MacGregorSailors.com

In keeping with the thought that weight / hp / engine CC is very important with our Mac, this might be the cats A$$!

OptiMax 125 Specifications
HP @ Prop 125
kW @ Prop 93.2
Max RPM (WOT) 5000-5750
Cylinders 3 (in-line)
Displacement (CID/cc) 92.96/1526
Bore & Stroke (in) 3.63 x 3.00
Bore & Stroke (mm) 92 x 76
Cooling System Water-cooled with thermostat & pressure-controlled
Ignition System PCM 07
Starting Electric
Gear Ratio 2.07:1
Gear Shift F-N-R
Steering Remote or tiller kit
Alternator 60-amp/756-watt belt-driven
Trim System Power trim
Exhaust System Through prop
Lubrication System Electronic multipoint oil injection
Recommended Oil Mercury OptiMax/DFI Engine Oil
Fuel Induction System 2-stage direct fuel injection
Shaft Length (inches) 20/25
Shaft Length (mm) 508/635
Dry Weight (lbs.) 375
Dry Weight (kg.) 170
Operator Warning System Overheat, over-rev, low oil level
SmartCraft Yes
Warranty 3

http://www.mercurymarine.com/engines/ou ... php?ID=185

G

That motor weighs 375 lbs! What in the world makes folks think they can put a motor weighing that much more than design weight 240 lbs. Let alone the out and out fact that this sailboat was designed for around 22mph. That motor will get you 32mph. Think airborne on any wave. We (as cruising sailors) are not tolerant of a sailboat that can be knocked over and not come right back up. Some of us (Macgregor sailors )require that our boats be unsinkable, a good requirement. Now a speed boat driver can relate to flipping over, sinking, breaking the bottom out, etc. They don't even get mad about it. Duh, duh, I just flipped my boat , ha ha. We are sailors! Our reputation can be soiled by the installation of too much power. That is my personal take as a dealer or factory rep or whatever name you apply to me. This reputation of the Macgregor as a safe boat is my only reason for rsisting the overweight, overpowered motors. Nothing hidden and I don't think the E-Tec is the only way to go. Just get a motor at 240lbs max, 60hp max and with a big prop.
Mike Inmon

Whoaaaaaaaaa Mike,

Please please........roll em back a little bit here. I know you arent "officially the factory" but I have to make a comment here to folks who might read this board for info about the boats construction.

The following comments are not to disparage you or the X or the M ......In fact I agree with the intent of your words to require safe boat operation and stay withing moderate guidelines and a reasonable safety margin

but lets come to some understanding here about.........for example.....

...much more than design weight 240 lbs.......

....designed for around 22mph..........

your use of "design" here is sadly and I mean sadly inaccurate. Where is the structural analysis, FEM, vibration analysis, flexural load studies, strain measurements, all of the supporting documentation for an analyzed solution which is subsequently designed for mechanical solution ........ no......the mac factory did not and has not done that. Was it tank tested for drag in all aspects seas and heel angles, Who performed the analysis and hydrodynamics study..... C'mon.....lets be real here........Roger is a great, and I mean great businessman, he has stuck to his knitting. and done well.......but that is not "design" in todays day and age. not even close.


CAD (Computer aided drafting)is good.But it is still cartooning with numbers......CAD is a computerized method for producing documents to aid in construction, and also can aid in robotic assembly and manufacture.........but lets face it........until I see otherwise.....CAD is not ..CAE (computer aided engineering) has not been done to any signficant degree on the X, and minimally on the M, Who do I call at the factory to get the specs for the radius of the transom joints etc....... Centroids, moments, Computer aided engineeing is far more than CAD. Weight and ballance were done, The boat was staticly balanced, several slight mods were done for on the water handling of a full size boat.

