Tracking Verse Yaw
Course keeping. tracking is often misunderstood. The best computed indication of course keeping in block co-efficient; the block composed of a hull’s waterline length, it’s waterline width and draft, all in the same units. The less of that block the hull fills, the better it will track. To simplify we can just the length to width ratio since draft is pretty similar; USCA racers have a L/W ratio of 7. Most solo canoes have numbers between 6 and 7 so can be expected to track pretty well.
The issue in solo course keeping is paddler induced yaw. To 1. Not paddle with a vertical shaft, 2. Stroke along the curved rail rather than parallel to the keel line, 3. Carry the blades to or behind the body, results in misdirection. Sweeping forces turn the hull offside, away from the paddleblade, by pulling the stern towards the blade.
To reduce that Yaw designers often minimize stern rocker, but it isn’t to make the hull track better, it’s to reduce the effects of poor paddle technique. Note the profusion of newer canoe designs with differential rocker.
Bow rocker is inconsequential; we need do something very different to pull or push the bow off course. Bow rocker enhances turning and increases forward speed.
Hence, the best step towards better tracking is likely to be a paddling lesson.
But, back to OP’s boat search. Armed with burden data, I’d try to locate a good used composite Argosy, Nomad, Osprey or YellowStone Solo. Rubber performs too poorly to bother with, Baboosic, DragonFly and WildFire have too much stern rocker for this first step. Kee 16, Nomad and SRT are too rare to be available used and withing price constraints. Happy hunting!
Argosy
I have paddled an Argosy some. Not my favorite boat, but it would probably suit your purposes pretty well. I haven’t paddled a Wilderness at all, but I’m pretty certain I would go with the Argosy if it came down to a choice between those two.
I do agree with those who feel that the review of the Argosy you posted is pretty much BS and should be disregarded.
Wenonah’s proprietary Tuff-Weave layup is fiberglass and polyester cloth. It is quite tough but not as light as their aramid boats. Most people who have owned Wenonah Tuff-Weave boats have been quite satisfied with them.
I don’t share Charlie’s aversion to Royalex but I agree that for tripping in the BWCWA or ADKs a composite boat would be preferable for the weight savings. I don’t think that the weight of a Royalex Yellowstone solo (or Wildfire) would be that onerous and I would certainly consider one if it came your way.
In addition to the boats mentioned, I would be on the lookout for a Bell Merlin II or Hemlock Peregrine if one appeared. I bought a very nice Merlin II in white gold layup for $900 a few years back.
Interesting conversation, I love it
Intended river - West branch Susquehanna, from Cherry Tree to the Susquehanna.
Freestyle - I’ve attended 4 classes in Ohio and at Paul Smiths years ago. I have a cedar strip Red River Canoe “Élan” that I built purpose for freestyle. When I showed up one year with my SRT that got some looks. You may remember me?
I am a decent paddler but am surely no Harold Deal. But I do ok.
My wife has a Hemlock Kestrel that Is a pure delight to paddle, and I have used it on a few ADK trips and a few down river races empty, but wouldn’t consider it the best option for river tripping.
Kneeling in Argosy MUCH
Conversation came up about kneeling and if you have an aversion to doing so!? If you are thinking of an Argosy AND whitewater,…kneeling is a CERTAINTY! I just assumed it was known but regardless I don’t mind doing so since I have the knee pads and flotation in my Argosy. Furthermore the pronounced tumblehome WILL put you in the drink if you take a wave of any significance broadside. The pleasure of paddling a Wenonah with the tumblehome does have its drawbacks! Interested in knowing who pBlanc was referring to about a BS review of the Argosy! HMMM
SOLD your SRT! - Rivers - Tribalism
Windwalker, you sold your SRT? I don’t think I’ve ever said this, but your review of SRT was a significant influence on my decision to investigate that superb hull. Every year I appreciate its sophistication and versatility more and more, and I now paddle almost nothing else on any kind of water.
Rivers are not rivers are not rivers. That section of the Susquehanna, at least from some pictures and descriptions, seems to me to be what I would call a big, slow river – fairly wide and mostly smooth water or class 1. On such a river I would prefer, if forced, a high capacity lake canoe. Turning is not a high priority move on such rivers. Angled vectoring and accelerating are more important, as are slipping and back-watering.
