonder if perhaps a 65 foot Mac that sailed the globe is perhaps built a little more solidly than a 26 footer? Goodness knows, they are expensive enough - I see a 1999 model selling now for $239,500 U.S. Dollars. It ought to be magnificent for that kind of money. Our 1970 Olivebank, in the sad shape that she was, was purchased by us for $7,500.
Best regards to all -
Eileen (on m/s Olivebank)
http://www.eastcoasthorizon.com/Claymore/index.htm

[chinook]

Being a Mac 26X owner since 2002, I've read this thread with interest. I was a newbie sailor at the time of purchase. I had sailed with others on various sized boats, but because of financial status never thought I'd ever own a boat. The Mac's price point put it within my range. More importantly, being trailerable, I could dispense with moorage fees when not actually out on the water. She is moored comfortably in my driveway when not in use. A major attraction was its trailerability. I didn't want to be essentially limited to home waters. I love to explore, and the Mac looked like a boat we could tow to all kinds of great places.

The Mac is a very stripped down boat on the interior. Mac owners love to "mod" their boats and I'm no exception. We set the boat up for our version of extended cruising. We've increased fuel and water tankage capacity, have built in lots of extra storage, added a cockpit surround, and installed a solar panel and refrigeration, to mention just a few of the things we've done to set her up for cruising.

The boat has done a great job satisfying my desire to explore a wide variety of waters. In our first season, we sailed on most of the sizeable freshwater lakes here in Washington State, plus the Puget Sound and San Juans. In our second season we spent 11 months doing a circuit of the US, boat in tow. We trailered 16,000 miles, and cruised nearly 2000 nm. Waters experienced included Jackson Lake in the Tetons, Yellowstone Lake, Isle Royale on Lake Superior, the North Channel of Georgian Bay on Lake Huron, Lake Champlain, the coast of Maine from Southwest Harbor to Deer Isle, the ICW from Chesapeake Virginia to St. Augustine FL, the Everglades out of Flamingo up as far as Everglades City and down to the Keys, a 2 month cruise of the Abacos out of West Palm Beach, and finally a 3 week cruise up Lake Powell. Our third season we cruised up the Inside Passage, from West Vancouver to the head of Glacier Bay and back. In 2006 we trailered up to Tweedsmuir Provincial Park in British Columbia where we sailed up a 35 mile lake, loaded the boat on a rail portage system at the head of the lake, got towed across a half mile isthmus to a spectacular wilderness lake. Pretty cool seeing her "sailing" through the forest, with the mast raised. Summer of 2007 we sailed with friends we met back east on their 32' Caliber, so didn't make any major trips with our boat. This spring we trailered down to San Carlos, Mexico, sailed across the Sea of Cortez and then cruised down to La Paz and back. Upcoming plans include going back east next summer for some time on Chesapeake Bay (son in the Navy, going to be based there), and in the spring after that, we hope to get out to the Exumas.

Most folks don't use their Macs like we do, but the boat has more than met our needs. Initial price was affordable. We have no fixed moorage costs when not in use. We've been able to explore some of the finest cruising waters in North America. The boat is more than up to the kinds of crossings we've made in Mexico and the Bahamas, with the proviso that we pay very close attention to weather and select the times when we expose ourselves to big stretches of open water. I'm ok with winds up to 20 knots and 6 foot seas if they're spaced out, 3 to 4 feet if they're not. I hide from the rest as best I can. I've noticed that most of the bigger boats (and practically every cruising boat we meet is bigger than us) tend to tuck in when the weather turns nasty. We know we're not bluewater cruisers, but we've enjoyed the world this boat has made accessible to us.

[mattotoole]

The Mac 26 isn't designed to win races or cross oceans, but it seems to do what a lot of people want to do with their boats pretty well. I've heard a bunch of stories like chinook's.

Water ballast could work well for a lot of small sailboats. I'm surprised it's not more common. I've heard good reports about the Santana 2023 (http://www.santanasailboats.com/boats/santana2023/s2023.htm), which has PHRF numbers better than most of its peers. I think there's even an "R" version that rates close to a J24.

