A different MacGregor ( hopefully)

Discussion in 'Sailboats' started by aitchem, Nov 28, 2005.

  1. aitchem
    Joined: Sep 2003
    Posts: 73
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Aberdeen UK

    aitchem Junior Member

    Hi all,
    Any info on where this was made/manufacturer.?
    What is their background/track record.
    Looks a bargain.!

    I have googled my fingerprints off.
    Any pointers gratefully recieved.

    http://www.lionsinsight.org/uldb-651.htm


    best regards
    aitchem
     
  2. the_sphincter
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 63
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 8
    Location: behind the grundle

    the_sphincter *

  3. mighetto
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 689
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: -6
    Location: water world

    mighetto New Member

    Alaska Inside Passage

    One of the longest ocean race records still unbroken is held by a MacGregor 65. The record is for the Los Angeles, CA to Puerto Vallarta, Mexico race which is run on alternate years from the Transpac. It was exciting to see BARKING SPIDER 3, a MacGregor 65 run in Division III of the 2005 Transpac, with Cone. She is owned by David Kory of Concord California who hed previously sailed a Catalina 38 from Point Richmond in the Transpac.

    I had no idea Spider did the Alaska Inside Passage. Only soundly constructed vessels mess with ice bergs. What is your beef with MagGregor, sphincter?

    Frank L. Mighetto
     
  4. usa2
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 538
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 11
    Location: Maine

    usa2 Senior Member

    "Only soundly constructed vessels mess with ice bergs."

    Do these stories seem to describe a soundly constructed vessel?

    "I'm embarrassed to admit it buy I've sailed on two Mac65's. I think the one in the picture was one of them.

    The other was a non-pilot house version named "Black Jack". It was a Mac65X (someone had the bright idea of adding an SC70 rig!). It was like driving a pinto with a blown big block V-8 in it. Man it would go, but the frame just wasn't up to the task.

    I trimmed Genoa on the boat. In 10 knots o breeze upwind I could see the chainplates on the LEEWARD side panting up and down. The whole deck wiggled in puffs like a bowl of jello. Absolutely scared the crap out of me.

    Two months later it ripped all of the forward bulheads and stringers out and lost a guy overboard at the start of a Coastal Cup. "


    How about.....




    "Many years ago a local sailmaker was racing a 65 from San Francisco to SoCal. It was windy and he was stearing. The boat starts to feel wierd with some vibration and isn't going as fast as it should - kinda like you hit kelp. So they start talking about dousing the kite and going head to wind to back the boat down and get the kelp off the keel. Meanwhile someone goes down below and is using their flashlight to find whatever. The sailmaker sees the flashlight beam shooting out the side of the hull! WTF They look over the side and discover that the gel coat layer of the hull has pealed off and all that left is the chopper gun layers. Time to turn left and look for a place to park."


    This probably isnt good...." I put rigs in a few of the last boats (w/big houses) and never had to use a wrench to tighten shrouds - if you did, doors wouldnt close. Backstay tension would visibly lift the transom corner up. Even the last boat, built for son-in-law, was soft. "

    (Above quotes taken from the Sailing Anarchy link provided earlier in thread)

    So basically you have a cheaply constructed 65' ULDB that completely sucks upwind, and can fly downwind. Floating trash on the sea surface have the same sailing characteristics.
     
  5. the_sphincter
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 63
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 8
    Location: behind the grundle

    the_sphincter *

    "Only soundly constructed vessels mess with icebergs" Actually, it doesn't matter how soundly constructed the vessel is, it's who makes the decision to take it around icebergs.

    Oh wow, so a Mac 65 holds a record? we never doubted that it was fast (downhill). It's just built like ****. At least it has a proper keel, making it safer than the 26x.
     
  6. barleymalt
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 13
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: US

    barleymalt Junior Member

    The Titanic was a soundly constructed vessel, Frank. No sane person messes with icebergs in any sailboat. The Mac 65 is a poorly built POS and a marginal performer. Any of the same vintage ULDBs (SC-70, NM68, RP68) are much faster. There is a reason why the boat is a "bargain"
     
  7. aitchem
    Joined: Sep 2003
    Posts: 73
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Aberdeen UK

    aitchem Junior Member

    Thought so, junk, like their other product.!
    Scratch that one.
    Thanks all.
     
  8. mighetto
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 689
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: -6
    Location: water world

    mighetto New Member

    MacGregor Yachts established itself as a race boat company with the MacGregor 65. The MacGregor 65 Joss in 1985 established a record that Genuine Risk (a canting keel maxi), Pyewacket (a waterbalasted maxi), Beau Gest (a TP52) and Magnitude 80 are unable to better even today. They all tried last year.