In fact, the performance numbers are so marginal on the mac (Crew&gear) weight is such a major factor on the mac, it is amazing that the front office even ever mention the 22 and 24(X) mph advertised speeds...

none of my other boats have unattainable advertised performance with 4 onboard. Dont get me wrong, I love my macX, but if you really feel that the boat should not go 22-24 mph fully loaded........say so upfront and be done with it. to me it is amazing that you sell a boat that you dont recommend to do its published speed with a fully loaded boat.

lets go with the next aspect, a fully analyzed and engineered structure for the boat would provide information where the most effective reinforcement locations would be. 60 lbs of foam and glass in the right places could really stiffen the boat up, and it would be a better performing sailer as well as cruiser. As it is owner has to analyze small sections of the hull to get the performance improvements that are possible. Transom stiffeners, ballast tank mods to prevent oilcanning...strakes, hull stiffeners....etc...

Don't get me wrong here.......I still recommend these boats to my friends. But the "magical" design number of 240 lbs at that weight and ballance location is a static measurement. I have seen over a dozen x boats and 4 M boats with with only 50 hp engines on them with cracks forming beyond the gelgoat on the transoms.........There is no way that analysis, quality control, design margins are in sync on those boats.

Furthermore........ a 50 hp tohatsu is marginal to cruise twice hull speed, 5000 rpm to get to 13 1/2 kts...

...Our reputation can be soiled by the installation of too much power......

a note to the wise, the published performance spec is the laughing point Why dont you put in the literature that as soon as the family of four and a cooler on the boat, let alone a second fuel tank, a cooler, lifejackets and lunch sacks.......you will do 16 max motoring........
The advertising reputation is already soiled. If it wasnt for the wonderful dealers such as yourself.........BWY, B@BFS etc......These boats wouldnt have near the customer base.......lets face it.......your down to 500 boats a year.....and there are 10 % more boat launches, lanes than 15 years ago, and you are now making 1/3 as many boats per year....

most other companies would be looking at bankruptcy. Do you really consider this innovative after 15 years of production?

Personally, I would love a 240 lb 90 hp motor, on mine,(if a commercial one existed) mine is set up for cruising comforatbly for a weekend with the admiral. The trailer is marginal when loaded. no........ I dont see signs of good "design" I see undercapacity on everything I look at on the boat. All in the name of cost. Sometimes I wonder if the lancer solution isnt better.

But please seriously consider....... IF the factory is going to advertize 22 make it loaded, with fuel, Adults, a normal days complement of gear, sails, bags..... and put a motor on that will do it.

I understand your wanting to protect your customers, a boat that wont sink, reasonable comfort. etc. But if you cant build a boat that delivers your advertised specs you will eventually lose your 500 a year customers. (right now...........the factory can hide behind the CA emmissions limits......) but soon that wont be the issue. Someone will deliver a more desireable product for the bottom of the new market.

I am probably :
full of garbage, know nothing about composites manufacturing, formal design processes, not an analyst, not a pilot, not an engineer, not a mariner, poor communicator, crotchety young opinionated fool,who happens to like these boats. But I await to be proven wrong on this one.,

Respectfully

Darren.

PS. I still think you folks are great dealers. Thankfully I bought my X used and had no delusions........everyone has been responsive to my ordering of replacement parts.

Just saying; motor weight is a huge factor in sailing or powering performance. I remove the 2hp Honda on my 1979 V-23 for racing, so does all of my competition. The M is even more sensitive to motor weight than the X. While the transom is stronger than ever and the steering is improved, extra power and weight is a detriment to sailing and range. Thinking that a larger hp motor wil improve mpg as some claim has just never been indicated by real testing by unbiased test. In my view, bad fuel mileage, poor sailing, questions about too much hp laying over a Mac, the whole bit; it's just not worth it. It is a sailboat. For the dark side of it all; everone who wants to pull water toys for their kids or move at high speed in flat water for short distance (range is limited by power), OK. I have sold many Suz 70's for the X back in the day, but no more. Even though, I have never seen a Mac damaged by excess hp or excess speed nor heard of a Mac being flipped by too much hp it is still too much risk. So for design, the M was designed both by cad and cae and vast knowledge of fiberglass contruction of boats in this size/weight range. The X was mostly cad and knowledge. Was it designed well? Resale value is one indicator. Check out 25 year old Mac/Ventures and compare to any other brand similar size boat. Most of the time the Mac will sell for more thanthe other even though it cost much less new. Your comments are interesting (engineering)

See what you started, Beene

Rick Less

PS I cannot believe that I STILL have not found a boat to buy for Lake Mead - - - and I would NOT buy an for use strictly as a powerboat - - - if I had a powerboat on Lake Mead, I would want to go much faster much more comfortably - - - with a reasonably more comfortable interior cabin.

