Edging the QCC700x

I have been putting my new QCC700 through its paces and have found it to be much harder to edge than other boats I have been in. Is that the experience of you other 700 owners?

If you don’t like it I’ll take it off …
your hands.

I’m about ready for a new one.

Not sure how far you want to edge it, but I can take some pretty sharp bouy turns with mine.



Thanks for the “generous” offer! :slight_smile:
But I like it just fine. Was really wondering if this is just a characteristic of the design or if maybe I am missing something technique wise.

Two Comparisons
First I have not paddled a great number of boats. I have paddled a CD Caribou several times and it reacts to edging a great deal more than my QCC.

Second, following a second QCC with a more experienced paddler I have seen a 700 turn much better than I am able to do.


Harder in what way?

– Last Updated: Jun-04-07 3:18 PM EST –

What do you mean by "harder to edge?" Do you mean that when using your knees and hips it is more difficult for you to move the kayak off the horizontal? To lean it far enough so the spray skirt /edge of the cockpit is in the water? Is is a matter of being too light for the boat? Would hip pads and snugging up the cockpit help?

Because of its long waterline and convex shape,the 700 sits fairly high on the water relative to most 17 foot kayaks. Try edging the 700 when paddling with some gear aboard and you may notice a big difference. I also use hip pads in my 700X and at 165 lbs. have no problem edging it, even when it is not loaded. It may be something you need to just give a bit more time.

Harder in what way.
“Do you mean that when using your knees and hips it is more difficult for you to move the kayak off the horizontal?”


“To lean it far enough so the spray skirt /edge of the cockpit is in the water?”


“Is is a matter of being too light for the boat?”

I weigh 190 so I don’t think so.

“Would hip pads and snugging up the cockpit help?”

I wondered about this. I am going to install some this evening. Thanks for the suggestions.

Displacement hull characteristics?
Since its a fast boat, I would assume its generally a displacement hull, which usalyy have inherently vague secondeary stability, translating into vague edges. Is that the problem? You can edge the boat over but there is no feeling of secondary stability, just you trying to hold an uncertain edge?

As oppossed to a boat with a more definite chine to the hull, like the ever mentioned Romany, which gives a more solid and confident edge.

All sea touring kayaks
are displacement hulls which occassionally plane or semi-plane when enough wave energy is present.

Flatter hulled river and surf kayaks are also in displacement mode until enough wave energy gets them “on-step” or plane. Due to their flat hulls this happens faster, but not without wave energy.

With the exception of the foil craft, humans cannot supply enough power to get a kayak on plane on their own.

One might ask, why then are sea kayaks displacement hulls? Cuz that hull is far more efficient at slower speeds.

What other kayak
are you comparing it to. I went from a 16 ft Avocet to a QCC 700. Initially, I felt like I was paddling log. However, with time and gaining confidence to get a good edge the boat starting carving some good turns. It will never turn like one of our Avocets, but none of our Avocets can hold speed or track like the QCC. Like it’s been said many times before there is no perfect boat. Each has it’s good points and it’s bad. This is my favorite boat for long expeditions 7+ days because of it’s cargo capacities and it’s speed. It’s fairly stability in 3-5 foot waves and it likes to surf. So in the end what do you want from your kayak and is the QCC 700 match your expectations.

sorry, yes,
I don’t know what I was thinking, I meant to ask is it more of a “pure displacement” hull, as opposed to something with more chine to it that will give it a more predictable edge. I know that its a little interesting edging my surf skis. My Black Marlin, I may as well be trying to edge a log.

Thanks for pointing that out, I guess I shoudn’t be surfing PNet when I’m supposed to be working, don’t have the attention span to multi task.

Agree with jetter.
The answer is rocker. Avocet, moderate rocker. QCC700, little rocker.

Increased rocker = increased response to edging.

