PaddleWise Topics PaddleWise Stories PaddleWise Photo Album

Who's Who on PaddleWise PaddleWise Links PaddleWise Home

Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 14:31:32 MET-1MST
From: "N.D. VAN LOO"
Subject: [Paddlewise] hardshell/foldable debate

Hi everyone,

We have a simple question: Can anyone convince us that buying a 
foldable double instead of a hardshell is a stupid and crazy idea?

Let us explain:
We are new to kayaking and Paddlewise and considering to buy a kayak 
somewhere end of this year. The only experience in kayaking is 
limited to a couple of intructions at a local kayak club.  

When asking around to some " more experienced" kayakers, they all 
told us about their favourite hardshell brands and their moste loved 
types. At an outdoor exibition we saw a presentation of Klepper and 
fell in love immediately. So we started to look around more carefully 
at the internet and  we read a couple of  "standard books" on 
seakayaking  and kayaking in general.

To cut a long story short, our conclusion (for the moment) is:
We want a foldable because its larger safety margin and foldability.
We consider Feathercraft/Klepper/Nautiraid doubles. Among these the 
Klepper expedition (red colour) is the favourite.

This conclusion when presented at the kayak club gave rise to quite 
some resistance. Foldables were "not done". When we asked: "Could 
you give any logical reason why a foldable is a bad idea?" The debate 
focussed on, stability, preformance, vurnerability to rocks, 
maintenance, folding/unfolding time etc. But most of our kayaking 
friends had no experience at all with foldables.

We are curious to learn from people that have experience 
with both foldables and hardshells. Could any of them please tell us 
why we are so wrong?
Anyone of you is also free to explain why buying a foldable is the 
smartest thing to do!

Thanks in Advance,
Diana and Nico-Dirk van Loo
N.D. van Loo, Msc
Dept. Cell Biology
Medical Faculty 
Erasmus University Rotterdam
P.O. 1738
3000 DR Rotterdam
The Netherlands


 
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 
From: Dave Kruger
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] hardshell/foldable debate

N.D. VAN LOO wrote:
 
> We have a simple question: Can anyone convince us that buying a
> foldable double instead of a hardshell is a stupid and crazy idea?

No.  There are advantages and disadvantages to both.  I paddle both
hardshells (I own 3 singles) and a folding double (Folbot) -- probably
nowadays about equal time, but used to be almost exclusively hardshell.

Ralph Diaz will preside as the priest of folders, so I'll just compare my
experience.  YMMV

Folding doubles are:  slower, roomier, more difficult to pack, more stable,
require more maintenance, and are generally more costly.

My Folbot Greenland II is all of the above except the last,

I like hardshells for ease of maintenance, their speed, and their
sleekness.  I like my folder for its comfort, its HUGE cargo space, and the
laid-back feeling of its enormous cockpit.  I feel a little nervous when it
works its way over swells, as it creaks and bends, but the things are
durable.  If I broke a frame piece or longeron, I believe a field repair
would bne pretty simple.  The same is not true for a major hole in a
hardshell.

Most folks decide to re-engineer the seats in folders.  I did that on my
Folbot.  Folbot supposedly now sells a really good seat.  I have, as well,
re-engineered the seats on ALL my singles, because they did not fit well.

You can not miss -- thery are all boats!

-- 
Dave Kruger
Astoria, OR




Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999
From: Scott Ives 
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] hardshell/foldable debate

Diana and Nico,

  Folders are great boats, I've had four over the past 10 years and currently
have an older Klepper.  What your friends are trying to tell you is that the
Klepper is not a really high performance boat.  Think an older prop. plane vs.
a jet.  Both will get you there, but the trip will be a little choppier and
slower in the folder.  (I can hear Ralph disagreeing already!).

  Remember that if you stick with kayaking, you will experience a sharp
learning curve.  You may find that you desire faster, lighter kayaks soon - and
then you will have already invested $5,000 (probably more now) on this boat.  I
would recommend you try some fast hardshell doubles before buying the Klepper.
If you have the $$, it would be great to have one or two fast single hardshells
AND the Klepper.  Unfortunately most folks don't have such $$.

