Hello. Brand new to the forum; first post.
I have paddled canoes in the past. Gearing up for this season with my wife and eight-year old boy. We’ll do some slow rivers here in VT and NH, maybe ME…and a good bit of bombing around Lake Champlain and some overnight camping. I will be doing some spin fishing with my boy on quiet back bays and some fly fishing solo on slow rivers.
I’m in the used market and I have narrowed the choices down to Mad River Explorer 16 in Rx and Old Town Penobscot 17 or 17’ in Rx. Probably would lean to 17’ on the Penobscot.
Any thoughts on how these compare? (seems there MUST be a thread on this but Search did not reveal it.)
I know the Explorer has the modified Vee-hull an is better “tracking” and the Penob has the rounded bottom hull and has less initial stability. I think our family will get used to this; we HAVE canoed before, but maybe this is more significant than I think? Seems the Explorer may be better on the open lake and the Penob better in the river? And maybe the Explorer better to stand and fly fish out of?
I also like the fact that the Penob 16Rx is 58 pounds and the Explore 16 Rx is 72 pounds! I would stay with a pre-2001 Mad River. I’m really on the fence.
Thanks.
I’ll cime in.
The Explorer is a canoe that is sort of an all around canoe leaning toward tripping. It has high sides and a decent amount of rocker so good for white water. Rugged tripping canoe but also good all rounder.
The Penobscot is similar but I would say slightly more oriented toward flatwater as opposed to white water. It does not have as much rocker and so it is harder to turn especially in white water. It if very light compared to lots of other royalex boats.
Both good canoes. Penobscott a bit more flatwater oriented. Exployer a bit more white water oriented. But both can do both.
Again, I would like independent
verification of OT’s weight claim for the Penobscot.
Penobscot 16 is right at 60 lbs.
Yes
60Lbs - give or take. Very light for a 16 foot Royalex boat - probably the lghtest out there. The reason is that it has low ends and low sides which means not has much material as some other 16 foot boats, like the Explorer.
The 17' Penobscot is a different story of course. The original post is a little confusing to me. Are you considering the 16 or the 17?
Sounds like you are using this boat for flat water paddling and fishing including with your son. The Penobscot 16 in my personal experience is not high in the initial or secondary stability department - it requires some attention. This is not necessarily a bad thing mind you - just a characteristic. If I were looking for a boat with high initial stability for fishing with a child it would not be my choice. The Explorer on the other hand would be a boat that I would consider for this use. Also, if weight is a concern - the Explorer is available in composite which will shave off some pounds.
If you want to be out on Champlain in any sort of weather you might want to consider a 17 foot boat. Personally that is what I would choose.
But the bottom line in my opinion is that both boats are very nice boats and will serve you well.
Did you weigh the 16, or are you
quoting OT claims?
Disregarding low ends, OT might be able to use lighter Royalex because of the boat’s sort of shallow arch, quasi tubular design, which makes it stiffer compared to a V bottom like the Explorer or my quasi-V Guide Solo. But I doubt it. I am very sceptical that the Penobscots are that light without an attendant reputation for being floppy.
Never weighed it myself.
But I have had it on my back. The boat is light. I don’t doubt that weight. Certainly not a 70Lbs boat - not even close.
I
love my OT Penobscot 16. Fast on flat water, tracks well but maneuverability is ok, initial stability is ok, secondary is great. The rounded bottom avoids oilcanning, so the hull stiffness is good. Perfekt all-round canoe. No experience with the Mad River, I think it's a little slower on flatwater, little bit more maneuverability because of more rocker, little bit more initial stability and also a good all-round canoe.
Greeting from Germany and sorry for english language mistakes!
I prefer the Explorer
The 16’ Mad River Explorer was the second of my 17 canoes, and I’ve had it for 35 years. I’ve paddled it solo and tandem on lakes, ocean and class 4 whitewater. I’ve poled it in Florida swamps and buzzed around San Francisco bay with a 2 hp motor. I even made a rowing rig for it. I moved the center thwart forward and put in a wide cane seat behind center. I could fit two kids on that seat, and it is also my solo seat for flat and white water.
Two summers ago I paddled a 16’ Royalex Penobscot extensively in Alaska both solo and tandem.
I’ve never paddled a 17’ Penobscot or 17’ Explorer.
I like the 16’ Explorer a lot more than the 16’ Penobscot. It has better initial and secondary stability. It turns better on heels, which are rock solid on the V slab sides. It’s deeper, so it can carry more in terms of people and/or gear on a trip. And it’s drier and more maneuverable in whitewater because it’s deeper and more turnable when railed.
I’d say the Penobscot is a little faster because it’s narrower, but not so much as to make any practical difference to me. Neither hull is my racing or exercise canoe. The Penobscot is somewhat lighter, probably because it’s less voluminous.
