to me, the single most important lesson with boats is that everything is a compromise, I guess it all depends on what you are prepared to compromise on, and what you are not!!
i think its a great design, and a few of the Mac features have been copied- the sliding galley etc ( personally- my least favourite)
there are many powerboats that will plane at 30 kn with a shaft and rudder- i dont see this one being a problem, in principle.
i think the engine well hood could make a great cockpit surface /table- just like when we fish on boats that have an IB/OB setup. many very successful designs have incorporated OB's in wells- seems to be a popular feature in English circles. its a system that works, combining the best of all worlds. With some compromise of course.
i like the tiller and thru- transom setup
it does not have an out of the weather helm- just like the macs, a huge drawback IMO.- folk in Florida or So. Cal. may not mind, but those of us up in the PNW, its a factor.
the offset companionway, i would like to see how that compromises self-righting on the port side- if i am seeing that right
i dont like the winch position, and how it will be in the way or compromised with a fitment of a dodger
as for the aesthetics, i dont find them bad, no worse than the Mac- personally, (and this is very personal) - i don't like euro styling, i prefer more traditional lines. this seems to be a compromise between the two.
without looking at a hull sketch, its hard to comment on the performance, but looking at their overhead plan, and making the assumption( we all know what assuming stands for) that they have tried to generate floatation aft with the very wide stern, almost akin to modern high speed downwind demons.- i will bet they have more stern floatation than the Macs.
that wide transom comes at the compromise of upwind performance, the modern race boats overcome this by having a radically different hull profile when the boat is heeled over, creating a better performing hull for that purpose, but then we are back to radical angles of heel- which are great for racing, but not so convenient as a leisure sailor.
here is my guess: the extra wide transom, has allowed for a planing shoe just aft of the motor- that is a flat run from the motor aft. this section of the transom will be buried in the water- and guessing there will be none- or little deadrise or rake in that section, however the bilges/chines will have a lot of rocker built into them, so as soon as that boat heels, the hull profile undergoes a dramatic change in shape, the transom is elevated cl;ear of the waterline, and windward performance is improved.
i see a multi-chined hull profile, and this matches their situation well, they have lots of experience building epoxy/glass plywood panel boats.
you dont have the inflexibility of molds and the high costs of molds.
i think this boat is just in the concept stage, and not in the final development stage, they are gauging the market, before they spend $40 000 on design fees- thats what it costs- minimum!!!
i like how they have included the bowsprit, carbon masts are great- but very prone to failure with any compromise to the exterior surface.
they have added a bunch of features which were left out of the mac, but that comes at a $$ value- thats where the macs got it right, creating a lower entry-level price point, and allowing folks to do the mods themselves and save $$
Personally, i dont like the rig, its back to shrouds, spreaders, mast raising systems and all kinds of rigging etc high sheet pressures and high angles of heel.- but again this is just personal, there are better rigs than the Marconi, Its just that Marconis have been popularized by the racing mindset( and the handicapping system), and what the average sailor pictures as a boat.
there are a lot of sailplans that will outperform the Marconi- when comparing apples with apples.
but if you are trying to make money- a Marconi sail rigged boat is an easier sell.
i think the 75K was in GBP, will be more in $$
i agree with Sailboatmike- that the Mac users are a great resource and should be utilized.
Over the last 5 years i have started numerous threads, (some on here some on FB groups) to try and glean as much input from other Mac users as possible for my intended build, results have varied a lot, some people have just got downright mad, angry that i would even consider another boat, some have had some valid input, very few have actually commented.
but i consider all comments valuable- and try and see it from the individuals perspective. we all have an opinion , right?
i am only trying to build a boat for my own use, and not creating a commercial venture ( well at least at this stage ) and i think many heads are way better than one.
However, i cant say if the swallow guys consulted with mac owners or not.- there do seem to be a lot of similarities though!!
but here is personal opinion again, i dont think the Mac is beautiful and streamlined- but thats just an opinion- doesnt mean i hate my
, or dislike Mike,
- its just an opinion that's all
i love seeing boats and projects like this, it means people are thinking
Roger was a pioneer- and created an excellent boat and business model.
did he get everything right, certainly not- but thats just the nature of the beast. cant please everybody all of the time i guess.
but the Mac is a great boat, and it certainly got my thoughts spinning, and allowed me to embark on my journey, to create the ultimate boat for myself.
Just that, over time we have moved away from the way that the Mac has created the power/sailing ability, the NA's working on my concept have created a hull profile that will sail a lot better, and power a lot better( on less hp), it will sail flatter and faster, with a true, highly rockered non-drag transom sailing hull, yet with a proper planing hull, and not a semi-displacement monohedron hull like the Macs.
But thats all i can say about that at this stage- its pretty hush-hush at the moment.
peace out all
