Getting the 26x off the trailer ( on land.)

[Brian Russell]

I'm going to be adding a second axle to my trailer (1997) and need some advice. I think it will be easier to do the work if the boat isn't on the trailer. Any suggestions on how to safely slide the trailer out from beneath her. then back again? I'm 100 miles from the nearest lake , so that's not an option.

Also, where can I get the original style axle. Champion's is close, but not quite the same drop.

Thanks kindly,

[Robert]

Brian,
The Mac26X axle is an unusual beast. I made some measurements when I was swaping drum brakes for disc brakes. IMHO the Mac26X axle is a 5000# cross member with 3500# spindles welded on.
..
Check the parts prices, IIRC the axles themselves are not all that much, just in the $150 to $250 range. I recommend finding a pair of new axles already set up as a dual axle system and weld them to large (2" x 4" X 1/4") angle irons correctly spaced (weld a cross member between the angle irons that will clear the trailer frame and the axles and the hull) to allow the Mac26X trailer frame to sit snugly between them. With your Mac26X on the trailer cut off the old axle mounts and smooth the surfaces then place the new axle assembly under and lower the weight of your Mac26X back down onto the new axle assembly. Adjust the new axle assembly for and aft until you achieve the desired tongue weight with your Mac26X loaded the way you will trailer it. Then measure for fenders and the details of bolting the new axle assembly to the trailer frame.
..
This method will allow you to get all the axle stuff right separately and then optimize the axle position under the actual load.
..
Do the anticorrosion steps in the area of the new axle mount at this time. And schedule the next trip to the lake to include a few hours to corrosion proof the rest of the trailer frame with the boat off. The only part that would be a lot easier without the trailer that may have to be done at home is brake line replacement.

[Robert]

I think the Mac26X was planned for a 5000# single axle originally, but then it was calculated that 3500# was just enough, so the 3500# spindles were used because if 5000# spindles were used the trailer could not get the 3500# rating. And that 3500# trailer rating means a lot to MacGregor who wants his boat designed for everyone to buy, and not limit his customers to those who have a 5000# tow rating.
..
I like just one axle better for simplicity and lower cost of maintenance and probably better mpg towing. I occationally push the trailer around the driveway by hand, especialy to put the tongue out of the way of my kids little bikes and then bring it back where I can hitch it up, a second axle would make pushing especially turning by hand more difficult.

[Chip Hindes]

IMHO the Mac26X axle is a 5000# cross member with 3500# spindles welded on.

The 3500 lb Champion axle is the same section and thickness as the original Mac axle, and BTW the difference in drop between the two is insignificant in the overall scheme of things.

the 3500# spindles were used because if 5000# spindles were used the trailer could not get the 3500# rating.

Uprating the trailer to 5000 lbs would have required a whale of a lot more than simply upgrading the spindles. Bigger wheels, tires, springs, brakes, probably beefier sections on the rails and bunks. It would have added significantly to the cost. Even if all these had been done, nothing would have forced Roger Mac to state the trailer was rated at 5000 lbs. The stated capacity is determined by the manufacturer, not by the ratings of the individual components used to make it.

[Frank C]

Agreeing w/ Robert's premise, I like the conceptual simplicity of a single axle. I also understand some prefer dual axles for the redundancy of four tires on the ground, which is fine too. But with two adequately rated tires on the ground, it's not a hot-button for me. (I must have 3,000 miles on my under-rated factory tires w/o problems, but they run too hot for my comfort.) Chip and I would rarely agree on this topic, but in this case, he's already made most of my points. (Emphasis & parens added).

Uprating the trailer to 5000 lbs would have required a whale of a lot more than simply upgrading the spindles. Bigger wheels, tires, springs, brakes, probably beefier sections on the rails and bunks. It would have added significantly(??) to the cost.

Even if all these had been done, nothing would have forced Roger Mac to state the trailer was rated at 5000 lbs.(!!) The stated capacity is determined by the manufacturer, not by the ratings of the individual components used to make it.

At the factory, the added cost of larger spindles, wheels and tires would be insignificant ($20 per side, max), and would solve the most critical deficiency by providing tire capacity approaching 5,000#. This would be much safer for the owner/user, and more prudent from the aspect of "manufacturer liablility."