  The Klepper is a beautiful, functional boat and you won't go wrong buying it
(very easy to resell).  But just remember that you might want more speed and
manuverability some day soon.  Also, two singles allow you to get away from
your better half every now and then!

  - Scott

--
Scott Ives
- avid father, husband, lawyer, photographer, kayaker, jet skier and
   Mustang Cobra convertible owner


Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] hardshell/foldable debate
From: Ralph Diaz

N.D. VAN LOO wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> We have a simple question: Can anyone convince us that buying a
> foldable double instead of a hardshell is a stupid and crazy idea?

It _is_ a stupid and crazy idea.  Why would you want to buy a folding
kayak?  It would just put you in a kayak with a long distinguished
pedigree of thousands of expedition accomplishments on ever waterway and
large body of water from the Arctic to Antarctica and everywhere in
between.  Who would want to paddle a kayak that is the choice of such
dainty, sissy paddlers as special operations forces the world over
including those in your native Netherlands?  Need I go on?  It is a
crazy idea, folding kayaks are no good; they are not even kayaks, just,
ugh, "boats".  Give it up!  :-) 
 
> When asking around to some " more experienced" kayakers, they all
> told us about their favourite hardshell brands and their moste loved
> types. At an outdoor exibition we saw a presentation of Klepper and
> fell in love immediately. So we started to look around more carefully
> at the internet and  we read a couple of  "standard books" on
> seakayaking  and kayaking in general.

I know, I know.  That is just my point.  If experienced paddlers say
that the hardshells are better you should listen to them.  I remember
when well before I decided to write a book on folding kayaks, I asked an
author of one of those leading seakayaking books why he had said such
bad things about folding kayaks.  He fumbled for an answer and said that
is what "people" say about the boats and it turns out he had never been
in one.  
 
Folding kayaks are much too stable; that makes them boring in heavy seas
and takes away from the enjoyment of having to use all your bracing and
rolling skills to survive.  They don't perform well except in rough
conditions.  All those major open water crossing over the last 90 years
including the Atlantic were just flukes, meaning exceptions.  Yes, they
are extremely vulnerable despite being able to be dropped from
helicopters fully loaded from 20 feet up and crashed against enemy
shores in the blackness of night loaded with a half ton of gear. 
Maintenance: the instructions say that you should varnish each year;
those who never varnish like me, will not get the 70 years of life out
of the frames just perhaps 30 years because of our unwise
non-maintenance laziness.  And that Klepper, it takes all of 10 minutes
for two people to make; that is so much longer than putting a hardshell
kayak on a roofrack (assuming the rack is always in place), strapping
and tying it down, then untying and removing it from the roof at your
paddling place.  You are much better off in a hardshell that doesn't
require assembly at some point.  So what if you can't ship the latter
anywhere except by special arrangement and at enormous cost or it
depreciates 50 per cent in value within the first two years.  Folding
kayaks go as ordinary baggage everywhere and keep their value far too
well; who would want those things.

> We are curious to learn from people that have experience
> with both foldables and hardshells. Could any of them please tell us
> why we are so wrong?

You are totally wrong.  Afterall it is what people say.  :-) :-) :-)

ralph diaz

p.s. Paddlewise, our Dutch friends who asked the questions know I am
doing this tongue-in-cheek. 
-- 



Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 13:43:48 -0400
From: Leander
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] hardshell/foldable debate

N.D. VAN LOO wrote:

>We want a foldable because its larger safety margin and foldability.
>We consider Feathercraft/Klepper/Nautiraid doubles. Among these the 
>Klepper expedition (red colour) is the favourite.

Nice kayaks; we fell in love with folders after paddling them at a symposium 
a few years ago, and now own Kleppers, despite the initial higher investment 
in folding kayaks versus hardshells. We have a Klepper expedition double,
which my spouse paddles solo, or we paddle double; we had the factory install 
the extra center seat position. We also own a Klepper 2000, which I paddle; 
the new two-bag system works great for me. We love the wood frames, canvas 
deck, sailing potential, and dog-carrying capacity.