Designing on CAD instead of with a pencil has absolutely nothing to do with the engineering validity of a design. Both are simply two ways to put lines on paper. In both you can create a great design or a poor design. Just because it was drawn on a computer does not in any way mean it is a better design.

Taking the output of a CAD drawing to a CNC/CAM machine insures that you get the same part cut every time. In the case of a poorly engineered part you end up with a whole bunch of perfectly manufactured bad parts.

The 135 difference between your supposedly ideal 240lb motor weight and the 375lb motor in question is such a small amount in the overall load variables that it really doesn't matter. You could easy have a far bigger difference in the typical number and size of crew on the boat. Do you carry 12 gallons of fuel or 24 gallons, that's a 73.8lb difference, how much water is on board, how many batteries have you installed? Is your 80lb dinghy on board, did you bring the 60lb motor? Food, Ice, Drinks? All this easily outweighs the 135lb difference.

Say you do have all the above on board, you need the extra weight of the bigger motor to still get the expected performance out of the boat.

To rationalize the need to keep the motor weight down with racing stories is ridiculous. These are not racing boats, they aren't designed to be raced and they aren't bought to be raced. They are cruising boats where creature comforts are far more important that shaving a few pounds for max performance.

For years the best motor choice for a M has been the Suzuki 70 that weighed 341lbs (with the new models you can even get their 90 for that weight). It offered the best balance in motoring performance and sailing performance. Now that there is 125hp motor that only weighs 34 pounds more the game has changed yet again. That's less extra weight than the beer most pack along in their cooler.

mikelinmon wrote:That motor weighs 375 lbs! What in the world makes folks think they can put a motor weighing that much more than design weight 240 lbs. Let alone the out and out fact that this sailboat was designed for around 22mph. That motor will get you 32mph. Think airborne on any wave. We (as cruising sailors) are not tolerant of a sailboat that can be knocked over and not come right back up. Some of us (Macgregor sailors )require that our boats be unsinkable, a good requirement. Now a speed boat driver can relate to flipping over, sinking, breaking the bottom out, etc. They don't even get mad about it. Duh, duh, I just flipped my boat , ha ha. We are sailors! Our reputation can be soiled by the installation of too much power. That is my personal take as a dealer or factory rep or whatever name you apply to me. This reputation of the Macgregor as a safe boat is my only reason for rsisting the overweight, overpowered motors. Nothing hidden and I don't think the E-Tec is the only way to go. Just get a motor at 240lbs max, 60hp max and with a big prop.
Mike Inmon

Duh! Some of us are boaters. That means we sail, row, motorboat, speed, fish, dive, snorkel, and ski behind our boats. Speak for yerself.

I think a 90 hp is nice on a mcgregor sailboat. You don't have to floor it to cruise in front of the storm cell at 22.

If I were to change motors, the new one would be a 90 hp, or perhaps a hull speed motor with better mileage and hence motoring range.
Tohatsu TLD 90 sure sounded like a good motor last time I looked. It was not that heavy or big if I remember correctly, but it has been a couple years since I looked.

I thought my old Tohatsu 50 was dead, but a simple carb flush brought it back to running like new again. Just can't kill them old Tohatsus.

Same here...wife says I can get a new outboard when the Nissan 50 wears out. 1998 and it runs great. gets a new water pump impeller every 6 years, whether it needs it or not. Same for the plugs. Runs on 12 month old fuel. I stopped looking at the brochures.

mikelinmon wrote:That motor weighs 375 lbs!

The motor on the back of my 26M weighs over 389 lbs dry.
I have logged 100's of hours with my Mac without a single issue arising form the motor of my choice.

mikelinmon wrote:What in the world makes folks think they can put a motor weighing that much more than design weight 240 lbs.