Both canoes have been very popular for decades, and you will probably find strong preferences for each boat among the canoeing population.
actual weight
I’ve weighed my Penobscot 16RX. OT claims 58# on their website. Mine weighs in at 60#.
I agree with the previous posters. Straight tracking. Good hull stiffness. No oil canning. Great secondary stability and decent initial, though I’m not sure I’d want to fish out of it. I definitely wouldn’t stand and fish from it.
As much as I like my P16, I think I’d want a bigger boat for Lake Champlain.
From OP regarding 16 or 17…
“The 17’ Penobscot is a different story of course. The original post is a little confusing to me. Are you considering the 16 or the 17?”
I’m considering both because they are pretty rare on the used market. I’d prefer the 16’
Reply
QUOTE:
"If I were looking for a boat with high initial stability for fishing with a child it would not be my choice. The Explorer on the other hand would be a boat that I would consider for this use. Also, if weight is a concern - the Explorer is available in composite which will shave off some pounds.
If you want to be out on Champlain in any sort of weather you might want to consider a 17 foot boat. Personally that is what I would choose.
"
UNQUOTE
The Explorer, as others have said, seems to be a good whitewater and less great on flatwater. Why do you prefer Explorer for flatwater?
When you say the Explorer is available in composite, you mean Royalex? True, but even in Royalex this 16' is 70 lbs compared to the Penobscot 16' at 58. I like 58.
RESPONSE TO LUPOVER:
QUOTE:
love my OT Penobscot 16. Fast on flat water, tracks well but maneuverability is ok, initial stability is ok, secondary is great. The rounded bottom avoids oilcanning, so the hull stiffness is good. Perfekt all-round canoe. No experience with the Mad River, I think it’s a little slower on flatwater, little bit more maneuverability because of more rocker, little bit more initial stability and also a good all-round canoe.
Greeting from Germany and sorry for english language mistakes!
UNQUOTE
Thanks Lupover…perfect English…no worries.
From my scattered research this sounds accurate.
I’ve kept my trap shut
because I was also a little confuzzed regarding your length preference. Now that you’ve said it’s sixteen I vote Explorer. Great initial and secondary, quite maneuverable; especially with two paddlers, plenty of load capacity and nice looking. They don’t call it the swiss army knife of canoes for nothing.
Thanks to all…
Here are my takaways:
The Exp, with t v-hull, has more initial stability and would offer more initial stability than the Pen, and so make a better fishing boat.
The Exp has better maneuverability on white water and with higher gunnels, handles whitewater better.
The Exp is 10-14 lbs heavier than the Pen. Mad River website lists it at 72 lbs vs. 58 for the Pen. That is a big difference for someone over 50 that has to carry it and get it on and off the roof rack.
Exp capacity, from manufacturer, is 1100 lbs. and OT lists capacity at 1100-1150, so nominally identical.
The Pen glides a bit better due to the stable rounded hull design and is slightly less maneuverable due to less rocker.
For me it comes down to…Explorer is more stable, more family-friendly, better whitewater, and better fishing boat. And significantly heavier.
The Penobscot is perhaps better on the lake, less initial stability and a lot lighter.
If it were not for my back the Explorer seems like the clear winner.
responding to 17’ Penobscot issue
QUOTE
If you want to be out on Champlain in any sort of weather you might want to consider a 17 foot boat. Personally that is what I would choose.
UNQUOTE
Why does the additional foot in length have such an effect? I would not take family on the lake in any weather, but I’m interested in what additional advantage a 17’ offers beyond added capacity.
Weight
Unless you have seriously debilitating back problems you should be able to handle an Explorer. Just a matter of technique. Doesn’t sound like you plan to portage it on long BWCA style trips or anything like that and there are tricks and even devices to help with getting it on and off the rack.
a vote for the explorer
like the way the boat heels and slices into turns, like the rigid v hull.
overlooking something
You asked about composite reference but didn’t get an answer.
The Explorer is and has been available in lightweight composite construction. Talking about kevlar here - not royalex. That brings the possibilities down to weights below the actual weight of any Penobscot.
If performance on water similar to the Penobscot is desired, the Malecite would be a better comparison. And that boat can be even lighter in kevlar. The Malicite is also fairly common on the used market. In the more common fiberglass, it weighs about the same as the 16’ Penobscot.
Don’t be mislead by Old Town’s capacity claims. They are…misleading. Penobscot capacity is closer to the Malecite, and both are less than the Explorer.
Thank you all for your help.
I truly appreciate it.
I’m about to buy an Explorer, pre -2000 made in VT.
Decent condition, vinyl gunnels, gash in on of the gunnels, otherwise OK. $700 sound fair?