  To my 2000 was added paddle pockets instead of paddle straps, extra D-rings
and lifeline like the Quattro has, extra keel-strips to make the hull
expedition-quality. I also had Mark Ekhart modify the spray-skirt
attachment so that the Velcro would not be glued to my wood coaming; instead,
that Velcro portion is on a tuck-under sprayskirt piece, to which the main 
portion attaches. Mark did a great job on this, and I recommend it to anyone 
who wants a quick-remove system without mucking up their coaming.

>... when presented at the kayak club gave rise to quite 
>some resistance. Foldables were "not done". When we asked: "Could 
>you give any logical reason why a foldable is a bad idea?" The debate 
>focussed on, stability, preformance, vulnerability to rocks, 
>maintenance, folding/unfolding time etc. But most of our kayaking 
>friends had no experience at all with foldables.

Their worries are mostly unfounded, as well as worthless since they have never
been in a folding kayak; so all they know is hearsay from others with no
experience. Not very useful.

  Our experience in Kleppers and hardshells is that Kleppers are more stable
than hardshells, especially in rough water. Both are capable of capsizing, but
hardshells are easier to capsize. Yes, Kleppers can be rolled; no, we can't
roll them yet (the only sea kayak I can somewhat reliably roll is a Picolo).
Both hardshells and folding kayaks require flotation bags; consider the
air-filled tubes in folding kayaks as balance enhancers instead of flotation
gear and get canoe end-bags to fill the Klepper bow and stern (kayak flotation
bags are too small). 

  Kleppers are not slow. The 2000 has phenomenal glide. The double moves well
with two paddlers, and moves pretty well with just my spouse paddling(meaning
he keeps up with the pack even when he is out of shape)...until we hit rough
water, then both kayaks shoot ahead of everyone else, as we use forward
strokes and they frantically brace to keep from capsizing. 

  Maintenance is simple; we wash down our kayaks and all our gear with fresh
water and let them dry. You can leave them assembled or put them in their
bags, giving the option of car-topping like a hardshell, or keeping them 
safely inside your vehicle. We haven't varnished the wood or put 303 on the 
hull, but we may get to that sometime.

  So what about vulnerability to rocks? Well, you can crack and hole a
hardshell, you can scrape or gouge its gel coat; you can also tear or hole a
folding hull. We have never done any of those things, but we tend to baby our
boats, whether hardshell or folding. We don't grind them onto the sand or
rocks in takeoffs and landings, and we try to avoid barnacles. We did, 
however, get expedition hulls and extra keel strips because of the rugged 
terrain.

  Finally, folding and unfolding time. I can assemble the Klepper 2000 or the
Klepper double in 10-15 minutes, taking my time. We can both assemble the
Klepper double in 10-15 minutes, or my spouse can assemble it in 20-30 minutes
slow-southern-time (grin) (sitting in a chair while assembling parts) or 15-20
minutes ambling time. Disassembly is equally easy, at 10 minutes more or less,
depending upon how tired you are.

>We are curious to learn from people that have experience 
>with both foldables and hardshells. Could any of them please tell us 
>why we are so wrong?

You're wrong to let people who know nothing about folders talk you out of
buying what you really want. We have never regretted our decision of going
with Klepper. I did own a Feathercraft Khatsalano-S for awhile, which is a 
lovely craft, but takes far longer to assemble than I am willing to spend; 
15 minutes is my maximum tolerance for assembly time.

>Anyone of you is also free to explain why buying a foldable is the 
>smartest thing to do!

