A New 33' Quasi Mac?

[AWKIII]

This topic has been discussed for ages but would like to bring it up one more time.

I am curious about how the membership of MacGregor Sailors would react to a new trailerable sailboat entering the market that would offer the following:

Length: 33'
Beam: 8'
Headroom: 6'
Displacement: 4,000lbs
Easy to ramp lauch and retireve.
Easily rigged by one person.
Capable of carrying a 25 horse 4-stroke engine with electric start and power-tilt.
Very good sailing characteristics.
Build quality similar to Hunter and Catalina

I am trying to determine two things:

1. Poll: If you felt this is a viable boat and something you would consider moving up to at some point, what would be your maximum budget to purchase.

2. General converstion: Would like to hear your opinions of this boat. Strengths and weaknesses.

Thanks,

Art

[delevi]

I think 4000 lbs is just too light for a boat that size. At 33' you want to be able to do coastal cruising with confidence. A wider beam, like 9' would be nice too. Just read about the Santa Cruz 37 in December's Sail Magazine. That's a top-notch racing cruiser weighing in at 8000 lbs and a 43% ballast/displacement ratio via lifting bulb keel. This boat is trailerable, which I find amazing! I'm sure many here will say transportable vs trailerable since it would involve a heavy duty truck to tow.

On edit: Would go with inboard diesel vs. outboard.

cheers,
L.

[Terry]

Major weakness = Beam
An 8' beam is barely a marginal increase over the current MacGregor, even the Hunter Edge goes beyond this skinny beam.
Under this thread http://macgregorsailors.com/forum/viewt ... =9&t=12002 Tiarra Yachts is anouncing a limited reproduction of their popular S2 7.9 which if I got the specs right off YachtWorld is a 9' beam.
The S2 7.9 is towable with a class 3 hitch and vehicle and accomodates up to 15HP engine.
To add a viable upgrade to the trailerable market a manufacturer would have to consider a smaller target market that eliminates those rogue jurasdictions that still have the antiquated 8' wide limits.
I met up with an owner of a Seward 32 by Hake Yachts who was setting up his boat to launch from Point Roberts and I gave him a hand with the mast raising. After that he invited me for a look inside. It is a nice boat but requires a strong tow vehicle. He towed it up from Oregon and only had to get three permits from the three jurasdictions he crossed and he said it was relatively easy and very inexpensive.
If I was to upgrade to 33' the Seward 32 would be at the top of my list.
I have seen power boats with 10' beams being towed in British Columbia and all they need is a permit and strong truck to tow them.
Trailerable is a must in todays shrinking marina market and Northern climes and given the increasing competition a wider beam is going to differentiate a new entry.

[AWKIII]

Hi Leon.

The 4,000 pound displacement is an estimate based on an empty boat without engine. When all is said and done, I think the boat will come in closer to 5,000.

Like the Santa Cruz 37, this boat would also have a retracting bulb keel.

Without letting the cat out of the bag, the hull is already in existence and has been succesfuly raced both on and offshore. The deck mold would be modified to gain additional headroom and the interior would be re-designed for cruising purposes. The rig/sail plan would be reduced to take some of the pi$$ and vinegar out of her.

There wouldn't be an inboard for a couple of reasons. One is obviously price and the other, weight. A sail drive may be an affordable answer though.

[AWKIII]

Hi Terry.

The S2 7.9 is a great boat and sails exceptionally well. I am glad to see Tiara start production again. It's poularity is not rooted in cruising however. She is a favorite among the PHRF racing crowd as she sails exceptionally well for her rating. Price is pretty steep for a 26 footer too.

I like the Seward 32 as well. She has beautiful lines. She is more of a transportable boat than a trailerable. Plus you are going to spend well in excess of $100K to buy one.

I am trying to determine the viability of a 33' trailerable cruiser that carries a reasonable price tag.

There will never be a perfect boat. But I am interested to know if this is a concept that would make current owners step-up in size or possibly offer an up-front alternative to the 26M.

[bscott]

The Broadway play "If I were a rich man, yada-yada-yada-etc." Would I like one, yes as long as it had an electric winch to raise the mast, a 9' beam and could cruise with an E-tek at a min speed of 15 knts.

I can only see a HD 3/4 ton diesel as a minimum tow. So even if you gave me $20,000 for my and I got $6,000 for my Jeep GC, the package deal would cost me about $70,000 plus increased license fee. Yikes

If I want to sail blue, I'll charter a bare boat.

Bob

Terry,

I crewed on an S2. 7.9 Great boat, narrow beam, little head room and a SOB dagger board that weighed too much to handle very often.

[bubba]

The new price of our used 6 month old 07 M was $54,000.00 according to the dealer, so that would put the 33' at about $65,000.00 or more for a well equipped ( 70 hp motor, fully enclosed cockpit canvas ,shore power setup, spinnaker, furnace, frig, TV, etc.) and ready to cruse sailboat. The insurance is in a different bracket and more difficult to get.

Does anyone know if this 33' can be single handed from the trailor to a 20 mph breeze on blue water ? Like a Mac can.