High capacity, depth and longer length may in part be subjective preferences for me, but I also think they are practical solo hull attributes. You can carry more. You can carry it below the gunwale line. You will have more freeboard in waves.
On a twisty river with 90 degree turns like the NJ Pine Barrens, Adirondack meanders, or fractal Florida spring runs like Juniper or Rock Creak, I would prefer a more turnable hull than a lake boat. Going straight up fast spring run rivers I would prefer a fast and hard tracking lake hull or outrigger.
The magical SRT can of course handle all of these aqueous venues.
For what I understand of your intended use, I’d get a fast-ish lake canoe with sufficient capacity and depth to suit your preferences.
On other tangents, I was not aware that a paddler had to attend a so-called (and perhaps no-longer-called) Freestyle Symposium in order to know how to do basic canoe moves such as post and axle turns. I think Yuleeman did them elegantly 10,000 years ago. Nor was I aware that a WW paddler had to attend a WW Symposium in order to know how to do an eddy turn or ferry.
I think “lean” is a very common noun and verb to describe … uh … leaning a canoe. Many FW and WW authors use terms like “J-lean”, “bell buoy lean” or “lower body lean”. “Heel” is term derived from sailing, but some people (including me) like to use it to describe canoe leans also.
I certainly think the Canadian Stroke uses an in-water return, because it derives its corrective efficacy from the loaded forward slice on the recovery. The paddle need not remain in-water all the way to the bow, however. Once the corrective force is sufficient the paddler has option to finish the stroke as a form of Indian Stroke, Florida Stroke, or the multiply-ambiguous Northwoods stroke. (Disclaimer: I learned nothing in this paragraph from any symposium.)
Finally, I think the presence of bow rocker or not can affect waterline length, and waterline length can affect what is commonly called tracking or turnability. So do other things. The question is whether it matters in the particular hull you may like for other reasons.
Which review?
I was referring to the Argosy review, submitted by birren and quoted by windwalker earlier in this thread.
What in it do I consider to be BS?
1. The Argosy is unsuited to any purpose other than freestyle
2. The Argosy must be leaned to track with any degree of ease.
3. The Argosy is very unstable until leaned nearly to its limit.
4. The Argosy has better secondary stability than the Bell Yellowstone solo.
I neither love nor hate the Argosy. If it were the only boat I could own I would probably be very fond of it.
The things I don't like about it?
For a 14 1/2' OAL boat with a waterline beam of 27" it has relatively little carrying capacity because the rails are relatively close together in front of the front thwart.
The low, rounded tumblehome leads to an abrupt decrease in secondary stability when leaned beyond the wide part of the "bubble".
For what is marketed as a nimble river boat, the small amount of stern rocker (1") makes the stern rather sticky when executing eddy turns. I am not saying you can't heel and turn it, but there are similar sized boats in which you can do it much easier, and those boats do not give up any straight ahead hull efficiency to the Argosy.
Totally agree
I totally agree with your critique of the review and I still feel if one were to have one solo canoe for all possible purposes,…(some whitewater, some lake, some cruising and some canoe-camping) the Argosy is hard to beat!
The Canadian Stroke does not have a
full inwater recovery. Just a little corner grab with an upward slice.
Of course its not essential for anyone to attend any Canoeing Symposium to learn to do axles and box strokes and posts but to brag that they can do it to the rail in the Wenonah suggests that they have had very extensive balance drill and instruction.
I stand corrected. I did see an Argosy this year at Midwest Freestyle and it fit the paddlers aims perfectly . All they wanted to do was get from A to B efficiently and move the boat a little …not heel to the rail. Everyone has their own goals and it is fine.
I would stick with rubber on some PA rivers. The Argosy can do the Susquehanna but its actually kind of fun on western PA rivers like Mahoning and Crooked Creek.
Incidentally Western PA seems to have a concentration of Curtis Dragon Fly boats.
interesting
in the last of 4 Raystown rendesvous I attended I found that I spent most of my timein a borrowed SRT.