You will love it. One recommendation, however, is do not get the Klepper
paddles. Those paddles are awful, and the $90 per pair (two pair in a double)
can be spent on better paddles, probably in the 230-250cm range, depending on
who is in front/back, and how tall you are. Try before you buy. Initial
investment is higher than for most doubles, but you will never need another
kayak; you might add a sail rig in the future, then have a folding
kayak/sailboat. If you plan to do that, then I suggest the newer larger
sailing rudder assembly. Also, on a double, sometimes a rudder is helpful in
cross-wind/current, but I would recommend learning to handle those things
without a rudder, then you can use it when you feel lazy (without being
endangered if it breaks, as all rudders are prone to do eventually).

Hope this has helped. Ralph Diaz can tell you a lot more, and also advise you
about the other folding kayaks. You might want to read his book "The Complete
Folding Kayaker", which has 1994 prices, and doesn't have boats new since
then, but the information is still quite valuable and valid. Hopefully, he'll 
be using his "Folding Kayaker Newsletter" articles to aid writing an updated
second edition for his book...how about it Ralph...is in the works yet? 

Regards,
Leander



From: Peter Osman
Subject: [Paddlewise] hardshell/foldable debate and the Klepper expedition
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999

As a novice kayaker I was faced with a similar decision 6 months ago and
decided to hire hardshells for use in quiet water and to buy a Klepper
Aerius Expedition foldable for use at sea. Before the purchase I read
Ralph's book cover to cover. Storability, transportability, safety, and the
joy/ease of assembly were paramount in the decision. Some observations:

	Assembly:- It's very easy to put together, taking 1/2 to 3/4 hour
both to assemble and to disassemble including adding:- flotation, compass,
rudder, daytrip luggage, packing/unpacking the bags, drying the wooden
components. Basic assembly with no accessories takes 15-20 minutes without
rushing. Assembly is much more pleasant on grass than on sand. Strategic
packing with two towels speeds packing the wooden components, which
otherwise tend to tip about. I find assembly a very pleasant start to
paddling but not everyone may feel this way.

	Performance:- The Klepper Aerius Expedition seems slower than about
half the hardshell sea kayaks I come across except in moderate to heavy seas
when it tends to keep up or overtake. (A hardshell owner in turbulent water
once shouted behind me "look at that Klepper go" - it was great).  If your
group paddles fast in calm water you may struggle to keep up. The Klepper
Aerius Expedition needs a fair bit of strength to maintain its top speed
over long periods.

	Safety:- The Klepper Aerius is well known for its outstanding
stability and seaworthiness. My local sea kayak club normally require the
ability to eskimo roll a hardshell for higher grade trips. However, they are
flexible and will probably allow an exemption for Aerius users. Clearly the
need for good bracing and self rescue skills is still essential.

	Maintenance:- 	Allow about 1/2 an hour cleaning and stowage time at
home (mainly rinsing with fresh water) and about 1 or 2 days to dry it out
before packing it away. To dry the skin I support it on towels over 4
sawhorses under a veranda. Regular use of Klepper wax/303 UV protectant for
the hull and fittings (particularly the seam which folds into the coaming
groove) is highly desirable but only takes a few minutes. I'm also using 303
fabricguard on the deck on the advice of a friend who has used it regularly
on his Klepper to protect against UV. Mild soap/detergent seems to remove
the expensive 303 fabricguard so I'm now using fresh water only to clean the
deck.

I've not regretted the decision although its about the most expensive kayak
I've heard of. When trying to keep up with faster paddlers I'm less than
thankful. When in roughish water I'm very thankful. Good luck, Petero.






From:	[Ralph Diaz]
Sent:	Tuesday, May 04, 1999 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] kayak reviews and advice needed
 
> dmccarty@... wrote:
> 
> I have a Looksha IV and my wife has the IVs.  Both are kevlar layups.
> When we started looking into sea kayaks we started with plastic but after
> much hmmming and hawing we slowing escalated to kevlar.  One reason was
> the limited lifetime on the plastic boats.  I have taken out rental plastic
> boats that suffered greatly from oil caning.  They all suffered from one
> degree or another. I just could not stand the thought of that happening to
> my boat. It seemed to me that I was going to spend $2400 on two boats and
> within a very short number of years I would be looking for a new boat. That
> was to expensive for me.  Hopefully others will comment on my impressions
> of plastic boats.
> 
> Another was weight. 
 
