Hi – I’m new posting here on the boards and have tried to research both the Q10x and Avocet LV as I need help deciding between the two. I’m 5’2”, 115#, small frame and in good shape.
I had the opportunity to paddle the Avocet LV for 4 weeks and also just purchased the Q10x to sample for a few weeks as well. I’ve also tried a variety of other kayaks and have narrowed it down to these two. I’ve taken several classes this past summer including a surf class, my next will be a rolling class, and have practiced all that I’ve learned from each class over the summer.
As my skills progress I would like to eventually kayak to Catalina from Newport Beach as well as take extended camping trips (2-3 days). My husband just bought the Nordkapp LV (he loves it).
So, I’d love to learn about the pros and cons for each kayak. Suggestions and help truly appreciated!
::margie::
You are probably…
one of the most qualified to tell tell us the differences in the two boats.
Not that many people have paddled the x10.
2nd that
You had opportunities to try both, you are the best judge.
Q10x probably felt faster and better tracking than Avocet LV. Probably the fit was a bit looser, but that isn’t necessarily a shortcoming.
I wouldn’t be extremely surprised if you manage to keep up with your husband in his Nordkapp LV
My wife was in on the design of the
QCC-10x, before they ever even named it.
As Grayhawk says, you are the best qualified to say that since you have paddled both, but for what it is worth if you are looking for speed, the QCC will have it all over the Avocet.
Cheers,
jackL
a little clarification
Thank you for the quick responses…
The reason I ask is because I rec’d this email from one of the sales people at the shop I’m considering purchasing the Avocet LV.
“QCC kayaks are fine for flat water, but get one of those out in real conditions, wind and swell, current and some real waves and it’s handling will go out the door. Even boats like Wilderness Systems and Necky handle much better in conditions such as swell than QCC kayaks. I actually had a guy rent from me this morning, who’s been coming regularly, and he own a QCC. We got onto talking about it and he totally agreed that the Wilderness he’s been renting from me every week does much better in conditions than his boat… but for the bay, it’s great.
… my two cents. :)”
I just wanted to know how accurate that is and if any of you agree or disagree with this.
Thanks again!
Different - maybe not better or worse
I've paddled neither. However, I shudder when I hear such broad characterizations.
The Q will handle differently than the Avocet. Both are capable of handling conditions but each will feel different doing so.
The Avocet LV will be 'looser' and easier to turn etc... The Q will be faster going forward in all but the roughest conditions and likely track better.
Which have you enjoyed more?
Will you be doing mostly straight ahead paddling or a lot of play in rocks, clapitois, etc...?
I like how many of the Brit boats I've paddled perform in lumpy seas. Some prefer the personality of the QCC boats.
Wow!
I'll bet the person who said that doesn't have much time in a QCC.
There are several folks here who are very happy with the way their Q700s handle "conditions". All of them will say they the QCCs feel different than a "Brit boat" but do just fine once the paddler adapts to them.
Part of it may be the definition of "conditions". Running downwind in big swells is very different than playing in reflecting chop, but both are certainly "real".
Matching a boat, paddler, and conditions is very subjective. You've paddled both -- what did you think?
As a disclaimer, I've got an old Avocet. It's better for ME and the paddling I do than many other boats I've tried, but that doesn't mean the other boats are bad.
Valley
I agree with the quote given to you by the salesperson in email, Marge. I own an Avocet, and and Aquanuat LV and a Nord RM and Nord c/K, so I suppose you could say I'm a Valley fan. I love the rocker, and the very forgiving nature in soup. I also own a Barracuda by Prijon which, although it is not a QCC certainly, is similar in nature and rockerless--very similar shallo v hull design. The Cuda is "da bomb" on flatwater, but I am a paddler for 5 years and fairly skilled now and I still find the ride in the chop unnerving. The rockerless bow is simply not for playfulness and steadiness in chop. I think a better all around boat would be the Avocet or any Valley for that matter. In addition, I do not favor the spartan design of the QCCs, but that is more a personal preference.
Ciao.
Stereotypical BS…
... form someone who's probably never paddled a 600/700 (other QCCs are too different to compare in same breath) in conditions, if at all.
QCCs do have a different feel, but it depends on what you're used to. After paddling mine a few years, I find most Brits a bit slow and wallow/dampen things more than I like, or are just quirky. Lot's of variety - and some of the newer ones have actually become a little more QCC like in feel and sort of split the difference as far as personality goes.