[Terry]

Transportable/Trailerable as I see it.
Major benefit is no committment to wet slip mooring.
If & when the time comes to sell one can simply cancel the marina contract, have the boat hauled home, cleaned up and readied for sale from the driveway. I can take my sweet time selling.
It can take upwards of two years to sell a bigger boat if not longer and slip fees only eat into the selling price until the selling price (through urgency) gets lowered to the point that the final sale (on older boats) only recovers recent years slip costs. The seller simply sells the boat for a song to escape the marina contract.
Another benefit:
Return on investment
In northern climes the sailing season is limited. The option of seasonal moorage reduces annual slip costs. A trailerable can be winter moored in the driveway. Maintenance can also be done in the driveway without the added costs/time contraints the marina would charge for being on the hard. I have been doing this for six seasons. My limited seasonal use more closely matches my limited budget. I could not afford a new Seward but perhaps an older used one might fit the budget. Spending in excess of 100K is putting too many fiancial eggs in one basket given the limited sailing season we have, the return on investment is simply not there. The only exception that comes to mind is retirement, if I was retired I may find the enough time to spend sailing to balance my invested $$. Still it would be a bit cost prohibitive, something that makes the poll quotes attractive as they are within a reasonable budget that more closely matches sailing season length.
Last Benefit
Change of Venues
Not as big a deal where I sail since the San Juans & Gulf Islands are a tough act to beat. Certainly in a few years (after retirement) I may tow to interior lakes or southern locations in the winter but for now the only advantage is to tow the boat via ferries to a more northern launch to explore Desolation Sound or the Broughtons. This would make it easier and more convenient to enjoy such a trip. Now trailerable/transportable sounds more attractive since it increases cruising range and reduces travel time.

With todays market I believe the trailerable concept is more appealing and may continue to increase in appeal. It is simply easier to justify the costs and budget for them,they are more affordable to the masses.
On edit Solvency comes to mind. One can more easily divest themselves of a trailerable when finacial difficulties arrive, whereas a full time slip boat becomes a financial burden and is a bigger gamble to invest in.
Still need a wider beam to be competitive though.

[AWKIII]

Hi Bubba.

Who in the world is selling a new 26M for $54,000.00?

That's obscene unless it came with a new tow vehicle.

[npatterson]

Well, we bought ours for 34K from Boating Atl. It has pretty much everything you'd need on it. Ican't imagine what the 54K boat has on it???

[Boblee]

Well I voted for the lowest price because thats $10000 above a basic Mac price but for me even that would not be enough to sway me as there are other variables as well, not least of which would be the tow vehicle and permits etc.
At $10,000 above a basic mac this boat would be well over $100,000 Aus moderately equipped even when our dollar was nearly on par s/h macs were selling here for up to $70,000.
If money was no object the boat would have to be exceptionally better in performance and comfort to compensate for the lack of versatility in access to parks, roads, ramps etc and the 25 hp motor would not be good when a fast passage is needed, but if money was no object, it could be good as a second boat for specific trips and probably then in the higher price range?
The Mac does everything I ask of it, there are compromises but there will always be compromises irrespective of the boat.
I have seen quite a few local boats here that kill the mac for looks and sailability but cost half as much again, it really pees off the owners though when their wives come over at the ramp and drool about the room in a Mac.
Bob

[DaveB]

I would like a 8'-6 inch beam 28' Mac.(Trailerable down here in FL.) with centerboard and 6 ft. Headroom at gally area.
The 2'-2" ft. would be added in front V berth (8 inches) ,(12 inches ) added to front bulkhead for chain locker and eliminiate the present recessed anchor storage for mounting a elect. windlass for anchor.
The other 6 inches added to the head of the X.
I would be a happy camper!
33ft. with a 8 ft. beam and 6 ft. headroom is to much boat above water in anything above 12 knots of wind.
Dave

This topic has been discussed for ages but would like to bring it up one more time.

I am curious about how the membership of MacGregor Sailors would react to a new trailerable sailboat entering the market that would offer the following:

Length: 33'
Beam: 8'
Headroom: 6'
Displacement: 4,000lbs
Easy to ramp lauch and retireve.
Easily rigged by one person.
Capable of carrying a 25 horse 4-stroke engine with electric start and power-tilt.
Very good sailing characteristics.
Build quality similar to Hunter and Catalina

I am trying to determine two things:

1. Poll: If you felt this is a viable boat and something you would consider moving up to at some point, what would be your maximum budget to purchase.

2. General converstion: Would like to hear your opinions of this boat. Strengths and weaknesses.

Thanks,

Art

[AWKIII]

Hi Dave.

You said:

"33ft. with a 8 ft. beam and 6 ft. headroom is to much boat above water in anything above 12 knots of wind."

Could you explain? I am not sure I understand what you mean. Clipper Marine built a 30 and a 32 footer back in the 70's with 8' foot of beam. The MacGregor 65 is only 12'.

The Etchell's 22 is actually 31' on deck and has a beam of around 7'. She has a big sail plan and will handle just about anything you can throw at her. She's lightweight and one of the sweetest boats a person can sail.

Art

[AWKIII]

Boblee.

What is going on?

First a $54,000.00 26M and now a $70,000 base boat in Oz.

Not usre what is going on over there but the boat retails for $21,500.00 including the trailer. Factor in another $15,000.00 for shipping and duty and you are around $36,000 U.S.. The Aussie dollar was trading at par until very recently. Someone is making a killing over there.

I think it is time to raie our prices!

Art

[Duane Dunn, Allegro]

It should have a 8'6" beam for sure, 5000# (with trailer) is easily trailerable by any full size 1/2 ton truck or van. No need for a monster rig. Heck, many ski boats have a 102" beam and weigh around 5000# with the trailer yet are towed around by mid-sized SUV's.

Why only a 25hp? It should be designed to carry a new generation 90hp two stroke.