I liked Mr. Taunton's water-ballasted User Friendly 21 (http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/best-design-minimalist-trailerable-coastal-cruising-14040-2.html) that he posted here awhile ago.

[Uanhanluke]

I read a Lot of sailor prejudice but not owner postings of what they like or dislike about their sailboat. Are there any real owner's of this vessel around?

[chinook]

Well, I'm a Mac owner, and have been since 2002. We were complete newbies when we bought our boat. A number of things about it appealed to us as newcomers to sailing. First was price. I never dreamed I could get into a new sailboat for what we paid. Trailerability was a huge consideration, since I couldn't afford moorage, but did have space at home to park the boat, and the Mac has the best design around for trailering (low weight and low profile on the trailer). Also, I didn't want to be restricted to home waters. We've hauled that boat all around the US, and sailed to Alaska, the Bahamas, and last spring from San Carlos to La Paz on the Sea of Cortez. Yes, it's lightly built. Yes, you can find some cosmetic flaws in the finish. Yes, it is a very basic boat. However, Mac owners love to mod them to suit their tastes. We've set ours up for long range cruising, and we have gone many of the places that bigger boats go. The trailerability, shallow draft (I can float in 1 foot of water, motor in 2 1/2 feet of water, and let the tide go completely out under her flat bottom if I wish. Most non owners seem focused on the Mac's speed under power, which usually isn't as high as advertised. We rarely run full throttle, preferring to motor at a more efficient half throttle, at around 5 to 6 knots, so we can extend our range. However, on occasions it is handy and fun to open her up and make that bridge opening, or get back to the ramp on a favorable tide. All boats are compromises, and the compromises that make a Mac what she is work for a whole lot of Mac owners. PS: Pictures of our boat and some of the places she's been, along with journal entries, can be found on our website: http://chinook.home.dyndns.org:8080/chinook. Enjoy!

[Manie B]

Chinook thanks for the info :D

it was an absolute pleasure to read your pages - brought back good memories of El and Bill on Halcyon and their travels

http://www.geocities.com/bill_fiero/

it is always fun to read about the wonderful boating opportunities all over the world and the folks who actually get out there and enjoy it :D

nice to read positive notes on a Macgregor :D

your website works very well for me - pure and simple - i love the entire setup :D

[Uanhanluke]

Most of the MC26 owners I have read about are pretty happy with their boats as is or have made adjustments. They are not hard core sailors whick explains a lot of things, including the rabid criticism by non-owner skeptics.

Thanks for reply.

Best
U

[mydauphin]

Here we go again....

[Willallison]

Here we go again....

:D

I watched a couple of approx retirement age (though in these days of financial doom and gloom that makes for a pretty wide spectrum!) launching a Mac 26 (or perhaps 28?) just an hour or so ago.
I have to say, they both had smiles on their faces.....

[rwatson]

I read a Lot of sailor prejudice but not owner postings of what they like or dislike about their sailboat. Are there any real owner's of this vessel around?


Mac owners have their own happy little forums where they dont get rubbished by the 'experts'.

[mydauphin]

Mac's are great as long, like any other boat, you know their limitations....
No boat is perfect. I have a simple rule never be out more than 1 mile per every foot of boat. Or 1 foot of waves for every ten feet of boat. May not be perfect but it works for me. But apart from that every boat is murphy ready to happen. Knowledge and prepareness are the key. ALL boats should should have a big disclaimer....Do not operate while being an idiot, it is not a car - it is a sea vessel.

[SFO]

Dear Sailors, I so wish more women would comment on the MacGregor 26.

My goals do not seem to be in line with many of the first comments on this post. All I care about is the view, safety, marine life, and seeing San Francisco from water and not shore.

My husband and I do not have any interest in speed, racing or sailing to Hawaii. This will be a first for me... For the past 20 years I have flown 54 different airplanes, flown thousand of flight hours and the SF Bay is now calling.

