Narrow upturned ends add buoyancy?
– Last Updated: Oct-08-04 5:16 PM EST –
Before anyone gets their knickers twisty, I'm not about to argue for or against any type (my fleet has extremes at either end [pun]). Too hard argue any points when all posts use "some", "most", "can", "tend to" and other similar non-specific words, but I would like some clarification on that bow volume comment.
I find that type of ends (Brit) to have LESS volume (fine ends not fat) and cut into waves more/ride over less than higher volume bow/sterns. This slicing can help smooth out the ride (with a speed loss) which could be described as a favorable characteristic (or not). If that's what you're used to - a fuller ended boat will feel quite different, perhaps more harsh. If you're used to fuller ends - the fine may feel a bit mushy. It's all relative.
The advantage to the up-swept and lower volume up-swept ends is maneuverability (but this works both ways - and what gets you back on course faster may also be what got you off course to begin with). If playing around in one area (particularly close inshore with rocks), the Brit style in most likely the better choice. If paddling through/across an area - I'm not so sure it's going to be better (again - gets back to what you're used to).
So I don't disappoint those expecting the inevitable QCC comments from me (and as fair warning to those who have weird anti-QC bias), let me add that the differences between the Q700 and something like wilsoj2's Aquanaut are not as extreme as some may (want to) believe. Q700 has more waterline length - so handles like a slightly longer kayak (maneuvering difference, but not to the point of any difficulty) - otherwise, classifying them into widely different types in terms of design/handling is a bit of a stretch.
The Q700 is certainly not a "Brit" style kayak (which I also own) - it is also not like the larger volume higher decked PNW designs either (which I have only test paddled). At 12", Its foredeck is a good bit lower then larger PNW kayaks, and actually lower than several Brit or Brit inspired designs (and much lower than all other QCCs save the Q600 which is 1/2" higher). Rear deck could be lower - but only a handful of commercial designs have that right (for wind wave anyway - most keep the volume up for gear).
In wind wave and heavy chop, and particularly rear quartering conditions, the Q700's handling is hard to beat. Don't take that on my word alone - others here have a heck of a lot more textured time in one than I.
All kayaks will submarine, even the fuller and more plumb QCCs. I had the entire front half of my Q700 under water during my last paddle (going upwind), and before that most of the rear was awash several times (in rear quartering wind waves). Not big stuff either. 2-3' at most, majority less, but very confused and short/steep. I love the way it steadily surfaces as it punches through. In bigger waves with actual wave period instead of just slop it's drier and even better handling.
PS - Would like to try an Aquanaut sometime - as I have this odd idea it's handling may lie in between an Explorer and my 700 (not that I need that - just like to try kayaks!). I've paddled an Explorer a few times (regular and HV - regular much better) and think it's a great hull! Heavy, and could be faster, but like the feel and love the rear deck height. Quite similar sense of security and predictability to my 700 but with a different personality. If Aquanaut is as well mannered as reported, and a bit faster than an Explorer, well, you might see where I get this crazy idea it would lie in between.