Yes, the ComPac 16 has a well deserved reputation to need half a gale to drive her well and not going to windward well--maybe not at all if her sailor isn't a pretty fair hand at coaxing shy fillies upwind. BUT, there two things we can say with confidence:
- First, they are built like tanks. I used to park my boat (not a ComPac 16) next to one in a mast-up storage lot near a launch ramp at one of my local reservoirs which hadn't been moved for years. After we'd all covered our boats for the winter, we had some really heavy rain. Checking on my own boat, I noticed that the ComPac 16, mast still up, no cover in place, had her cockpit completely full of water (stopped up cockpit drains, I'd suppose) which had overflowed into the cabin, which was also nearly full of water. All of this weight had sunk the trailer in the ground right up to the frame.
I reached out to the owner, who appreciated my call; but he was unable to organize a rescue before a long stretch of cold weather set in, causing the water inside the boat to freeze up into a solid plug. Darnedest thing--the next year the boat was rescued, found to have no structural damage, and eventually returned to sailing with new owners. That was one tough boat.
- Second, they look so salty you just about have to hug one. Nobody is going to be hugging that MacGregor based on looks. <;-)
Having owned a CP-16, the design is exceptional for what it was designed to do. It's easy to launch/retrieve and rig, it's solid built, handles heavy weather confidently, and it's pleasing to the eyes. It's not particularly comfortable for two adults to over night, however for a solo camp cruiser it's fine.
As cute (and CRAMPED and poorly-sailing) as the Compac-16 is, and as butt-ugly (but incredibly capacious and liveable) as the M-26X+M is, I have to go for the M-26. For family fun and safety, it may have no equal for its size and second-hand price. This vote may have something to do about when I was teaching a new owner of a 26M to sail, and a big thunderhead blew up a few miles away. Instead of facing the gail of the thunderstorm, we dropped sail and motored away courtesy of the 50 HP outboard. Got safely tied up and buttoned up just as the gust front hit.
I voted for the Com-Pac because it is a boat that I would own. However, aesthetics and maybe build quality aside, I don’t see how the McGregor can possibly be considered objectively inferior in any other way. My brain tells me that the McGregor will provide a superior boating experience (and maybe a small, ugly Bayliner powerboat even more so) but my heart and self image would not let me set foot on one. That is a flaw in me, not the boat, but it is not going to change.
Seems like a silly comparison..IMO. I wouldn't even class the X/M as a "mini"...just because it's trailerable. Comparing a boat with full standing head room, an enclosed head, and a top speed in the 20s to a classic beater (meaning you can't kill it even if you try) old design with a slightly-more-than cuddy cabin isn't very fair. I wouldn't want a Mac X if I were looking for a mini-cruiser. It's not one. But if I were looking for comfort and convivence in a trailer boat...Mac X would be on the short list.
Com-pac all day long. Sailed Com-Pacs (larger version) as our USSA Keelboat course fleet aboard Camp Lejeune Marine Base. Stout little classics that were sensitive to light air and handled heavy air like champs. McGregor just not on the same level of quality.
The contest is for a mini-cruiser. At 26 feet long, I cannot include the MacGregor 26 in the group. On its trailer it has to be over 30 feet long. This length seems to be pushing the max-trailerable category.
the macgregor is a unique and useful boat for many families. Not against the concept or the excellent compromises that it shows. Phil Bolger would endorse it's design, But the compac 16 was the boat i lusted after in high school. I even rebuilt the interior of my 19' wooden sloop to incorporate some of the compac's features. Com-pac for me.
No contest on this one…the Com-Pac 16 might be small and cramped as a mini-cruiser, but it’s a towering classic next to the MacGregor.