    In 1985 Richard and Camille Daniels' MacGregor 65, Joss, boosted by following breezes of 15 to 25 knots most of the way, raced the 1,125 nautical miles from Marina del Rey to Puerto Vallarta in 4 days 23 hours 0 minutes 4 seconds. Average speed: 9 1/2 knots. This is one of the oldest records in ocean sailing.

    Undoubtedly the reputation of the 65 and the yacht company that built them owing to this record contributes to the high resale value enjoyed by Mac26x vessels. These are Costa Mesa builds, just like Cal 40s.

    Regarding reports from thread above, the 65 carries a 140 hp motor. I suspect she is reinforced for that. I enjoy bustin your chops over this but two years ago my wife and I looked into purchasing Braveheart, a Mac65 out of Gig Harbor. She didn't like her and that was that but the dealer claimed that there had been two Mac65s that had split in half in rough sea. Since that claim has never been shown even remotely true, I suspect there is still pent up shock and awe over the vessel which remains the most successful ULDB in that size. MacGregor has since stretched the model to 70 feet. The yard still has the mould sets and still claims that they will produce more. For my money I think I would go with used SC70. Rogers daughter races one of those. What ever you would like to fool yourself into believing, once you know about the Mac65, it makes you start believing that cost is more an indicator of inefficiency than of quality in a boat.

    Frank L. Mighetto

    Did you know it is almost impossible to get insurance on a 30 year old wooden sailer. I suspect a 30 year old glass racer will be looking at that same insurance problem in the near future. Factor that into any purchase decision.
     
  9. RHough
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 1,792
    Likes: 61, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 793
    Location: BC Summers / Nayarit Winters

    RHough Retro Dude

    It's also one of the slowest records. In 15-25 knots aft of the beam a VO70 would do that in 45 - 75 hours.

    The only reason that a 9.5 knot record stands is that the conditions for the 1985 race have not been duplicated.

    Big Macs were IOR Maxi's, look at their race record against other IOR 60ft rated boats. No Whitbread winning Big Macs that I know of.

    I don't have a bone to pick with either the Mac 65 or the 26. I have a lot of respect for the 26. Their owners *use* the boats, that's a good thing. They are what they are; multi-purpose, trailerable, little boats. They are not great motorboats nor great sailing boats. If the 26 suits you, then it's a great boat for you.

    Calling the 26 unsafe by design is as stupid as calling the Corvair unsafe at any speed.

    Calling the 26 a state of the art racer is as stupid as calling a Corvair a F1 car.
     
  10. marshmat
    Joined: Apr 2005
    Posts: 4,127
    Likes: 148, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 2043
    Location: Ontario

    marshmat Senior Member

    Well said, RHough, about the 26 series. Those who know what their yacht is meant for, enjoy very much doing what their yacht does best.
     
  11. mighetto
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 689
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: -6
    Location: water world

    mighetto New Member

    Well Spoken!

    It's also one of the slowest records. In 15-25 knots aft of the beam a VO70 would do that in 45 - 75 hours.

    The VO70s are indeed the standard for the next decade. But of course they will be improved. There is another point to make and that involves what is normal conditions on the ocean. Analysis of popular areas reveals that 98% of the time winds are between 4 and 21 knots (4.6 and 24.15 MPH). 93% of the time they are between between 4 and 16 knots (4.6 and 18.4 MPH). With modern weather reporting and a fast rig with retractable foils, you can no longer expect a vessel to get caught in 70 knot winds in her life time. Hence the design can be about going around bad conditions, like aircraft do, rather than crashing through and getting to all weather harbors which often have shallow entrances thereby requiring a draft of no more that 6.5 feet.

    The only reason that a 9.5 knot record stands is that the conditions for the 1985 race have not been duplicated.

    The record is ripe for being broken. It was a real eye opener that it was not broken last year.

    Big Macs were IOR Maxi's, look at their race record against other IOR 60ft rated boats. No Whitbread winning Big Macs that I know of.

    And they do not have movable ballast. You have to wonder if Roger wasn’t thinking that way and using the Mac26x to gain knowledge on ballast tanks for the Big Macs. Almost all the VO60s had water ballast. Today its canters but there is nothing preventing a design using both and indeed this is done. The big drawback to the Mac65 is the fixed fin.

    I don't have a bone to pick with either the Mac 65 or the 26. I have a lot of respect for the 26. Their owners *use* the boats, that's a good thing. They are what they are; multi-purpose, trailerable, little boats. They are not great motorboats nor great sailing boats. If the 26 suits you, then it's a great boat for you.

    Just a little respect? A whole lot of respect is owed. Just look at how their owners are making fools of Sailing Anarchists who refuse to say uncle. This Zeno fellow is hot. See http://www.sailboatowners.com/forums/pviewall.tpl?&fno=86&uid=F&sku=2005331223508.10. This single boat design has toppled the TP52s, who were to have had 26 foot baby versions supporting them.