It is funny how polyethylene kayaks have this reputation for toughness
that lures people into buying them (in addition to cheaper cost) but in
point of fact they are not as durable as fiberglass or kevlar
composites.  Plastic boats suffer from: oilcanning from being on
roofracks or resting uneveningly on a beach; scars and strands of
plastic that hang from the bottom from dragging them around that also
slows them down on the water; and the relatively short lifespan expected
of them before they get too brittle to repair easily are all points that
get lost in the illusion of indestructability.  Then there is the weight
factor.  They weigh a ton.  Take a look at Sea Kayaker review of
kayaks.  The manufacturer says his boat weighs 55 lb.  SK mag puts it on
the scale and it is 66 lb.!!!  And, at least in some of the plastic
boats, a lot of the weight for some reason (the way the molds work,
whatever) is at the ends; so when you pick one up and you don't have it
perfectly horizontal, you start getting a pendulum effect making the
carry even more difficult in addition to sheer weight.
 
While kevlar is expensive, you can certainly shop around.  Some
companies offer their kevlar and fiberglass boats at a lot cheaper price
than others.  Take SEDA for example.  Prices on them tend to run as much
as $500 cheaper than their counterparts coming from other
manufacturers.  There may be a model from SEDA that suits you.  Then
there is Dan McCarthy's further comment (which I snipped) about going
around to demo days and symposiums.  Often these exhibits offer boats at
10-20% off list price which could make a difference or help you buy a
nice paddle.  Then, if you can wait until the end of the season, many
kayak stores offer significant end of season sales to reduce their
inventory and later bring in next year's models.   I know around here in
the NY area, some of the shops drop prices $800 or more on a $2,000 or
so boat, perhaps not of the greatest colors but a nice savings.  Also,
some outfitters do sell off parts of their fleet at the end of the
season and you can pick up a good fiberglass boat then at pretty close
to list price.
 
Unfortunately, if you are looking for a folding kayak, there are seldom
any end of season sales as people will still buy them in winter for
travel to warmer climes and dealers often are not stuck with just a
local market pool as they can ship 'em by UPS anywhere.  Only Folbot
offers any such sales in the Fall.
 
ralph diaz
-- 




Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 10:47:16 -0700 
From: "Mattson, Timothy G"
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] kayak reviews and advice needed

It is funny how polyethylene kayaks have this reputation for
toughness that lures people into buying them (in addition to cheaper cost)
but in point of fact they are not as durable as fiberglass or kevlar
composites.  

Plastic boats don't last as long, but they are tough.  I hit rocks in my
plastic boat and get a little scratch.  Due to the flex in the material,
though, I don't ge a depressing gash as I would wiith my folding boat or my
Kevlar boat.

Also, there is the psychological factor associated with the cost.  I paid
around $900 for my Plastic Sea Lion.  So it just doesn't bug me as much when
I slam into a barnicle covered rock in that boat as opposed to my $3800
Khatsalano.  

I think its this psychological factor that has earned plastic boats their
tough reputation.  They are considered tougher because their owners are more
willing to abuse them around rocks.  I will always keep a ready-to-abuse
plastic boat in my fleet so when I know I'm going to bash into lots of rocks
-- either in shallow rivers or rugged coast lines -- I have a boat to use
without suffering mental anguish.

--Tim " proud owner of a two ton plastic Sea Lion"





Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 09:43:21 -0700
From: [Ralph Diaz] 
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Proud to Paddle Plastic

Reeves, Debbie (Debbie) wrote:
> 
> You are not alone!
> 
> Debbie Reeves
> Owner of fiberglass, wood, and yes, plastic kayaks

Plastic is just fine and don't ever let anyone look down on you for what
you paddle.  One of the fastest and most reliable paddlers I ever met
paddled a Chinook.  He would go to symposiums, eye and try out all the
fiberglass while considering what he might upgrade to one day.  But for
years he stayed with that Chinook and remained the best paddler around. 
The paddler maketh the boat not the boat maketh the paddler.