Yes, the ComPac 16 has a well deserved reputation to need half a gale to drive her well and not going to windward well--maybe not at all if her sailor isn't a pretty fair hand at coaxing shy fillies upwind. BUT, there two things we can say with confidence:
- First, they are built like tanks. I used to park my boat (not a ComPac 16) next to one in a mast-up storage lot near a launch ramp at one of my local reservoirs which hadn't been moved for years. After we'd all covered our boats for the winter, we had some really heavy rain. Checking on my own boat, I noticed that the ComPac 16, mast still up, no cover in place, had her cockpit completely full of water (stopped up cockpit drains, I'd suppose) which had overflowed into the cabin, which was also nearly full of water. All of this weight had sunk the trailer in the ground right up to the frame.
I reached out to the owner, who appreciated my call; but he was unable to organize a rescue before a long stretch of cold weather set in, causing the water inside the boat to freeze up into a solid plug. Darnedest thing--the next year the boat was rescued, found to have no structural damage, and eventually returned to sailing with new owners. That was one tough boat.
- Second, they look so salty you just about have to hug one. Nobody is going to be hugging that MacGregor based on looks. <;-)
Having owned a CP-16, the design is exceptional for what it was designed to do. It's easy to launch/retrieve and rig, it's solid built, handles heavy weather confidently, and it's pleasing to the eyes. It's not particularly comfortable for two adults to over night, however for a solo camp cruiser it's fine.
As cute (and CRAMPED and poorly-sailing) as the Compac-16 is, and as butt-ugly (but incredibly capacious and liveable) as the M-26X+M is, I have to go for the M-26. For family fun and safety, it may have no equal for its size and second-hand price. This vote may have something to do about when I was teaching a new owner of a 26M to sail, and a big thunderhead blew up a few miles away. Instead of facing the gail of the thunderstorm, we dropped sail and motored away courtesy of the 50 HP outboard. Got safely tied up and buttoned up just as the gust front hit.
I voted for the Com-Pac because it is a boat that I would own. However, aesthetics and maybe build quality aside, I don’t see how the McGregor can possibly be considered objectively inferior in any other way. My brain tells me that the McGregor will provide a superior boating experience (and maybe a small, ugly Bayliner powerboat even more so) but my heart and self image would not let me set foot on one. That is a flaw in me, not the boat, but it is not going to change.
Water skiing behind a sailboat is an abomination of nature.
I’ve really tried to focus on the positive attributes of the Machregor— to give it a fair shake— but it’s a tough sell.
I always thought the MacGregor was a boat for someone that didn’t understand boating. Certainly not a vessel for a sailor. Com-Pac hands down.
The boat that gets the most use is the one that’s easiest to set up and take down.
I always loved the spaciousness of the McGregor and to enjoy time with the wife and kids on calm waters.
But as a solo Sailor I’m going to pick the compact 16 versus the MacGregor.
Seems like a silly comparison..IMO. I wouldn't even class the X/M as a "mini"...just because it's trailerable. Comparing a boat with full standing head room, an enclosed head, and a top speed in the 20s to a classic beater (meaning you can't kill it even if you try) old design with a slightly-more-than cuddy cabin isn't very fair. I wouldn't want a Mac X if I were looking for a mini-cruiser. It's not one. But if I were looking for comfort and convivence in a trailer boat...Mac X would be on the short list.
And I happen to be in the market...for an X :-)
Com-pac all day long. Sailed Com-Pacs (larger version) as our USSA Keelboat course fleet aboard Camp Lejeune Marine Base. Stout little classics that were sensitive to light air and handled heavy air like champs. McGregor just not on the same level of quality.
I'll always opt for quality over quantity.
I voted for the Mac 26 because it fills a role no other boat does.
The Compact 16 is a great boat too. A cousin of mine owns one.
Compac 16 has an aura of quality about it irregardless of performance
The contest is for a mini-cruiser. At 26 feet long, I cannot include the MacGregor 26 in the group. On its trailer it has to be over 30 feet long. This length seems to be pushing the max-trailerable category.
the macgregor is a unique and useful boat for many families. Not against the concept or the excellent compromises that it shows. Phil Bolger would endorse it's design, But the compac 16 was the boat i lusted after in high school. I even rebuilt the interior of my 19' wooden sloop to incorporate some of the compac's features. Com-pac for me.