I am still waiting for that publish clearing house Check.
Charlie inNC
West Branch
In Ed Gertler’s book, Keystone Canoeing he lists class II- rapids on the upper stretches. And At Cherry Tree the river is only a very narrow creek. I would most likely get on it at higher levels to help move things along. I am leaning (pun intended) towards a faster boat rather than a turny boat. Right now that is the Wilderness, but may have a lead on a more interesting boat…
I couldn’t agree more about the SRT. But mine wasn’t getting used enough to justify keeping it. Always need money to fund the next adventure. I moved on from tripping and got into WW (still am). But as life sometimes does, I came full circle. And another thing is I enjoy messing around with different boats.
Oh, I am a kneeler.
Not the Prism I owned…
Even with the opposite gunwale on my shoulder, the Prism was just barely free.
I don’t like Wenonahs. They don’t work right for me.
It is very good to hear…
…from you Michael. I shall always remember those incredibly beautiful wood paddles (especially the ones using the lacewood veneers) and canoe you had made and brought to the Raystown gathering in 2004:
http://sports.webshots.com/photo/1205103448054054916WguXru
Like Glenn, your excellent review of the SRT, per journey down the Susy-Q’s full length, was what first turned my attention, and purchase desires towards Misters Curtis and Deal’s fine canoe. If only my knees (and wallet) were of like mind. Hell, I’d even suffer the discomforts of the elderly penitent nun, but this damn dog sidekick that insists on me taking him along has me still holding back, in fear I’d drown the whole triumvirate of downriver fools and hull. This past Raystown I even witnessed a very agile young guy deftly snub his SRT down the extremely skeletal Juniata below Huntingdon (at least, “deftly” till that usual Duckheaded “carousing” thing began to snake-in its own natural element of imbalance.
Well, full-circles and whatnots always having their fill of twists, perhaps you’ll find another used SRT at an affordable sales price (If Jeff keeps poling bony PA streams maybe you can get a bottom-repair number real cheap!).
I notice no one mentions the Wenonah Rendezvous. I’ve always found it a most peculiar hull, favoring the lighter Kevlar Flexcore one I have over my former Royalex model. It’s a good boat for carrying more-than-ample supplies on wider rivers, as well as open lake stretches, though a tad (despite claims of 2 to 2-3/4" rocker stems) sticky, especially to bow, at executing quick eddy maneuvers, at least for someone hefty like myself. In the capable hands of a lighter and more skilled paddler like yourself, I’m sure you would adroitly maneuver all the rock gardens and ledges the West Branch Susy has to offer. Gel-coated, though perhaps a tad heavier and approaching Royalex tonnage (42-pounds, maybe? don’t really recall), it makes the composite a tad more shock-absorbing and slippery for dealing with the usual Susy-Q rockrash, as opposed to a lighter skincoat which I’m not certain Wenonah ever laid it up in. And, it seems to turn up on canoe sale boards more often than many of those blue-blooded (but yes, magnificent) DY/Curtis hulls.
Another composite solo I remember having the fine fortune to test paddle, per Mike McCrea’s generosity, was a Clipper Prospector 14. Felt a lot like a Baboosic, except it sat a little more flatly/stabler (shallower arch, I suppose) on the water surface. Quite nimble, relatively easy to push along with gear on windy expanses without having a j-stroke infarction. Reasonably priced, but darn hard to come by this side of the Mississippi.
Hope the Carter Racing team is still enjoying their crossings of the muddy trail, and good future paddles to you,
TW
not necessarily free
You don’t have to free the stems to get a boat to turn faster, as I’m sure you know.
I paddle almost exclusively flatwater and rarely have to turn more than 90 degrees. Even with the harder tracking Wenonahs all I have to do is edge/heel the boat to the outside of the turn and take a couple of extra strokes on that same side and they come around more quickly than most folks think they will.
I can turn a Prism 180 degrees in three strokes, but the technique is not what most folks would probably use. It helps to go into the turn kneeling (yes, you can kneel with a bucket seat) with good momentum, then initiate the turn with an outside heel and a sweep, switch to an inside heel with a reverse sweeping low brace, then back to an outside heel with a good power stroke or two with maybe a little bit of sweep and carry the stroke a bit further back than normal and you’ll be headed back in the opposite direction at crusing speed.
