MacGregor 26 vs Mariehom IF
How do the MacGregor 26 and Mariehom IF compare? Below, their dimensions, displacement, sail area and the standard design ratios side by side, followed by a data-driven summary.
MacGregor 26 
Mariehom IF | MacGregor 26 | Mariehom IF | |
|---|---|---|
| Length overall | 25.8 ft7.87 m | 25.8 ft7.86 m |
| Waterline length | 23.0 ft7.01 m | 19.9 ft6.05 m |
| Beam | 7.7 ft2.36 m | 7.2 ft2.20 m |
| Draft | 5.5 ft1.68 m | 4.0 ft1.21 m |
| Displacement | 2,250 lb1,021 kg | 4,850 lb2,200 kg |
| Ballast | 1,500 lb680 kg | —— |
| Sail area | 241 ft²22.4 m² | 280 ft²26.0 m² |
| SA / Displacement | 22.46 | 15.64 |
| Displacement / Length | 83 | 277 |
| Comfort ratio | 9.5 | 24.9 |
| Capsize screening | 2.36 | 1.71 |
| Hull speed (kn) | 6.4 | 6.0 |
| Average used price | — | €2,900 |
MacGregor 26 vs Mariehom IF: the short version
- The MacGregor 26 and Mariehom IF are close in length (25.8 ft7.87 m vs 25.8 ft7.86 m ).
- The Mariehom IF is heavier, displacing about 116% more, which usually means a steadier but slower-to-accelerate hull.
- On sail area/displacement the MacGregor 26 carries the more powerful rig (22.5 vs 15.6), favouring lighter-air performance.
- The Mariehom IF scores higher on the Brewer comfort ratio, suggesting an easier motion in a seaway.
- By the capsize screening formula the Mariehom IF rates better for offshore work (1.71 vs 2.36).
Ratios are guidelines computed from published specs; condition, layout and gear matter as much as the numbers.