And assuming the factory's quoted capacity remained at 3500#, then brakes, rails and bunks would carry no more weight than they already carry, and would not require upgrading in any way. I'm assuming, from regulatory perspective, that the factory could use the current smaller brake units within the larger wheels ... if not, then larger brake units would be $10 per side. Unfortunately, 100 bucks here, 100 bucks there, pretty soon yer talkin' pocket change!

[Chip Hindes]

This would be much safer for the owner/user, and more
prudent from the aspect of "manufacturer liablility.

Ah, the dreaded "factory liability" bugaboo.

This is a straw man. If anyone knows of even one concrete example of
somewhere around 5000 boats of somebody who has gone after the factory for the undersized trailer components, I'll grant you the point. Anyone...anyone...?

My point is (and must be) the trailer is adequately sized and equipped for
the Mac as it leaves the factory. Barely so, but adequate, none the less. There is no margin for Roger in making it "more adequate" than it already is, and he ain't gonna do it.

Further, it's probably a good assumption that the wheels, tires and spindles are the weakest factor in the trailer equation, but it's irrelevant. Sizing them as he did, Roger couldn't have made it more obvious that when he said the trailer was rated for 3500 lbs, he wasn't kidding. If he had given us 5000 lb axles, or wheels or tires, or all of the above, some of us would immediately have assumed we were free to load them up to that weight, when it so happens the rest of the trailer isn't up to it. As it is, of the 5000 owners out there, I'll bet 4000 of them have never done anything to beef up their wheels and tires, and they're quite happy with them as they are.

Heck, some of us put 140HP motors on Roger's 50HP transom, don't we? Does Roger know it's being done? Believe it! Is he going to spend a few more bucks to beef up the transom so it's better able to take it? Don't hold your breath.

Regarding the matter of "pocket change", if Roger had a dollar for every time on this board somebody said "if only Roger had been willing to spend a few more $$ on (fill in your favorite substandard component here)"... If the list isn't almost as long as the number of owners, it's probably longer than the number of those who frequent this board. Spindles, wheels, tires, disc brakes, galvanized trailer, turnbuckles, split backstay, blocks, water containers, galley pump, 12V wiring, Teleflex steering, higher quality sails, larger diameter standing rigging, yadda, yadda, yadda. It's diffucult to name even a single component that somebody on this board hasn't mentioned in this context.

[Frank C]

Ah, the dreaded "factory liability" bugaboo. This is a straw man. If anyone knows of even one concrete example of somewhere around 5,000 boats of somebody who has gone after the factory for the undersized trailer components, I'll grant you the point. Anyone...anyone...?

I can't understand what you're thinkin'. It's certainly not necessary to cite a concrete lawsuit in order to comtemplate the potential legal risk. It seems to me it would be a no-brainer for a legal shark to claim product liablility for an inadequate trailer. Add the largest 50 hp motor, add the 24 gallons of fuel that obviously fit in the fuel lockers. Now add a reasonable pile (need not be excessive) of food, drink and week-ending gear into the boat. There's very little doubt that an average Macgregor owner could inadvertently exceed the factory's 3500 net axle weight. Macgregor provides a boat & trailer combo that's subject to inadvertent overload.

Now combine those circumstances, an average RV-er's weekend load, with a failed tire and a tumbling boat/trailer .... if somebody gets hurt, the factory is certainly at risk for a product liability claim. The judgement will rest with the system, but it's no great stretch to imagine an owner could prevail.

But, the tire capacity is the parameter that's been demonstrated most likely to fail, and that's a parameter the factory most certainly had an opportunity to cure (has cured, in fact). Just because nobody's been seriously injured enough to make the claim ... I'm amazed that it took Roger so long to cure that risk. Cure the tire risk, and the risk of other trailer problems is much, much lower - at least from the reports I've seen.

Whatever ... I feel no need to pursue it. I'm comfortable that my risks are covered, I'd encourage others to study theirs.