There are however a lot of shortcomings to plastic that can't be
overlooked:

Weight--they tend to be about 8 to 10 pounds heavier than equivalent
fiberglass.

Portability--with lots of their weight at their very ends, plastic boats
are harder to carry as a see-saw effect starts up if you get 'em
slightly off balance in the carry.

Deformity--they deform terribly to affect handling and speed.  After a
year no two kayaks of the same model will handle the same because of
this.

Longevity--they really don't last long, certainly no where near the
useful life of a fiberglass kayak.

Repairs--generally more difficult than in fiberglass.

Leaky bulkheads--no matter what a manufacturer claims, bulkheads all
leak, some more than others, but all leak.

So I don't see the choice as a matter of prestige but rather
practicality.  Fiberglass gives you more than image.

Plastic kayaks have an advantage in price and in there lies a danger. 
It is so easy to get one as an entry boat from a department store and go
paddle forth without any knowledge of airbags, self-rescue, reading sea
conditions etc.  Sooner or later, we are going to start seeing
statistics catch up to these paddlers and it won't be pretty.

ralph diaz   
-- 





Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:48:36 -0700
From: [Ralph Diaz]
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] experience with folding seakayaks

Hendrik Maroske wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am looking for a folding seakayak that is in handling and speed
> > comparable to hardshell boats. Are there people on this list with
> > hands on experience in boats like the Feathercraft K1 or
> > Khatsalano, or the longer single seat Nautiraids (greenlander 500).
> > Or may be other alternatives?
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Merijn
> >

> Hmmm, since nobody answered this, I take this as my turn:
> 
> having built a few folding aluminum baidarkas, I don't think they
> were in any respect similar to harsdhell boats. Although I wanted
> each kayak to be comparable with hardshell kayaks and took
> some pain to achive the best results, neither rigidity, nor
> speed under paddle were as good.

I am not certain what is the situation with the boats that Hendrik has
hand crafted but there are certainly some commercially available folding
kayaks that are no slouches in the speed department.  The Feathercraft
Khatsalano is generally recognized as a very fast boat with less than a
half dozen non-racing commercially available hardshells being faster. 
Stepping down from the Khatsalano, the Feathercraft K-1 and some of the
Nautiraids are certainly as fast as a lot of other hardshells.

I think a lot of the image regarding folding kayak speed is one of
thinking in terms of clunky doubles paddled by occasional paddlers in
comparison to solo paddlers in hardshells.  When it comes to the
singles, the folding kayaks can be quite fast, length for length, with
hardshells.

> Anyway, you might want to look at something narrow and rigid;
> I never saw anything in the market that was foldable and would
> match at least my selfbuilts with regard to rigidity. They only
> _do_ assemble a lot easier.

I haven't seen these hand crafted folding kayaks but I can't imagine
anything stiffer than the Nautiraid singles.  If you pick one up by one
end and shake it up and down, there is virtually no flex at all...i.e.
they are incredibly rigid; their frames use more cross-ribs and
stringers than do other folding kayaks and their external sponsons add
lots of rigidity.  Feathercrafts have a bit more flex to them.  Folbots
an incredible amount of flex.

> One thing to consider is handling during rescue (-training).
> I haven't seen any folding kayak that would match my desires in
> this case. So I have equipped my recent folder with retractable
> compass and hatchcover-mounted pump in order to survive at
> least a TX-style rescue; also, I have lowered the deck beam to
> help with rolling.

The commercially available folding kayaks are regularly used in TX
rescues with no damage; I've seen it done several times this summer with
nothing happening by way of damage.  I suppose if the boats were not
carrying airbags to reduce the amount of water that gets inside in a
capsize than perhaps some damage may result to deck bars, BUT no one
should ever venture out in any folding kayak (even if using a sea sock)
without air flotation bags over and above the sponsons that are normally
built in.  The same would be true for any hardshell that does not have
bulkheads and for polyethylene kayaks whose bulkheads are generally
suspect and prone to leak and pop if flooded in a capsize.