Which dealer sells the most Macs each and every year?
BWY

What motor do they endorse as the perfect motor for the 26M?
Suzuki 70

How much does it weigh?
341 lbs

mikelinmon wrote:Let alone the out and out fact that this sailboat

The Mac 26X and 26M are not sailboats, they are POWERSAILORS. Combination power and sailboats that do neither job to perfection, but do both well enough for most.

mikelinmon wrote:Designed for around 22mph.

Quote from the factory website
"POWERING AND WATERSKIING: With the 60 horsepower outboard, the 26 will go about 24 mph. It will easily pull a water-skier. This adds one more bit of fun to the voyage. It will actually pull most adults at high enough speeds to create some real excitement. "
"MacGregor 26... Factory website for the MacGregor 26', $21,500 trailerable sailboat, 24 mph"

mikelinmon wrote:That motor will get you 32mph.

You are of course stating that from experience....... right?
I think not.
Others on this board own a Mac 26X with a 140 outboard and just barely hit 32 mph with a tailwind.
Many have said the 26M goes slower under power due to the difference in hull design, making it a better sailboat than a powerboat.
As a result, I would wager from my own personal experience using a an outboard with 100cc's MORE than the motor in question, it would not make a 26M go 32mph, rather 28mph, empty, solo.
My goal, as is that of many others here, is to find an outboard that will get the 26M up to the factory stated speed of 24pmh, loaded as a family cruiser would be and the way the boat is advertised.

mikelinmon wrote:Think airborne on any wave.

Please. Go easy with the dramatic flare. Artistic though it might be.

mikelinmon wrote:Some of us (Macgregor sailors )require that our boats be unsinkable, a good requirement.

Now I am starting to feel like I just got kicked out of an elite club or something.
Does that mean I have to hand you the keys to my Mac now?

mikelinmon wrote:Now a speed boat driver can relate to flipping over, sinking, breaking the bottom out, etc. They don't even get mad about it. Duh, duh, I just flipped my boat , ha ha.

Anyone can take the 26M or X and make it do stupid things, even with a 50 on the back.

mikelinmon wrote:We are sailors!

I am a boater. Love to sail, have done only that for 30 years. Got a 26M because I wanted to start enjoying both the power boating and sailing worlds.
Was I wrong to do so?
Just got sucked in with the Macgregor Factory advertising I guess.
http://www.macgregor26.com/powering_and ... wering.htm
Sailing, waterskiing, all with the same boat...... seemed like a dream come true.....

mikelinmon wrote:Our reputation can be soiled by the installation of too much power.

Please, stop with the drama.

mikelinmon wrote:That is my personal take as a dealer or factory rep or whatever name you apply to me.

Now this statement has merit. Thanks for your "personal take".
Input of any kind is always welcome and appreciated.

mikelinmon wrote:This reputation of the Macgregor as a safe boat is my only reason for rsisting the overweight, overpowered motors.

Quote from your own words "I have sold many Suz 70's for the X back in the day"

mikelinmon wrote:Nothing hidden and I don't think the E-Tec is the only way to go. Just get a motor at 240lbs max, 60hp max and with a big prop.

The biggest and highest volume Mac dealer I am aware of does not agree with your opinion.

mikelinmon wrote:Just saying; motor weight is a huge factor in sailing or powering performance.

Not in the case of the 26M.
The first outboard I used with my 26m was a Honda 7 1/2 hp, 4 stroke.
Put, put..... kicker only.
Max speed was 7mph.
Changed from that to my 389lb Merc 75 at 1600cc's, sailing speed remained the same, but the boat does handle better as it is now more in balance than it was with only the wee 7.5 on the back.
The boat now sits completely level, ballast in, with the 389lb 75 on the back.

mikelinmon wrote:I remove the 2hp Honda on my 1979 V-23 for racing, so does all of my competition.

I did not buy my 26M to race other sailboats.
I wanted a boat that was both a powerboat and a sailboat.
I join the sailboats in my marina when they race. I join in because it is a great evening with fellow sailors. I never win, not even close. The only ones I can even come close to competing with are other tailor sailors like the Hunter.

mikelinmon wrote:The M is even more sensitive to motor weight than the X.

