Here are Macgregor's
comparison of the 26X and 26M and their list of
changes to the 26M for 2005.
Although MacGregor claims the 26M to be "amazingly" faster than the 26X under power and sail, the published maximum speed for under power is down from 24 to 22 mph. While some of the changes should indicate increased speed, the deadrise of the 26M has increased from the 8 degrees of the X to 15 degrees. All other things being equal, greater deadrise (deeper V) will cut through the waves better in a head sea, but will roll more in a beam sea and at anchor, has less lift and takes more power to plane, and requires more power to maintain a given speed. There are powerboat companies that offer the same boat with different degrees of deadrise for these reasons. The bottom line is that speeds may actually be essentially a wash.
You have to read MacGregor's material with a very cynical eye. Roger's forte is marketing, and whatever he's selling that day is the best. For example, in the X days, he forewarned us about the M,
"The MacGregor 26 has a permanent backstay. We consider this to be an absolute essential for keeping the forestay tight (for proper sail shape) and for keeping the mast from collapsing forward when sailing downwind.
Other builders' omission of this critical support is something of a triumph of hope over reality."
and
"Avoid interiors that have fabric bonded to the walls and ceilings. They are hard to dry, and mildew badly."
The Ms that are mostly on the used market now are the late-2003 and 2004 Ms. While some like the layout, it didn't take MacGregor long to realize, that in general, it was a mistake. There was no longer a dedicated dinette, and to get in front of the galley, you had to stand with the left leg on the cockpit sole, and the right leg bent with the knee on the seat. The table had to be folded down, not only to reach the galley, but for many occupants, especially those in the cockpit, to reach the head, which had been moved forward. There was also no storage for an ice chest, simply a cut-out in the foam, where you could trade-off berth space for a cooler location. It didn't take them long to redesign the 2005 models.
The '05 brought back the side dinette, however the end of the forward seat is totally blocked by the daggerboard trunk, so the table is slightly narrower to allow occupants to squeeze in the forward seat. The aft dinette seat now houses an optional cooler, but it is narrower than the X's, IMHO, only being adequate for two small children or one adult, i.e. a 3 seat dinette in the M (vs the 5 Roger claims) vs a 4 seat in the X. That's okay. Even in the X days, he claimed the dinette made into a double bed (which is 54" wide) when it's just twin size (39" wide).
The galley is back on the port side now, with a novel sliding feature that lets you put it back in the aft berth. That was required because on the forward port seating, the forward occupant is now looking directly into the head, and the aft occupant is looking directly at the centerboard trunk, instead of at the occupants at the dinette. The aft occupant also has very little footroom between the seat and centerboard trunk.
The worst problem, IMHO, is that the head is aft of the starboard side of the V-berth, where on the X, the dinette seat back can be removed to extend the sleeping area for a taller occupant there. With some creativity, the port side of the V-berth could be extended, but the sleeper there would be looking directly into the head, and the sleeper on the starboard side would have to crawl over them to go to the head at night.
The head being forward in the M breaks up the view, and it doesn't have the open, spacious feeling of the X. They try to address that with a mirror, but that isn't a substitute. The tan interior, along with the dark, thin, flimsy feeling wood bulkheads and door for the head make the interior more dark and closed in, at least to us. The forward head bulkhead doesn't even go all the way down to the cockpit sole.
The Potti now sits on a fiberglas shelf in the '05, making use of a taller, higher capacity Porta-Potti impractical. That's a step backwards from the '03-'04 M, even though the '05 head is a little larger.
While the cockpit is the same length, the M loses footroom to the tall step forward. Some of that is recovered by putting the steering on a pole rather than a pedestal. Nevertheless, the M cockpit feels more cramped to me despite the helm being back over the outboard. I'd miss the X's back porch, where I can stand while raising or lowering the helm seat.
Boarding next to the outboard on the X is already tight, and is so tight on the M, it wouldn't be possible for us. So the point of having a swim ladder there would be lost.
We REALLY wanted to buy a new X, but that wasn't possible. When considering a used late-model X versus a new '05 M, the X would've won hands down, even had they been the same price and there was no $8,000-$9,000 savings.
That's our perspective... I'm sure others are different. Until they produce a swing keel boat with the X layout again, we won't be buying a new Mac.
--
Moe