Depends on what you want to do in them. Most sea kayaks do most things well enough. It's the less common things (real rough water play in rips and surf zone, paddling fast over distance - whatever you do other than typical group pace fair weather touring where anything works) where it make a difference and the differences matter more (and the choices get clearer).
Face it…
… whatever you may know about other kayaks - you know SQUAT about QCCs. The rockerless stuff is pure BS, that comes 100% from non-owners/non paddlers parroting nonsense they’ve picked up from other less clueless than themselves.
My 700 has as much rocker as my Valley Pintail had. Very different kayaks, but not in that aspect. Hell, you probably think pointy ends = more rocker! L
You sure that guy is not a salesmen…
for “Honest John’s Fly-by night Used car lot” ???
Ask the guys like Grayhawk, Brazil, Medicine Man and Grayak who were with us in Blackwater sound when the wind and waves blew up big time how well the baby Q handled for my 5’-2" 120 pound wife.
In stuff that I am apprehensive about in my 700, she is usually looking for bigger waves to surf.
You said that you have one for several weeks to try.
Make up your mind yourself and if I were you I wouldn’t listen to that guy on any purchases in the future. He might try and sell you the Brookly Bridge!
Cheers,
JackL
G, settle down.
http://www.qcckayaks.com/kayaks/models.asp
As much as your Pintail? It’s clear you do not know what rocker means. Relax, no one is getting up on you about it.
My recollection
As I recall Greyak posted an illustration of a Q700 and an Aquanaut on which he drew lines. It seemed to indicate that the 700 and the Aquanaut have pretty much the same amount of rocker.
When sitting on flat ground alongside my Aquanaut, my friend’s Pintail seems to show notably greater rocker.
All three of my other sea kayaks (Nordkapp LV, Romany, Elaho DS)have notably more rocker than my Aquanaut and look to have more than a colleague’s Q600.
You’re going by photos! L
I had them side by side for a long time.
Trust me, I know what rocker is, AND what it ISN'T:
http://217.160.65.46/Prijon_English/images/barracuda2007.jpg
would you have…
… a link to his post? I tried to find it w/o success.
(for my own educational use - not to argue w/ anyone!!)
Trouble here is where you measure
Many older Brit designs have very soft transitions from the keel into the ends - and if even a little of that is included (as we all tend to do just eyeballing them) it comes out as being more rocker than is really there. Some also have a variable arc along the keel - whereas the QCC is a more consistent arc (these things also distort our perspectives of how curvy things are).
When I say same as the Pintail, I mean the overall curvature along the keel only.
It would take a very flat surface, positioning jigs, and careful measurements to be exact - and that’s not the point.
Funny thing is how most people equate rocker with turning (when it affects a lot more), and things like LWL are more important. Note I’ve never said the QCC700 is as maneuverable as the Pintail! L
wilsoj2, you clearly get my point.
cd1 clearly can’t grasp something as simple as the QCC700 having a fair amount of rocker, or that he’s clueless about them and has been sold a line of BS by someone (as, based on his comments - I can’t conceive him original enough to make up that BS himself - and he spouts it with the knee jerk conviction of some “expert” he’s parroting). Either that, or he’s just assuming it must be like his Prijon (which I must therefore assume turns like a pig and sucks in conditions!).
Line drawing of 700
Take a straight edge and put it up to the screen - anywhere along the keel. I may not be a banana, - but if you look closely you'll find only tangent relation, not parallel.
sigh… I actually agree with Kris
I can’t believe I’m writing this but its not cold enough yet to start the QCC bashing.
As a fan of British/Greenland style kayaks, I preface this by saying that I tend to not prefer the PNW commercial sea kayaks. Frankly, I think the QCC 700 is ugly. With that said, I’ve paddled it and it is a damn impressive kayak. On edge, it is ridiculously manueverable and while it may not be a Pintail, its pretty close and thats saying plenty given its other attributes.
Seeing a plumb bow and long waterline and assuming the kayak can’t turn is a bit naive.
But, But, But…
Alex, you have the skills to turn it. Others rely on the (perceived) attributes of a “skilled” boat… LOL!
sing
It was probably 4+ years ago
It was back early in my Brit boat infautation and had not seen in person the newer sleeker QCC boats - maybe 5 years ago.
I’ll check the hard drive on my home machine in case I downloaded the image and it has managed to survive successive hard drives.