Not from my personal experience.

mikelinmon wrote:While the transom is stronger than ever and the steering is improved, extra power and weight is a detriment to sailing and range.

Not from my personal experience.

mikelinmon wrote:Thinking that a larger hp motor wil improve mpg as some claim has just never been indicated by real testing by unbiased test.

Not true. Every company selling outboards will post testing results showing that you can get far greater GPH by cruising at around 3/4 op spec rpm, say 3500 for example.
At that rpm, my Mac hangs in a 19-19.5 mph.
On plane, nice and smooth, quiet, fuel efficient, nicely loaded, as it should be.
A 50 or 60 hp outboard will not do that with a Mac.

mikelinmon wrote:In my view, bad fuel mileage, poor sailing, questions about too much hp laying over a Mac, the whole bit; it's just not worth it.

Again, thank you for your opinion.

mikelinmon wrote: It is a sailboat.

Powersailor

mikelinmon wrote:OK. I have sold many Suz 70's for the X back in the day, but no more.

Your decision.
Quote from a competing dealers website
"THE WORLDS LARGEST AND MOST EXPERIENCED MACGREGOR DEALER."
"The MacGregor 26M offers high speed powering without compromising sailing performance. You can have the peace and quiet of sailing, or the fun of powering economically at up to 24MPH with a 70HP outboard "
"

MOTORING PERFORMANCE WITH VARIOUS ENGINE SIZES

The smallest engine we recommend is around 30hp (although it is very rare to sell a boat with less than 50hp), you can use smaller engines, but the weight and cost savings just don’t make much sense compared to the performance loss unless you already have an engine and are on a really limited budget.

All of the performance numbers given below are for a fully equipped boat (such as our Super Cruising Package), but not a lot of cruising gear. As you add weight, the boat will slow down some, especially with the smaller motors.

Motoring speeds with the 30hp will be about 10mph cruise and 13mph top

Motoring speeds with the 50 hp Suzuki engine will be about 14mph cruise and 19mph top.

Motoring speeds with the 70 hp Suzuki engine will be about 20 cruise and 24 top. The big difference is that you can get about 18mph cruise with the water ballast full ! That is adding 1100 lb. and it still cruises at 18, that means that if you have a lot of load in your boat (people and gear) the extra power really helps keep the speed up. The goal with the 70hp is not to make the boat go super fast, but to have a good cruising speed even with a loaded boat.. The operating RPM range of the 70hp is also lower than the 50hp and hence the motor is not working as hard and is a little quieter too.

We would also expect resale value to be better with the 70hp, as that is what the majority of buyers want.

DOES THE BIGGER ENGINE HURT SAILING PERFORMANCE?

While the addition of weight to the transom of any boat has, by definition, some negative effect on sailing performance, the weight difference between the 50 hp or the 70 hp does not make any noticeable difference. Either engine is out of the water when sailing and the boat sails great with either engine. If, in a race, you had exactly the same weight on two identical boats the boat with the 50 hp engine would have a very slight advantage as it is 100 lb. lighter but you also would need crew with the same skills to take advantage of this and even then the winds would likely need to be in your favor."


http://www.bwyachts.com/Engine%20Choices.htm

mikelinmon wrote:Even though, I have never seen a Mac damaged by excess hp or excess speed nor heard of a Mac being flipped by too much hp it is still too much risk.

Again, your opinion.

I posted this information as it would seem many here are looking for an outboard that will get their Mac to preform as advertised.
From reading post after post from owners and perspective owners here, we are looking for and outboard that will:
- go 24mph as advertised, loaded up for family cruising.
- cruise at a good speed, on plane, low rpm, quiet running, excellent GPH, and great range.
- be as light as possible
- have as small a block as possible
- tilt up under the seat
- be out of the water when sailing
- be dependable, solid, excellent quality, and great after sales support

As far as I am concerned, based on my experience and that of many other owners as posted on this great site, the motor I posted info on will do most if not all of that. The only thing I am not sure about is fitting under the seat. It has a smaller head than my 1600cc o/b, and the cowling looks much shorter, so I would guess it would fit. Only mounting it would confirm it.

