MacGregorSailors.com

Just spent a heavily loaded week on our boat ,still have the 13 1/2 x 17 prop and I topped out at 19.5 mph but would only turn around 3800 rpms .but hit hull speed at a really low rpm !

Careful Bahama, is there any danger of lugging the motor?
Ultimately, what weight to prop this boat at is what this is about...

As an example, I was told by Evinrude for the the 115, they don't care what's spinning but I need to reach 5500 RPMs when fully loaded; & 6000 at lightest or feather the throttle.

How was the trip? Were you in the Bahamas all this time?

Re: Ray & Vic,

I need insurance for my marina & an umbrella to stay out of the rain & protect my house. Other than that, I don't file. I'm gonna keep it lean & mean insurance-wise, because I've filed one insurance claim in 30+ years [auto] & I wasn't even in the car when they hit it
Eh... Leases

Basically, I'm with Ray on this one. But it's with the contingency of not being a jack___. The same contingency we all live under

I just did a quick test .but yeah I was concerned so I guess I need to test some props .i do also have a 9 pitch ran it once and hated it ! I also burned more fuel this week than I would have liked .maybe 2 gph ,bucked a strong tide and head wind most of the time !

Cumberland island ,ga. That's a place we need to have a get together .off the hook great ,great little marina called tiger point ,had a ramp and no charge for trailer and truck storage .by the way I was under 2k rpms 99% of the time .most of the time 1.5-1.8k rpms

raycarlson wrote:the difinative answer is there is no difinitive answer, because there is no case law that has been decided regarding macs and issues with over powering or catasrophic failues. Firist of what would the coastgaurd tell the judge.they would tell him that a mac 26m is 25 ft 10in long and there fore falls into a class of craft where transom horspower and wieght rating is not required by law therefore coast gaurd has no further opinins. whats the manufacturer going to tell the judge,roger will tell him hes used a wide range of hp in his boats, and none of his transoms have had a failure due to horse power. he'll say in the 26M he first tested with a 50 and reccommended a nissan 50. but in lated years got a better deal on engines from BRP evinrude so he started reccommending 60 hp evinrudes.when the judge asks for any engineering data he'll get a bunch of doodles on napkins that he designed all his boats on,then he'll explain that their are hundreds of 26 x an M outthere with 75, 90 115,135,140, 150 hp motors for years with zero failures due to structure issues, the judge will ask just how fast this mac 26M with a 140hp engine will go and he'll learn that it will go WOT about 32 33mph. This is when the judge will start laughing and dismiss the case for lack of credible cause. If any one on this site has ever seen an actual lawsuit regarding this subject matter it will forsure be plastered all over these pages for weeks. Its difficult to find any documented case anywhere that was settled with paid damages because of over horsepower on a non-transom-plated boat with no USCG requirement for weiight or power. all you will hear is second and third hand eumors from cousins and uncles back east, out west etc etc etc.. nothing factual.My insuruer BoatUS has no problem with my installing a 115hp mercury, as long as i give correct seriall number and retail price,

If I had the money, I'd have that Etec 150 back there already!

Can't wait to hit mid 20's without breaking a sweat

My 75 works pretty hard at those speeds

I am not interested in wot numbers

Just want to go the speed she was advertised at, without wot



G

vkmaynard wrote:Do you really want to live your life under an insurance policy? If your insurance only covers you for 3 squares of toilet paper per wipe in case of a bathroom mishap do you dare to use four

Please, never wipe with a TPS Report

Maybe time to find another reasonable company.

Victor

LOL

I use 3ply insurance rated/certified paper only

G

beene wrote:

vkmaynard wrote:Do you really want to live your life under an insurance policy? If your insurance only covers you for 3 squares of toilet paper per wipe in case of a bathroom mishap do you dare to use four

Please, never wipe with a TPS Report

Maybe time to find another reasonable company.

Victor

LOL

I use 3ply insurance rated/certified paper only

G

I hope it,s septic safe

J

raycarlson wrote:the difinative answer is there is no difinitive answer, because there is no case law that has been decided regarding macs and issues with over powering or catasrophic failues. Firist of what would the coastgaurd tell the judge.they would tell him that a mac 26m is 25 ft 10in long and there fore falls into a class of craft where transom horspower and wieght rating is not required by law therefore coast gaurd has no further opinins. whats the manufacturer going to tell the judge,roger will tell him hes used a wide range of hp in his boats, and none of his transoms have had a failure due to horse power. he'll say in the 26M he first tested with a 50 and reccommended a nissan 50. but in lated years got a better deal on engines from BRP evinrude so he started reccommending 60 hp evinrudes.when the judge asks for any engineering data he'll get a bunch of doodles on napkins that he designed all his boats on,then he'll explain that their are hundreds of 26 x an M outthere with 75, 90 115,135,140, 150 hp motors for years with zero failures due to structure issues, the judge will ask just how fast this mac 26M with a 140hp engine will go and he'll learn that it will go WOT about 32 33mph. This is when the judge will start laughing and dismiss the case for lack of credible cause. If any one on this site has ever seen an actual lawsuit regarding this subject matter it will forsure be plastered all over these pages for weeks. Its difficult to find any documented case anywhere that was settled with paid damages because of over horsepower on a non-transom-plated boat with no USCG requirement for weiight or power. all you will hear is second and third hand eumors from cousins and uncles back east, out west etc etc etc.. nothing factual.My insuruer BoatUS has no problem with my installing a 115hp mercury, as long as i give correct seriall number and retail price,