The deck bars on folding kayaks can take punishment.  I once had a very
heavy fellow trip over while near my K-Light on dry land.  He fell flat
with all his weight on the bow deck right between two crossribs: unlike
when sitting in water, the boat had no where to sink into to absorb the
punishment (as it might in a TX rescue).  The result: The top deck bar
was ever so slightly bent at the point where it connected to another bar
but did not need replacing or fixing.  I shudder to think what would
have happened with the deck of a kevlar boat.

As for rolling, some folding kayaks roll okay; perhaps not as well as
many hardshells, but they can be rolled.  Ken Fink reports that he
regularly teaches people how to roll using the K-Light.  And I have
never seen anyone who does have a good roll fail when getting into the
single folding kayaks from Feathercraft, Nautiraid and Klepper.  At
worse a good roller cannot do his full array of rolls as he might in his
own boat or slimmer boats but that also would be the case with some of
the hardshells too, i.e. it would be difficult to do every type of roll
in every hardshell single.

BTW, I saw a double Klepper rolled the other day.  I had heard of people
doing it but two guys at the Boathouse decided to give it a try.  They
failed the first time; swam the Klepper back to the dock.  Got their
coordination straightened out and went out and did two effortless rolls
in a row. 

ralph diaz
-- 





Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 11:22:53 -0700
From: Shawn W. Baker
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Perfect Boat is Plastic!

> As a longtime owner of plastic and hopeful upgrader to something else, I would
> be interested in further comments along this thread on the relative merits
> (durability, speed, whatever) of kevlar, carbon composites, and wood.  Any
> first-hand experience out there across those lines?

Plastic is generally more resistant to abrasion and very large impacts. 
Fiberglass, carbon, kevlar, Spectra and wood/composite boats are
generally lighter and stiffer.

For example, a design that might weight 70 lbs. in plastic would weigh
50-55 lbs. in glass, 45-50 lbs. in wood, and 40-45 lbs. in Kevlar. 
Composite layups can vary according to how heavily they are
designed--there are super-light boats that are easy to carry, but very
fragile, and heavyweight glass boats that are probably tougher than most
plastic boats.

Colored gelcoats in composite boats are much more vibrant and glossy
than typical rotomolded or blowmolded PE boats.  Wood boats are
downright gorgeous-- admittedly, though, I'm highly biased in that
direction.

Some plastic boats are designed somewhat around ease of molding.  This
is not always the case, but you'll probably notice a few more little
intricacies of design in composite boats.  Coleman canoes are an extreme
example of boats designed for ease of manufacture and shipping, at the
expense of performance.

Composite boats are easier to modify and repair.  Nothing really sticks
to polyethylene.

Wood kayaks, built well by someone else, are very, very expensive.  Wood
boats built by the owner are dirt cheap, but take a considerable
labor/time investment, and some modest woodworking tools are required.

Email me if you have any particular questions about wood kayaks.

Happy deciding!
Shawn

                ____©/______
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^\  ,/      /~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
"Everything can be found at sea according to the spirit of your quest"
 -Joseph Conrad




Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 12:22:53 -0800
From: ralph diaz
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] (Paddlewise) Plastic is  Perfect!????????????????
    not!

> I however revert to the "ram it full speed up the beach to keep my feet
> dry approach" once I have gotten a couple of scratches in the gelcoat
> anyhow.

If you are of the ram-the-beach school, there is nothing quite like a
Folbot folding kayak for doing this.  The bow and stern have a thick
curved aluminum rail protecting them that runs from the tip of the boat
and down and under to part way along the keel.  The marks they make on
sand and any rocks they hit looks like they were made by a plowshare.