    The 26x is the most significant design in several decades. It makes sense that it would be. Costa Mesa has always produced great designs and builds. That base of knowledge makes it predictable that ocean going sailboat racers of this size would come from there.

    Calling the 26 unsafe by design is as stupid as calling the Corvair unsafe at any speed.

    If by that you mean it is a mater of driver training I suppose I agree. The US Sailing keel boat trained can never be expected to sail the 26x well. For them, the boat will always be crap because it take a lot of effort to unlearn.That probably also goes for the 65.

    Calling the 26 a state of the art racer is as stupid as calling a Corvair a F1 car.

    Well I have never so stated. However, any sailing vessel clocked at 17 MPH (under sail) is worth at least consideration as a race trainer.

    Frank L. Mighetto
     
  12. RHough
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 1,792
    Likes: 61, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 793
    Location: BC Summers / Nayarit Winters

    RHough Retro Dude

    I have to disagree. A race trainer must be very stable and forgiving. 18 foot skiffs hit 20-30 knots under sail and would be terrible race trainers. A race trainer must teach the skipper and crew about racing. It must forgive errors in judgement and timing.

    The Light Schooner I'm building has averaged 16 knots for a 3 hour period, there is no way that it would make a good trainer.

    Boat for boat the Mac 26 is not a fast 26. It's not a bad 26, but it just doesn't have the power to carry much sail.

    One has only to look at the rig.

    If I assume that the Mac26 is properly designed and rigged, the size of the rigging and mast section tells me that the boat cannot generate high rig loads. High rig loads are directly related to sail carrying power. Sail carrying power to displacement is a good measure of performance.

    There are two possible conclusions.

    1. The Mac26 is a high performance sailboat that is under rigged to the point of being unsafe.

    or

    2. The Mac26 is a moderate performance boat that has a well designed rig that is correct and proper for it's intended use.

    Which is more likely?

    As I'm sure you understand the Mac26 has removable ballast for trailering. This is not anywhere near the same as movable ballast for trim and boat speed.

    Don't even try to argue that, you would be arguing with the boat's designer:
    "IF THE BALLAST TANK IS NOT COMPLETELY FULL, THE BOAT CAN CAPSIZE.

    Unless the water ballast tank is completely full, with 1400 pounds of water ballast, the sailboat is not self-righting. Without the water ballast, the boat may not return to an upright position if the boat is tipped more than 50 degrees, and will capsize like most non-ballasted sailboats."

    "NEVER POWER THE BOAT OVER 6 MILES PER HOUR WITH THE SAILS UP. The forward speed of the boat can create enough wind to capsize the boat if the sails are up. The result could be instant capsize."

    If you doubt my opinion is a rigger about the mast:
    DON'T PULL THE BOAT OVER ON ITS SIDE USING THE MAIN HALYARD. If you have to tip the boat for maintenance or for any other reason, use the jib halyard. Using the main halyard will break the mast.

    I'm not making this up, it's from the MacGregor site.
     
  13. jam007
    Joined: Sep 2005
    Posts: 89
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 12
    Location: Sweden

    jam007 Junior Member

    What a lovley boat the Mac26x is ;)
    RHoug, you forgot these comforting words:
    - NO ONE ON THE CABIN TOP OR FORDECK.
    - WAVES LESS THAN 1 FOOT.
    -OPERATE WHERE WATER IS WARM AND
    RESCUE IS LIKELY.

    Anders M
     
  14. marshmat
    Joined: Apr 2005
    Posts: 4,127
    Likes: 148, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 2043
    Location: Ontario

    marshmat Senior Member

    Pretty clear, I think, that MacGregor intends the boat to have its ballast tank full when the boat is in the water, period. Drain the tank only when you put it on the trailer. Following builder's directives never hurt anyone.
     

  15. barleymalt
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 13
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: US

    barleymalt Junior Member

    Frank

    Not to piss in your wheaties, but 9.5 knots average off the breeze is not very impressive for a ULDB in those conditions. Given those conditions, any of the boats you mention would have been much faster. And the most successfull ULDB for that size is without question the Santa Cruz 70, not the Mac 65. There were 19 of them made. I sail on one regularly, and against nine others. Have you ever set foot on one? A used SC70, if you can find one one of the 19 originally built for sale, will cost you approximately 350K. Cost is an indicator of the relative value, construction materials and technique, and condition of a boat and its equipment, not of any inefficiency. The fact that this Mac 65 is for sale for $159K, while a used SC70 of the same vintage would cost more than double that should give you a pretty good indication of the relative value of the two boats. If you really believe the difference is due to the relative inefficiency of Bill Lee's operation, then you are indeed a drooling idiot just screaming for a white nylon wrap around sportcoat and your own personal padded stateroom.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.