Rudders past limits: Snap! Pop!

[Frank C]

With due respect to both preceeding comments, if you want a blue water boat, pay for it.

Isn't it a bit unreasonable to try to compare Corsair, at $100,000 to $250,000, with this entry-level powersailer? PLEASE, let's be reasonable here. If the TOTAL LACK of rudder failures (my contention remains unchallenged) is simply due to nobody else ever sailing in 40 knots .... DUH!?! Maybe we should bring this to a jury ... anyone think it's reasonable for a bracket designed to endure one load factor to fail when subjected to, as a guess, triple those loads??

The Macgregor is designed as a light-weight trailerable. That's why the glossies show it behind a Taurus. Who ever saw that photo and mused, "HMMM - THAT'S the boat I want to round the HORN, by gollie!" This boat is not designed to sail in a full blow. It belongs be on the trailer before the SCA is announced, or the Skipper should expect to adjust his tactics to minimize the loads, or drop sails and motor for shelter. To do otherwise is patently ridiculous.

[Lease]

40 knots - Bloody hull, that's drinking weather mate!

Any boat will be tested in those conditions. It's amazing that you haven't seem a lot of other failures if you've been sailing in those conditions often.

Opinions will vary as to what makes a heavy weather boat (most will opt for displacement), but I would not be looking to the Corsair as the panacea.

Multihulls, in this case tris, don't dissipate the wind's energy by rolling and spilling air in the way that monos do. When you are on a multi, and a big gust hits, all of that energy is taken up into the rig. You feel it, and you sense it, and you HEAR it. They convert that energy to foward motion very quickly, and if there is too much, they start lifting hulls.

You haven't lived till you're on a forty footer with two hulls out of the water, flying along at 25+ and you're sitting on the windward hull fifteen feet above the water.

In 40 knots of breeze, a Corsair 31 needs a very high level of skill to keep from getting into serious trouble. Better to go for the 10 ton ketch with lots of sail options, 4 inch planking, and lots of pig iron in a full keel. Much safer!

[Frank C]

Yeah, I was thinking that too about the Corsair. It's no solution for sailing in 40 knots, probably a much bigger liability in those winds than a Mac.

[delevi]

From what I read, the Corsair can sail with full main & jib up to 35 knots. Only then do you start to reef... RF boom by the way so reefing options are virtually unlimited. A tri doesn't roll in big waves, but rather goes right over them like a raft. They also don't round up and broach (provided the skipper doesn't mess up.) I would probably reef long before 2 hulls were out of the water. To quote/praphrase Corsair: "The average heel is typically less than 10 degrees and rarelly reaches a maximum of 15." Top speeds clocked around 25 knots. The boat tends to sail around wind speed. They claim they are safer than any monohull of similar size. Of course, I never sailed a Tri and have been on a few cats as a passanger (not impressed. Too much like a barge.) Roger also claims the Mac can sail at 18 mph By the way, a nice 5-year old Corsair 31 Ultimate cruiser can be had for around $100k. I talked to a broker in the Bay Area who would take me on a test sail. I'll arrange for that after Memorial Day.

Leon

[They Theirs]

Corsair manual posts this photo and instructions on how to turn it back over…………They accelerate fast…and stop even faster when the ama sticks a wave.

THIS SIDE UP?

[baldbaby2000]

Regardless of whether the bracket bent or not I'm guessing the rudder would have failed. We may not really be talking about a problem with the rudder as much as the severe weather helm that these boats can get putting stress on the rudder. It's possible that the added keel weight stressed things too but on the other hand keeping a boat upright helps reduce weather helm so I'm not sure. It seems like Leon's found the limitation of a 26M with big rudders. Probably not much one can do about it but accept the limitation and not use oversized rudders in heavy winds and big seas.

[LOUIS B HOLUB]

Sailing in 40 knot winds... That's too much for me to call it fun in a Mac. Gimmie' those 20 knot or less winds--thats where I notice that the Admiral is happier too.

Just an 'ole fair weather sailor

[kevperro]

With due respect to both preceeding comments, if you want a blue water boat, pay for it.

... any second hand boat site shows you can get a lot of boat for what I paid for my Mac. Unfortunately none of these fit the draft restrictions I have. Otherwise be sure I'd gotten one.
... the twin rudder design imposed by the heavy engine on centerline that messes the steering system's design. In my view it's the motoring compromise that makes it a less than fun boat in the nicer winds.

You bought the wrong boat. Sell that X and get yourself a 26C. You drop the big motor, keep the shallow draft and replace the steering with a traditional tiller/rudder arrangement and you will put about $6K large in your pocket in the process.

[kevperro]

With due respect to both preceeding comments, if you want a blue water boat, pay for it.

Isn't it a bit unreasonable to try to compare Corsair, at $100,000 to $250,000, with this entry-level powersailer? PLEASE, let's be reasonable here. If the TOTAL LACK of rudder failures (my contention remains unchallenged) is simply due to nobody else ever sailing in 40 knots .... DUH!?! Maybe we should bring this to a jury ... anyone think it's reasonable for a bracket designed to endure one load factor to fail when subjected to, as a guess, triple those loads??

The Macgregor is designed as a light-weight trailerable. That's why the glossies show it behind a Taurus. Who ever saw that photo and mused, "HMMM - THAT'S the boat I want to round the HORN, by gollie!" This boat is not designed to sail in a full blow. It belongs be on the trailer before the SCA is announced, or the Skipper should expect to adjust his tactics to minimize the loads, or drop sails and motor for shelter. To do otherwise is patently ridiculous.