What I like about the MacGregor: The interior is something I can keep clean. I actually like the idea that I can wipe down and keep things sanitized. With no interest in sanding, fixing, staining, I like the low maintenance that seems to go with the Mac.

As with all weather conditions a pilot/sailor must know their equipment and limitations. Again, my goal is to see the Golden Gate Bridge from below. Just yesterday the weather was marvelous and being on the water would have been so much fun during the Fall warmth.

So my goals are: View, Little maintenance, safety and marine life.

What I have read on this post: The Mac is not a sailors boat. If this means expensive buy in, well I can not justify this. We can afford the hundred thousand dollar boats, but I refuse. That money could go to more important causes, than the "size of my boat." - Just like in aviation... there are planes that serve various missions. My mission is to be out on the water, possibly with two friends and enjoying the view. The alternative, is to remain on shore, for I can not justify the horrendous costs and hate the idea of paying someone to maintain my boat.

Since I am new to sailing, do you find large egos in sailing? Like what do the Jones's own and on which dock? I could care less about this. I just want to know the MacGregor is safe and appropriate for 15-20 kt winds in San Francisco Bay, not sailing to Hawaii. Again, I wish women would comment about these boats. I would like their sailing management and ownership cost opinion.

Thank you,
SFO

[marshmat]

Hi SFO, welcome aboard :)
Dear Sailors, I so wish more women would comment on the MacGregor 26. Many of us would appreciate a more gender-balanced forum; however, this is unfortunately not the case at present.
What I have read on this post: The Mac is not a sailors boat.
So they say. Folks who are after sheer speed and excitement sail over-canvassed multihulls and racing dinghies. Folks who are after trophies and the respect of the "Traditional Yachting Establishment" buy keelboats designed around a rating rule. The Mac26 and its kin aren't aimed at either of these groups- they're aimed at the causal day/weekend sailor who just wants to get out there on nice days without much fuss.
If this means expensive buy in, well I can not justify this. We can afford the hundred thousand dollar boats, but I refuse. That money could go to more important causes, than the "size of my boat." - Just like in aviation... there are planes that serve various missions. My mission is to be out on the water, possibly with two friends and enjoying the view. The alternative, is to remain on shore, for I can not justify the horrendous costs and hate the idea of paying someone to maintain my boat. There's no need for boating to be as expensive as the racing magazines (and the chandleries) would like us to think. Take a pass on the latest gadgets, borrow a few old and proven tricks from the working/fishing fleet, and a decent cruising boat doesn't need to break the bank.
I just want to know the MacGregor is safe and appropriate for 15-20 kt winds in San Francisco Bay, not sailing to Hawaii. I'd say yep, that's what it's meant for. It's a simple, versatile motorsailer for taking the family out on lakes or near shore. Most of the controversy surrounding the Mac comes from two problems: (1) It often attracts the sort of people who can't be bothered to learn good seamanship; (2) As a result, it's often seen in dumb situations- like trying to cross to Hawaii- for which it is not suited. As an entry-level boat for near-shore use in nice conditions, it should serve fairly well.

[Pierre R]

SFO I can assure you that the egos in flying are far greater than they are in most of the sailing circles.

IMHO there is no comparison between airplanes and boats. In planes the more expensive a plane is for the size, the higher the maintenace bills. Because a boat sits in a harsh corrosive environment the higher the cost per lb on a boat the lower is the general maintenance. This is because better quality items last much longer in that enviroment.

There is also a drastic difference between airplanes and boats when it comes to depreciation and lifespan.

The Mac is fine for light use but with the goals you have in mind a pure power boat would be a better fit.

[rwatson]

Dear Sailors, I so wish more women would comment on the MacGregor 26......

Oh yes - women. The side of the equation so brutally ignored.

If you go through the more ..... um, "masculine" posts over the years, you find a lot of reference to using boats for ... um, "romantic pursuits" (to be polite)

The missing factor in that kind of activity is getting the female of the species to actually get on the boat, more than once.

