MacGregorSailors.com

roril wrote:

ferd johns wrote:....I think it was a S and the Keel was not locked or tanks not filled. Please correct me if I am wrong.

From the pictures it was a D...

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/O ... 86924.html

http://www.macgregor26x.com/forum/viewt ... ccc8e9d8e7

...but it could of been about any model or make and ended up the same way considering how it was being used. A sad deal,

Sum

Our Endeavour 37

Our Trips to Utah, Idaho, Canada, Florida

Our MacGregor S Pages

Mac-Venture Links

Mike,
This sounds awesome, and I'm guessing, but it sounds to me like the 70 might be a scaled-up version of the D - just shy of three times as long - which would mean a VERY wide beam (nearly 24 feet!) compared to other boats that size...but also, it might ride so high on the water, and yet stay so vertical during beam reaches due to the huge area, that it will perform like a cat, with the safety of a monohull! The comparison to the existing D boat would be to gather true "scale-up" expectations!

In any event, she is more like the 26D (semi-planning) underwater than the 26M (planning).

Okay, enough speculating - please explain the above statement - are you saying that the D (and consequently the S) are actually "semi-planing" hulls, and not true displacement hulls? Does this mean that there is a chance of exceeding hull speed in the D/S models? Thanks!

PS I think Mike just likes us, and that's why he asked one of us for a D boat to use...no reason to do all the title transfers, registration with the state, etc. just to test a boat!

vizwhiz wrote:....This sounds awesome, and I'm guessing, but it sounds to me like the 70 might be a scaled-up version of the D .....

Here is the "old".....



.... 70 and some more info ...

http://www.macgregor26.com/macgregor70/home/home.html

Pretty impressive boat, but it sounds like the "new" 70 will be even more impressive,

Sum

Our Endeavour 37

Our Trips to Utah, Idaho, Canada, Florida

Our MacGregor S Pages

Mac-Venture Links

Ferd...my guess is you are correct. The concept of using an old boat for design work in this day and age is quaint.

To all...Let's leave the legal speculation off ths Board though, please.

roril wrote:

ferd johns wrote:Wasn't the boat that capsized in San Diego w/the loss of 2 lives a 26D? Could capsize tests be part of an ongoing legal situation? I hope our legal system hasn't gone there, but ....

I think it was a S and the Keel was not locked or tanks not filled. Please correct me if I am wrong.

According to this article, it was a 1988 boat, which would make it a 26D. Roger suspects that the ballast was not full, but authorities were investigating.

I like the litigation theory.

~Rich

Pull Area 51 into it and you have a book deal....

...and the grassy knoll...

Catigale wrote:Pull Area 51 into it and you have a book deal....

That looks like the worlds largest spinnaker

I had to look this up to see why the 26D was needed for the testing.

http://www.deere.com/en_US/rg/infocente ... index.html

Semi-displacement / Semi-planing Hulls

Semi-displacement or semi-planing hulls have features of both planing and displacement hulls. They have a maximum hull design speed. Exceeding this speed can result in erratic handling and unstable operation. There is not one hull design characteristic that differentiates semi-displacement from semi-planing hull. The greater the hydrodynamic lift and higher the hull design speed the more likely it will be referred to as a semi-planing hull. Some general characteristics of a semi-planing/displacement hull are:

Has a pronounced chine (angular break where the bottom joins the hull sides) forward
Has versatility of combining speed with sea-worthiness
Offers a degree of useable interior spaces

Before i decided to buy my M, I had considered using a 26 d and modding the cabin as I did to my v22.2 and putting a 20 hp outboard and twin rudders on the back. I decided that the M would still have more space and better looks then the result, however, I would have had an inside steering station in the 26d option, plus an unstayed carbon fiber mast short enough to get under the bridges nearest me, and an unusual Sailing rig that I have grown to really love despite its limitations. Perhaps Roger wishes to explore a pilothouse equipped micro motor sailor. If you look at my 22.2 it's easy to see how it could be accomplished. Just think, a nice cozy inside helm when it's nasty out!
Might be a sweet addition to the Mac line.

Ixneigh

Am I reading this topic correctly.. Macgregor Boat builders is going to stop building the smaller trailerable models and concentrate on the 70`.

If thats true, thats bad news for the small yachts and traialerable boat fans.

John McDonough wrote:Am I reading this topic correctly.. Macgregor Boat builders is going to stop building the smaller trailerable models and concentrate on the 70`.

If thats true, thats bad news for the small yachts and traialerable boat fans.

I doubt it, John. The 26' models are their bread and butter... it would be like killing the golden goose.

When visiting the factory, Mike told me that Roger is spending his time/energy on designing the new 70.
Lots of unique ideas in her.
Some parts and molds have been built, as I understand it.
I got the impression that it's going to be Rodgers personal and fastest boat yet, and like the old 60', a limited run.

Meanwhile, nothing is on the horizon to replace the current M.

They just plug along making one M per day, compliments of Kalifornia Tree Huggers.

Meanwhile, nothing is on the horizon to replace the current M.

Au Contraire, mon Capitan...

Thats my white on the horizon in front of you...