I’m not saying that Wenonahs are for everyone and I’m not saying they will spin like a good freestyle boat, but I’ve put plenty of miles on them over the years and I get irritated when folks say they won’t turn. That is wrong.
The most important part of choosing a boat is to match the boat to your preferred paddling style and conditions. I’ve seen a lot of posts over the years by folks who bought a boat and were upset that it wouldn’t do what they wanted it to when the real problem was that they bought the wrong boat.
Memories
Wow this post is sure bringing back lots of memories, very cool! Thanks Guys.
I have owned an RX Rendezvous and can honestly say that boat was possessed and has been the only canoe I have ever owned that I truly hated. Maybe the composite boats are better???
How can I get a copy of that picture? Way cool.
Thanks
Tuff-Weave Rendezvous
I owned a tuff-weave Rendezvous and paddled a royalex version and they are significantly different paddling boats with different specs. I really enjoyed the composite version and have heard lots of complaints about the royalex version.
differences
I paddled both the Royalex and composite versions one right after the other. There is quite a bit of difference between the two, with the composite being a significantly better boat.
Eric Nyre used to say that
the Rendezvous had to be carefully trimmed and set up to do its best, and that Royalex versions were more in need of tuning than composite versions.
I think it can be an excellent boat for a combination of lake duty and fairly open rivers with easy whitewater. But I tried one, and it does not spin well enough for the kind of eddy work I can do in my Mad River Synergy or Guide Solo.
Of course, that’s the tipping point of compromise. My Synergy is an adequate cruiser on the flats with a load of gear, and pretty good up through class 3 whitewater. My Guide Solo is not as agile in whitewater, but is not that much better than the Synergy on flatwater. The Rendezvous is farther toward a flatwater boat, much faster than the MR Guide on flatwater, but much less agile on whitewater.
Anecdotes and Fit
We seem to have devolved to anecdotal experience; fairly unhelpful without paddler height and weight, and experience filters. We all like our boats; we don't keep those that displease.
The width range of solo canoes is 27.5 to 31" excluding the SuperNova. The OP seems to kneel some and would likely want a hull where his knees fall easily into the chines.
Wilderness is one of the wider hulls as the Vagabond/Kestrel/RapidFire is one of the narrower.
The obvious solution is for the OP to try some boats for fit. The triangulation of knees and sitz-bones is the key to hull fit, understanding that knee pads/ blocks can narrow the effective chine spacing and seats can be raised and lowered. That said, the paddler needs to comfortably stack hands across the rail, i.e. outside the max beam, with the hull flat in the water. Standing heel skews hydrodynamics.
My anecdote: At ~5'9", 170 lbs There are hulls that are too wide for me; requiring I move a knee to cross heel the hull. Wilderness is too wide for a guy who can sit on a cigarette paper and swing his legs. Further, I wouldn't have a canoe without bow rocker and don't need the stern skegged to improve course keeping. Cross sectional shaping? I like shoulders high and tightly radiused as per Yost and Scarborough as opposed to low and soft, but then again my arms don't reach very far down the sidewalls.
Wildfire
I came across a Bell Wildfire, wondering thoughts on this per the discussion.
It is RX with vinyl trim. I know when I was doing freestyle this and the flashfire were popular boats. Never though of it as a contender. Reading back I see Charlie did mention it. I can't find specs on it but I read that the Yellowstone solo is the same boat? In RX the Yellowstone solo weighs in at 47# would that be a real world weight for the older Wildfire too.
Thanks, Mike
RX Wildfire = Yellowstone Solo
The boat that was originally called the Royalex Wildfire was renamed the Yellowstone Solo.
I think it is a very good boat, much more to my liking than the Wenonah Argosy. It is reasonably fast, can carry a decent load, and is quite stable when heeled which makes it pretty nimble as well. Very nice river boat that does pretty well on flat water as well.
It does not have as much depth as a whitewater boat, or an SRT which would limit its use in whitewater. You still might be able to run some technical Class II stuff if it does not involve big wave trains or significant drops.