I do not condone what anyone does with their boat.
I can only comment on what others have done, and my own personal experience with my 26M.
Everything I have ever posted here has just been my opinion, unless quoted from another source.

To each their own.

Happy Boating

G

Da Da Da

And the drum beats on !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sounds like musical chairs to me they really want people to stick with that Factory installed E-Tec motor "$$$$$" for their sweatheart Deal ? . I could be wrong if they are passing on the savings to the customer !
Anyway Mike don't take this all personally it's not against you or Roger Macgregor he makes a great boats. Its just called constructive criticsisom in the long run it is actualy benificial to all

You know if Roger actualy got one of his employee's invovled with all of us guy's who have went down this road look at the vast amount of free trial testing & knowlege to be gained here without consending to whats being done of course , But alas when your selling every boat you make before it leaves the factory guess theirs no need or care less whats going on out their with your boats after their sold
A heavily laden Mac X or M with balast in & 30-50HP motor can have the hull pounded to death with any clown at the Helm in inclement weather you do not require a big eng. to do this ! all that is required is Stupidity & this goes for any boat for that matter !

And the Power run is On !!!

J

i long to go the advertised speed - my kids despise my Yamaha 60ht - we need a bigger engine daddy - its not fun anymore daddy - we need to go faster daddy - why cant we take any friends daddy -

i peaked at 18.6 - never towed a tube faster than 15.5 - just another 5 mph is all i need and they'd be thrilled - and i'd be out on the water much much more often...

if the boat is supposed to go 22 - put an engine on that makes it go that fast - and not at WOT either -

there are 10 boats in my neighborhood that could go twice as fast as their owners drive them - kinda like cars and trucks - able to and willing to are two very different situations -

gimme my 22 mph

I agree 100% with Beene's post.
With 20/20 hindsight I would now fit at least a 70hp or preferably a 90hp but to be honest the price gap at the time of purchase would have prevented this anyway. My boat is not weighed down by half the stuff some of you guys fit yet I still feel the Etec 60 struggles with a full ballast & crew even when it is being caned hard. My 's real world performance is way down from the Mac factory's claims. Tell it like it is.

daydreamerbob wrote:i long to go the advertised speed
if the boat is supposed to go 22 - put an engine on that makes it go that fast

i've heard this complaint before...
i believe that the advertised speed is based on a "controlled environment" test.
that is...one 150# person in a completely empty boat, w/ one gallon of fuel.

tell your kids that a 90hp will make a loaded Mac go "zoom-zoom".

Bob T.
"DāBob"
'02X w/ '04 90-TLDI (14" x 11 pitch)
Dinghy Motor: '06 2.5-Suzuki

As a new owner of a I find some of this very interesting. Full disclosure, I have an E-TEC 60.

With the ballast in and 6 folks onboard it does a solid 15 knots running around in the Gulf and ICW in Clearwater, Florida on a nice calm day.

But there's a catch that I am very surprised has not come up. Sure I can do 15 knots but I rarely am able to go that fast without inciting violence from the crew getting soaked by the spray. This isn't a "power boat" designed to direct that spray away from the boat, it's a sailboat that can power. Therefore we are missing some of the design features that exist in power boats.

A lot of this is going to depend on where you are boating as lakes can turn to glass with little wind but the ocean rarely does. Unless the wind is coming from the right direction, you are not going to be going all that fast, without foul weather gear on.

I would completely agree with Mike that pushing this boat at high speeds on other than glass water is looking to be a story of tragedy in the news. With a 35' mast and associated rigging, it is not going to perform like a power boat. With all of this up top, it will obviously tend to roll more in the wave for longer and the wind can exaggerate this. We have had some really wild rolls and resulting steering issues - this should lead one to be cautious about when and where to drop the hammer.

The other issue that buyers should weigh is that faster = more gas with less range which = more cost. So think about what you intend to do with the boat and what your budget is to go boating on the weekends. More weight equals slower sailing and these bigger engines tend to not fit under the helm seat so they drag in the water when sailing further impacting sailing performance. This is a sailboat that can motor not a powerboat that can sail.

Most bad stories are preventable and result from improper use of equipment, from my experiences with just a 60, it does concern me. Be safe!

Jim