[Brian Russell]

All this talk about liability! I prefer to look after things myself, evaluate a situation and make a decision. MacGregor is a fine engineer. He seems to know the limits of materials and how to build so that things are adequate, and don't break under normal usage. When I buy a piece of equipment I evaluate its strengths and weaknesses . Then I change what I don't find adequate , or , in the case of the single axle trailer, comfortable. We all have our levels of comfort with certain situations: some like to sail heeled at 25 degrees, others find that at 15 the fun begins to turn to panic. Some sailors don't carry spare spark plugs. Some people may not be bothered about having a flat on a busy two lane road with no shoulder, but I prefer the option of at least limping on down the road a bit. I suppose that it's a matter of age and paranoia. Experience has shown me that when you try to anticipate problems , even if those particular problems never occur, you will still be better prepared for any eventuality. As they say, it's always something! javascript:emoticon('')

So, any advice on removing the boat from the trailer?

[Chip Hindes]

It's certainly not necessary to cite a concrete lawsuit in order to comtemplate the potential legal risk. It seems to me it would be a no-brainer for a legal shark to claim product liablility for an inadequate trailer.

Of course it's necessary. Contemplating potential legal risK? Contemplate all you want. You can't understand what I'm thinkin'? You're proving my point for me. What I'm thinkin' is: If it's such a no brainer, then somebody would have already done it. Anybody...anybody...?

Still waiting.

[Robert]

Brian, I recall a few posts long ago about getting the boat off the trailer on land. Unfortunately all of them are a PITA. The one I recall most was to get on level ground then lower the tongue jack all the way, even put a thin board under the wheel-less jack leg to get it lower. Then put some blocks under the rear of the hull where they will spread out support enough to not damage the hull. Next raise the tongue jack all the way up, this time put the blocks under the forward part of the hull. Lower the tongue jack again to remove the weight of the Mac26X from the trailer. Now the tricky part is to place the blocks such that you can move the trailer the maximum amount under the hull before stopping to move the blocks again using a separate jack this time. Repeat a few times and the trailer will be out and the Mac26X will be up on blocks. To get the trailer back under, reverse the process. Use good quality blocking materials and place enough blocks to hold it still even in wind.
..
I hope that helps. I think it is a lot of work.
..
If you are in a hurry, call your local crane lifting company and purchase a set of proper boat jacks like sailboats in the boatyards use. Call a marina with lifting ability and ask them for the proper tackle to safely suspend a Mac26X. Your boat will be lifted onto the blocks in just a few minutes but this will probaby cost a couple hundred dollars.

[Nauti & Nice]

1. Get your trailer tongue as close to the ground as you can.

2. Next block up the aft of the boat, I used 4 tires with air in them
and a coulpe of 2 by 8's.

3. I used a beam in my boat house to connect two tuggets and strap.
I've also used a large maple tree before I built my boathouse.
or you could get a wrecker to lift bow. It's not really heavy
when you consider the front of a car or truck.

4. Make sure you wedge the aft blocking, pull trailer and block
bow and also wedge.

5. Works like a charm....George

[Brian Russell]

As if to confirm my desire for a second set of wheels I drove by a nice looking 20-something foot sailboat ( not a Mac-it had about 2 or 3 feet of fixed keel) on a single axle trailer parked badly on the shoulder of I-40 in Memphis today. It had it's right hub resting on the ground, couldn't make out what had happened. There was no tow vehicle in sight. I felt badly for the fella, as his day was not what he was expecting.

I'm ordering a double axle kit from Champion. It will completely replace the old axle with a matched pair, galvanized axles and angle iron spring hanger assemblies that attach to the trailer's channel iron frame with 4 u-bolts. They will make it all up to the specs of the trailer frame width and track width. I'll replace the brakes with a front set of galvanized free backing drum brakes and top it off with a brake wash down kit. I'll take some pix as i do the work . And I shouldn't have to remove the boat from the trailer! It does sound like a pita. Thanks for the good advice - there may arise a time when it is necessary.Knowledge is power.

[Phil Marriott]

I found out the hard way on this one. Apparently salt water is corrosive. Or so I'm told. And trailers that enter salt water invariably get water in their wheel bearings. The trailer usually sits in the yard for 6 to 9 months out of 12, and while the trailer sleeps, the rust doesn't. Take it out next season and forget to repack the bearings (or at least check them) and after a few kilometres (or fewer miles) down the road, the bearing race disintegrates, the trailer lurches and your trailer wheel overtakes your vehicle as you slow down to investigate.

It's really embarrassing.