I often wonder how a Folbot would do for playing kayak polo against
plastic and fiberglass boats.  While Folbots don't turn that well and so
would lack in agility, they would make a mash of any hardshell they hit
with their killer ramming ends.  I can see a Folbot on a kayak polo team
acting like those legendary enforcers that the Boston Celtics use to
employ to break arms and legs of opposing team stars.

ralph diaz



Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 14:45:41 -0800
From: ralph diaz
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Perfect Boat is Plastic! Now Flex

Kirk Olsen wrote:
> 
> hmm, time to figure out how to trade hats.  My paddling choices include
> a skin/frame baidarka, and carbon fiber race surf ski.
> 
> Skin/frame boats flex very differently than plastic boats. 
> With a skin/frame boat the boat will bend as it goes over waves.  To me
> this was the most dramatic the day I paddled with a friend, he was paddling
> my VCP Pintail ('glass british heavy).  We were paddling into a headwind with
> 1 foot chop.  The PinTail was riding up over each wave and crashing off the
> top of each wave.  My baidarka was cruising straight forward with the
> waves traveling along the gunwales.  With the boat flexing as it adjusted to
> each oncoming wave.  The baidarka was much faster than the pintail headed
> into the waves.
> 
> My current take on this is a rigid boat is going to be the fastest on a
> flat water course - no flexing induced by the non-existant waves.  In
> waves I think a skin/frame boat will be faster because it adjusts to each
> wave and less forward momentum is lost to the boat coming off of one wave
> and pounding down off of the back of the wave.

I am not certain it has to do with you observed but rather with some
other phenomena.  Back about 3 years ago, one of my readers, a physicist
of some renown with some 150 patents to his name and voted to all kinds
of lists such as Industry Week's Top 50 R&D Stars To Watch, etc., took a
crack at it in an article for my newsletter.  It is quite a detailed
article that I would share with anyone who asks via back channels.  The
key point he makes is cited below in an excerpt.  The phenomenon is
phrased in terms of folding kayaks but would apply equally as well to
any skin kayak such as Kirk's.

>From Folding Kayaker Sept/Oct 1996, pp. 1-5
Scientific Look At Rough Water Drag
For Folding Kayaks Vs. Hard-Shells

"Flexible Skin In Action 
In chaotic seas, a folding kayak^Òs skin sections defined by its
stringers and crossribs pump in and out like a drum head and destabilize
laminar flow of water along the surface of the kayak (Handbook of Fluid
Dynamics, ibid, page 11-30).  The vibrating skin of a folding kayak is
extremely effective in pushing the critical Reynolds number of the drag
crisis down to lower Reynolds numbers.  There also may be a small
geometric effect from the less regular surface generated by the framing
effect of stringers and cross ribs on the flexible-skin analogous to
dimpling on a golf ball. 
	This ^Ódimpling^Ô of the surface of the flexible-skin kayak also tends to
lower the critical Reynolds number of the drag crisis.  However, because
of the large lateral size and small height of such ^Ódimples^Ô on a
folding kayak, the destabilization effect due to this static morphology
of the kayak skin is much less than for the dimpled golf ball.   Of the
two effects, we believe that the dynamic in-and-out motion of skin
sections of the flexible skin kayak is the dominant one that causes the
critical Reynolds number of the drag crisis to fall.  Such in-and-out
motion occurs readily in rough chaotic waters and is a common phenomenon
that many of you have often exclaimed about, i.e. the feel of the water
as it passes along the skin.
	For the drag crisis regime to cause a difference in drag between
hard-shell and flexible-skin kayaks, the Reynolds number associated with
kayak motion through water must be near the drag crisis regime.  By one
of those quirks of nature,  it is."

By now I am certain James Lofton is scratching his head saying to
himself "What! My little ole Folbot is doing all that s**t?"  Kinda my
reaction too. :-)  Anyway it is good reading.

happy paddling,

ralph diaz

To subscribe to PaddleWise, send email to PaddleWise-request@paddlewise.net
To send email to members of PaddleWise, send email to PaddleWise@paddlewise.net
For questions or comments, please send email to owner@paddlewise.net