I couldn't agree more. The 26X & 26M are not designed as performance sailboats nor designed for regular 30-40 knot sailing. Put a large aftermarket rudder on there and you have much higher than 2-3 times the load. I bet the rudder loads are 10x what you see at 10-15 knot type of sailing with a standard rudder.

If that where my everyday sailing environment I'd look for a standard keel boat. A J-35 would be a fun boat to have for spirited sailing and used ones are fairly reasonable.

[Frank C]

AJ from Melbourne in the "Broaching" thread mentions:

Agree that the rudders don't like it - on to my 3rd repair at the moment.

So it seems the rudders and/or steering system are a weak point.

Add that to Leon's, you've STILL got less than a handful of rudder failures, at least one of which is clearly owner-induced. My point is that RUDDER FAILURE is not a demonstrated weakness, and never has been. There are more dismastings reported here than rudder failures.

Read above. I granted that the Cable Steering System was a weak point, mainly in the earlier years. It's not appropriate to ball them up together as Steering/Rudder failures. Steering failures in boats produced during the recent 10 years are a maintenance failure. The very few rudder failures do not illustrate a design weakness.

Leon's correct that Roger's rudders aren't large enough to control the boat in heavy air. Again I'd observe ... DUH~! The boat rounds up, safely. After a handful of those warnings, the prudent recreational boater (read as "Roger's Target Audience") will light up the motor and head for the marina.

If you're not pleased with the linkage system, knock yerself out. You might spend lots on aircraft fittings to improve the linkage, but that won't improve the "parallel" available in the basic rudder design. It's a magnitude quicker, easier and cheaper to just lift the windward rudder, with the by-product of assuring a ready spare. Every autopilot on the market already accomodates much greater steering inaccuracies than the factory system suffers ... so there's another alternative that's vastly more cost-effective.

I guess one could completely redesign the rudder hangers, but to what avail? It's still a billboard hull with a 300# motor hanging out back, with a 3rd-rate mainsail on a pencil-thin boom. This isn't to diminish the value in a Mac's versatility; rather, just to assess it realistically. Analogously ... one could completely replace the suspension under a Ford Falcon, but that wouldn't make it into a Jeep, and it still wouldn't get that poor Falcon up the fire trail to Desolation campground.

I suspect real issue here ... might be ... grudging dissatisfaction with the compromises of providing standing headroom and a potty-closet to a non-boating partner ???
Macgregor's powersailer 'is' what it is ... a sow's ear cannot a silk purse make.

Kevin's right ... you bought the wrong boat, and 'ugly' to boot~!
But then, that was eminently clear, right here, well before you bought it, eh?

You bought the wrong boat. Sell that X and get yourself a 26C. You drop the big motor, keep the shallow draft and replace the steering with a traditional tiller/rudder arrangement and you will put about $6K large in your pocket in the process.

[delevi]

TT, Thanks for that photo fo the Corsair upside down. Way to take the air right out of my sails I wonder how likely this is. It is rated for blue water cruising and according to them, the amount of force to capsize this Tri would turtle a mono much earlier. Not sure if that's accurate or marketing hype. If the skipper takes reasonable caution, I wonder how likely one of these would actually capsize in gale conditions in open ocean.

Leon

[Bawgy]

The problem of turtle vision occur when the two hulls are flying and the craft lifts over a wave and then the leeward hull digs in and pivots the boat to face downwind while the sails fill enough to pull the boat all the way over. Yes all that can be avoided with the proper sail technique but it does happen . Especially singlehanded when you cant dump the sheets while holding onto the tillar and the boat and the mainsheet . It all happens very quickly with very little warning.

[beene]

Still think you would have been happier with and S or D.

G

[Frank C]

... But there's the point where I differ: I don't think that a sailing boat that becomes almost unsailable in heavier air because of undersized rudders and pretty much has to rely on the engine as being safe or cleverly designed.
.... Might end up buying a boat for day sailing and using Ugly Duck for camping. Still a lot cheaper solution than 1 shallow drafted fast and comfortable boat anyway.

Maybe it's just not properly described as "a sailing boat."
Maybe the description powersailer is perfectly apt ... sailing when possible, otherwise powering, and amply capable as a camper.

Sorry to be so contentious, and I'm not targeting only you. There have been several new Macgregor owners who p!ss & moan about the Powersailer after having bought it. They either accomodate to it or sell it. But it is wearisome to read constant bellyaching that unfairly compares this eminently capable Waterbago (water-camper), clearly the least expensive boat (per cubic foot) on the planet, to other boats that sold for far more and are far less capable to it's intended purposes.

The resale marketplace judges more costly and capable SAILboats at the same prices as used Macs,
which truly trumpets the market's assessment of Macgregor's design and value.

[kevperro]

Still think you would have been happier with and S or D.

Most likely. I hesitated, and my only gripe so far on the X is the heavier air handling. The rest is pretty much what I expected.
I'm off on a 10 day cruise Friday and intend to measure/test/tune on a daily basis. I've been sail by "feel" up to now, and will start doing numbers soon.
Hopefully I'll get some strong breezes to play and test the boat some more.

Eric

I bought a 26D, mainly because sailing was more important than motoring. The cost savings didn't hurt either. I am sort of envious of that larger cabin though. Our area has less wind than the SF Bay so having a boat that performed in light air was more important than one with heavy air performance.

The 26D isn't what I'd feel comfortable using as a daily heavy weather boat. They are built as low-cost lake or coastal water sailors. If you want a good heavy weather boat, the Mac isn't it. I think the Macs are suitable for occasional heavy weather but that just isn't its design purpose. It is a lightly ballasted boat with low sail area and inexpensive hardware. Nothing wrong with that... I like it for that very reason. It is easy to tow, inexpensive to maintain and when the weather is hairy I stay home.