Missed this. The makers power rating has no specific Federal law or rule - because States (and some provinces In CAN) manage their waterways, and they will most certainly take their guidance from the manufacturers plates or specifications. There is no authority anywhere in the world that simply allows overpowering of anything beyond the maker's, or qualified engineer's ratings or for anyone to just do what they please. They don't need to make specific rules to cover this because it already exists at a fundamental level or law. The only thing that counts in court is facts, times, dates, and hard evidence. Like the fact that your hull is specifically rated by the manufacturer and his/her naval architect or structural engineer. The many times Roger has had to defend his design in court I'm pretty sure he didn't "get a bunch of doodles on napkins that he designed all his boats on" and tell the court "that their are hundreds of 26 x an M outthere with 75, 90 115,135,140, 150 hp motors for years with zero failures due to structure issues" and open himself up to multiple civil and legal lawsuits. He'll bring engineered stamped drawings probably drag the engineer along as well if it was warranted, the owners manual, and the specifications...you didn't get the owners manual or spec's? Well thats your legal responsibility as an owner to acquire that information. Ignorance is not a legal defence anywhere in the world.

If anyone tells you that they happily overpower their boats, fine, if they want to do that, it's their problem - it doesn't make it legal; People may well speed on the road near schools, take drugs, steal stuff it doesn't make it legal. If people tell YOU to overpower your boat that's just mischievous, misleading, and plain wrong advice. They don't care if you flip or sink, they won't rescue you, or help you if you get busted - they have no stake in the outcome at all.

Don't have to search further than this site to find out why overpowering isn't the best of ideas (as Chip or Mike point out below) or Roger defending the design due to people not following the rated specs. He is always been cooperative when there is an accident both with the law and the media. The most recent overloading issue came down to manufacturers specs and the owner not following them. Overloading would be looked upon no differently than overpowering. Again as Mike (a Mac Dealer) says below if you find a credible dealer willing to install above the specs and you have a receipt or proof of purchase then liability will most likely rest with the dealer or your insurer if they'll cover you, but that doesn't stop the insurance company from going after the dealer.

Very well known insurance story of a guy insuring a very, very, very expensive box of cigars (with Lloyds of London i believe as they'll insure anything for the right price). Insured the owner proceeded to smoke them, then make a claim that they were burnt and covered under loss due to fire. The insurer fought a little then gave in and paid the claim. Upon the claimant cashing the cheque they charged him with 12 - 15 (however many were in the box) separate counts of arson and they won.


http://www.macgregorsailors.com/forum/v ... f=7&t=4594

http://www.macgregorsailors.com/forum/v ... =9&t=15663

Very well known insurance story of a guy insuring a very, very, very expensive box of cigars (with Lloyds of London i believe as they'll insure anything for the right price). Insured the owner proceeded to smoke them, then make a claim that they were burnt and covered under loss due to fire. The insurer fought a little then gave in and paid the claim. Upon the claimant cashing the cheque they charged him with 12 - 15 (however many were in the box) separate counts of arson and they won.

It is actually a very well known myth, urban legend or just plain good old bulldust that has been around since the 1960s. MY wife works in insurance and called that one straight up.

I truly like the US have many friends there and have visited often over the last 15 years, but sometimes I have to question your "land of the free claims" when you are all so scared of being sued that it takes the fun out of life.

As I said in a previous post unless there is a specific law in your local jurisdiction that forbids (here there is none for sailing vessels) putting an engine on with a higher HP than recommended and you have declared this to your insurer and they have accepted the risk then you are covered. When I bought my it was only rated for 50hp I put a 60hp on no problem at all and low and behold Rodger starts selling factory 60s a few years later.

This is no different to all the kids that mod their cars with all the toys and boost their HP sometimes 100% over factory HP. As long as it is declared there is no problem. From a quick google it looks like in the US your capacity plates and Coast Guard rules only apply to boats under 20 feet. But AGAIN CHECK YOUR LOCAL LAWS.

yukonbob wrote:If anyone tells you that they happily overpower their boats, fine, if they want to do that, it's their problem - it doesn't make it legal; People may well speed on the road near schools, take drugs, steal stuff it doesn't make it legal. If people tell YOU to overpower your boat that's just mischievous, misleading, and plain wrong advice. They don't care if you flip or sink, they won't rescue you, or help you if you get busted - they have no stake in the outcome at all.

