Hello...
as you know i am working my ass of with modding my 26x.
i read about some problems people had with masts and so on..
is there any where you have reports and statistics on failures of the hardwaer.
it would be wery intresting to have acces to reports like that when we wanna make the mac stronger..
for the moment im looking into fuelcells and elektro propulsion..
and that is intersting.. the pancake engine from Lmc and briggs&stratton is really nice.. and for 2liters/day of methanol you get 200amps/day
and the engine use around 10amp/h for 4knots... (estimated)
Well.... back to work...
have a nice day...
Incident reports...
-
Catigale
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10421
- Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 5:59 pm
- Sailboat: MacGregor 26X
- Location: Admiral .............Catigale 2002X.......Lots of Harpoon Hobie 16 Skiffs....Island 17
- Contact:
Hmmm...something fishy with that blue hull...
One HP is about 750 Watts IIRC
I know the Mac with a 9.9 HP mercury can just reach hull speed of 7mph, which would be about 7.5 kW of electrical power. 10 Amps to reach 4 mph would be an interesting efficiency curve - unless an amp or two is being used to generate a warp field around the white hull....
On edit: I negelected the fact that a gas engine is 50% efficient on a good day, and Im not sure if the advertised HP ratings are input ratings, shaft or brake horsepower.
Throwing a factor of 2 into the equation in favour of a 100% efficient electric motor doesnt change the fishiness though. 10 Amps at 12 Volts is 120 Watts or 0.12 kW by comparison.
One HP is about 750 Watts IIRC
I know the Mac with a 9.9 HP mercury can just reach hull speed of 7mph, which would be about 7.5 kW of electrical power. 10 Amps to reach 4 mph would be an interesting efficiency curve - unless an amp or two is being used to generate a warp field around the white hull....
On edit: I negelected the fact that a gas engine is 50% efficient on a good day, and Im not sure if the advertised HP ratings are input ratings, shaft or brake horsepower.
Throwing a factor of 2 into the equation in favour of a 100% efficient electric motor doesnt change the fishiness though. 10 Amps at 12 Volts is 120 Watts or 0.12 kW by comparison.
-
Frank C
I listed elsewhere the 7 mast failures I've seen described here by Mac owners. They were not necessarily "failures" of the factory rig, more likely abuses of the factory rig. For example:
* One mast lost by catching a shroud on a passing buoy ... problem self-evident.
* Masts damaged & bent because of free-falls during mast-raising ... same assessment.
* Four (4) masts lost on moorings. These were likely due to shock-loading caused by rigs that were too loose. Note that aft-swept spreaders "push forward" at the mast's mid-point, right at the spot the mast is weakened by bolt holes mounting the spreader mounts and steaming light. Combine that with the constant stress of a boat that's pitching, rolling and repeatedly snubbed at a mooring ball ... problem self-evident.
Just my opinion, stronger rigging isn't any answer here. If any "hardware" solution is available, it would be a stronger mast (possibly a mast sleeve at that mid-point). Absent a cost-effective approach to sleeving the mast ... it otherwise obviously means a heavier mast ... not so appropriate for this light-weight trailerable boat.
YMMV ... cheers!
* One mast lost by catching a shroud on a passing buoy ... problem self-evident.
* Masts damaged & bent because of free-falls during mast-raising ... same assessment.
* Four (4) masts lost on moorings. These were likely due to shock-loading caused by rigs that were too loose. Note that aft-swept spreaders "push forward" at the mast's mid-point, right at the spot the mast is weakened by bolt holes mounting the spreader mounts and steaming light. Combine that with the constant stress of a boat that's pitching, rolling and repeatedly snubbed at a mooring ball ... problem self-evident.
Just my opinion, stronger rigging isn't any answer here. If any "hardware" solution is available, it would be a stronger mast (possibly a mast sleeve at that mid-point). Absent a cost-effective approach to sleeving the mast ... it otherwise obviously means a heavier mast ... not so appropriate for this light-weight trailerable boat.
YMMV ... cheers!