When it boils down to it, a lot of the luxury boats are designed to be inhabited by sweet young things in very little clothing. (Check out any yachting magazine)

So, getting a boat that is not grimy, claustrophobic, with bearable toilet and washing facilities etc etc should be uppermost in all boat designers minds (excepting full racing enthusiasts of course)

For this, Roger Macgregor has provided the perfect low cost solution - bless him.

To have a boat that you can experience the challenge of learning to sail, and enjoy the tranquility and economy of sail - and still get to somewhere in a hurry or to cope with non-co-operative winds, is a brilliant combination.

Great comment SFO - and lets get more civilised criteria uppermost in the minds of boat designers and builders everywhere.

[SFO]

Sailors: Thank you so much for your comments and I look forward to reading more about the MacGregor26. At this time, I am trying to stay away from power boats as I like the idea of "burning" wind power versus fuel. With winds at 15-20 in the Bay it seems like I should learn to manage this skill versus relying on complete engine power. - Trailering the boat to Tahoe has also become an appealing idea.

Thank you further for the comment about people sometimes not being bothered to learn good seamanship. I promise you, this will not happen in my case.

SFO

[Guillermo]

....I promise you, this will not happen in my case.

Well said! A boat is only as good as its crew.

Be very welcome! As Mark, I also would like to find more women around these sometimes 'testosteronic' forums.

Cheers.

[wardd]

does it float?

[welder/fitter]

SFO, others,
I bought a Mac26S(swing keel, water ballast) a few months ago. I needed a boat that I could ship in a container to Asia, not an easy animal to find. As well, I needed a boat that could be beached or easily removed from the water without the expense/availability of a lift. Until I ship it to Asia, in the near future, I am not paying for moorage. My experience has been that this model is faster than the newer versions, when sailing. It is extremely important to take on the correct amount of water ballast. If you can touch the surface of the water with your finger, through the inspection hole, your good. Just remember to put the plug back in, or you'll be mopping up! With the proper amount, the boat feels a bit tender to a certain point of heel - especially for one who is used to larger and/or heavier boats - but stiffens up nicely. Not a bad turn of speed with the basic sail rig, but I'm looking forward to adding a spinaker and a main with reef points. With the standard Mac rudder, one does experience weather helm, but there are alterations one can make and "Idasailor" sells a modified rudder.

I took it out in some stronger winds the other day(30+kts) and thought I'd made a foolish move, but the boat handled well. My wife is returning soon & I expect her to feel the same initial nervousness, as she is used to our old Cal330, but I believe that she'll be comfortable after a couple of hours & I know she'll appreciate the simplicity of the boat systems. San Fransisco has, on average, more challenging sea/wind states than our area. Maybe you can hook up with an owner down there & experience their boat before you make the financial commitment to buy?
Best of luck!
Mike

[rwatson]

I hope you enjoy the boat WF. It should do all you hoped it would.

The 26S must be one of the older designs (2003 was the start of the 26M, and for 7 years before that, the 26X - swing keel, water ballast.)

The latest 26M would be a faster sailer as well as a faster motor boat -
the sailing has been enhanced with taller rig, reduction of the drag from the centerboard trunk, and the rotating mast

In any case, the optimum sailing angle is about 6 degrees - flat like a laser.
That truly is totally different to the majority of keel boats.

Do keep up the story as you go, please

[ancient kayaker]

Just read the thread for the first time. It is what I call a happy thread. People who have a M like it and the best thing that people who do not can say about is "yeah sure, it's OK but it's not for me."

Everyone gets what they want and likes what they have. Nice!

It's great to see folk tolerant of differences like this. There are other threads that are not so happy; they tend to discuss high-testosterone boating activities and I don't want to attract unfriendly fire so I won't be dumb enough to name any. Perhaps the laid-back, relaxed nature of the M rubs off on folk.

I'm not really happy with any boat that's bigger than I am so I'll just tuck it under my arm and and sneak quietly out the back.