LOL, illegal

Yep the 90 was my gateway motor Just added an intercooler and supercharger to my 2nd Mustang. One day I'll feed my over-power habit and install a 250 to beat Billy's 140. Need to sell more 90s to support my bad habit.

Had a Mac'r call me at my house last weekend for advice on 90 re-poweing abuse for his boat. Another unsuspecting innocent

When do the urges end... Is there and over-power anonymous group where people can help

Victor

Hey YB,

Thanks for researching those old threads. That was about when I started here. & those were the guys & the posts that inspired me to go Mac & to Go Big. I miss them, those that have moved on. Their input is still valuable - because apparently the battle still rages on. & it's Fantastic Reading

It's not snowing but still feels like Winter here. Still haven't had test runs Still have to update insurance

Everyone has their "distance"... That is: how far they're willing to go - in a given situation or circumstance. & That is everyone's Individual Right.

Mind you, I don't play Chicken & Double Dog Dare. I never have; & I pay to play with my toys. I think we all do that.

We provide information, enthusiasm & insight to current MacG'ers & potential MacG'ers. So let's continue to give this insight in the same manner, as before.

Let's stay the course

Mac 26M and Naval architect in the same sentence. Now that's humorous.............

kadet wrote: It is actually a very well known myth, urban legend or just plain good old bulldust that has been around since the 1960s. MY wife works in insurance and called that one straight up.

As is mine, accredited, commercial, residential auto, marine, the works; this 'myth' has been floating around for a lot longer than the sixties and is thought to have originated around 1880-1900 (and settled out of court) when insurance was more readily available to the general public and was the hottest thing and policies were lose at best with little to no regulation (you could write a policy out of the back of a wagon).

Also when speaking with a broker or sales agent on issues regarding any questionable mater, ask to speak to an underwriter instead. Your broker can say just about anything but it does not mean you're covered nor does it constitute a contractual obligation by the company. Many cases where people were told / assumed they were covered due to broker not understanding the terms, adjuster picks up on error during a claim and denies coverage. Nothing is real in contract law unless it is in writing.

vkmaynard wrote:
LOL, illegal

Yep the 90 was my gateway motor Just added an intercooler and supercharger to my 2nd Mustang. One day I'll feed my over-power habit and install a 250 to beat Billy's 140. Need to sell more 90s to support my bad habit.

Had a Mac'r call me at my house last weekend for advice on 90 re-poweing abuse for his boat. Another unsuspecting innocent

When do the urges end... Is there and over-power anonymous group where people can help

Victor

Ya illegal is wrong. Insert legally responsible. The funny part is, if you help him install that you’ve created a fiduciary duty between the two of you and if he harms himself or others (and can prove you helped him and there was a duty of care established) he can come after you for damages. So how well do you trust him?

The same goes for cars. If you don’t inform you’re insurer of your upgrades and you have a loss they’ll only pay out what you’ve listed in your policy. If you kill someone and they look further into it they may go after you for gross negligence, although there are a ton more driving regulations and rules that help reduce / determine your liability as a driver (centerlines, stop lights, signs etc) that don’t exist on the water.

Gazmn wrote:

Like I (and Mike) said before if you had a dealer install it and you have a receipt / proof of purchase then you’ve reduced your exposure. It comes down to credentials. If you’re in court (be it a lawsuit or battle with your insurance company) you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the oversized motor did not affect the ability to handle / structure of the boat. If you can point over to the manufacturer or a dealer/engineer/mechanic and say “ask them, they approved it” you’ve greatly reduced your liability if not eliminated it. If it’s just you up there saying “Ya it’s never been a problem for me before”, they’ll simply ask you what credited experience or credentials you personally have that qualify you to make that decision which contradicts the manufacturers recommended specifications. If you personally hang anything above the specs off the back of your Mac in your driveway yourself it’s all on you.

One more thing…look into your local laws as Sates each year seem to be introducing legislation to crack down on this. Might be fine this year but not next.

raycarlson wrote:Mac 26M and Naval architect in the same sentence. Now that's humorous.............

If you think Roger put more than 20,000 boats on the water and never consulted a lawyer, structural engineer, draftsperson or architect you’re out of your mind. One lawsuit from one boat accident he’d lose everything.

If u guy,s were to listen too Roger,s Video he say,s the reasons for recommending a 50.max hp. #1 is so as not to compromise sailing ability, #2 a 50hp is big enough to give u sufficient speed for the best fuel economy & min. fuel consumption & #3 the fact that a 50HP is about a big as u can go & still be able to pull start the engine if ur battery or starter should fail !!

No where in the video does it mention that the "suggested" Max 50HP is to do with the boats Safety & Handling ability @ a higher speed with a bigger HP Engine & thats why they started putting bigger eng.s on 60hp -70hp because they r lighter than they used to be & get a lot better fuel economy than the older eng,s

And it is right outa the sales brochure


J

"we limited the engine size to 50 HP for a number of reason..." And he still has Plausible deniability.