This weekend
I was paddling with someone with an Avocet, Nordkapp, Tempest 170, and Pintail. All have more rocker than a QCC. And all edged easier and more than me. Granted I was still getting used to my boat and I hadn’t had any time to tweak the outfitting, but I think Cooldocotor hit the nail on the head.

With the rounder hull, edging the QCC ius like playing a trombone: with experience you’ll learn the positions. I remember going from an Explorer to the Q-Tip. The Explorer’s feel built linearly, while the Q-Ship has little definitive feel between ‘on edge’ and ‘practice your sweep roll.’ Testing its limits is a little vague. That said, it does roll very easily, and the rounded hull is very good to excellent in conditions; waves roll right under you. Actually, the amount of rocker on the Q is deceiving-it feels a little loose sans rudder(or skeg), and when you initiate a turn by edging, it will want to continue that turn. You can spin it in a surprisingly small circle for its length. Give it time; you’ll learn the notes, and wonder what the heck is taking those other boats so long. :wink:

Different design variables
We are talking very different craft. The QCC is designed to be an efficient, dimmensionally stable tourer with an emphasis on high potential speed (long LWL), with reduced Frictional Resistance via a more rounded cross section / chine profile. This helps reduce the added Friction of a longer hull. This is why surf skis. race kayaks, boats like the 700, Epic 18 etc have both rounded cross sections and long LWL’s.

Now, a Brit boat is quite different with a short LWL relative to it’s LOA. It’s fuller hard chine’d soft or hard edged cross section combined with rocker results in better turnability. This fuller cross section creates more stability as well as buoyancy that can be used on edge to free the ends…thus more turny. Look at the super playful Greenland Brit designs and what do you see…? Full chines, rocker, shorter LWL’s.

This is about emphasizing differnent variables against a design objective. This is why most Brit type boats are not really fast. Lower Potential speed via a short LWL, and quite a bit of Frictional Resistance via a full hull cross section. Add to that Cp’s that are lower than a race or fast tourer. Higher Cp’s offer reduced Residual Resistance by creating a longer wave than lower Cp pointy fine ended hulls. The latter will offer less Frictional Resistance at lower speeds.

The QCC is a fine boat. It’s just a different animal with a different set of objectives. It’ll blow the Brit boats away in fast A to B paddling, even in some big seas. The Brit types will rule in big knarly coastal waters, rock gardens, maneuverability, surf etc.

Jeep Vs Town Car.

jetter summed it up best for me:
‘This is my favorite boat for long expeditions 7+ days because of it’s cargo capacities and it’s speed’

It too is my first choice for paddle camping and big mile days, next will be the Mirage for the same when I think conditions merit ‘easier’ control.

If I need even more volume for packing, dont care at all about speed, and need good turning its still the venerable Sea Lion.

If I want speed, turning capability, reduced volume-say 3-4 days worth without jumping up and down on the suitcase, and a playful ride its the Q-boat.

Of the above listed boats I (like Greyak) have modded the QCC the most-it begs for it. and since it is used for the longest miles/hours it has benefited from the 4th hatch the most.

Have you measured rocker on either?
QCCs have more than most think. What you’re feeling is less likely from rocker differences - and more likely just the BIG difference in waterline length.

When edged strongly - keel roccker has even less to do with it.

'cept the “Town Car” analogy part. 700 ain’t that big (narrow or narrower and as low or lower foredeck than typical Brits).

Now the 500 - That’s big.

Nope - seems fine
I can dip coaming OK - and find the secondary very good for this, building continuously.

If you’re used to something with more defined points, the smooth transition may leave you looking for something that’s not there.

I rarely really put it way on edge or try to hold it there though. At least not for it’s own sake. Not much need - not a playboat - and if you consider the hull differences doing so has less payback than on designs with more belly bulge.

I find the smooth transition and steady building secondary is VERY nice in sloppier water. Easier to just paddle along and keep vertical with no abrupt heeling movements from chop/wave action. A positive trait of rounder and fairer hulls (though I have a hard time calling this particular hull “round”), but can require a little more input from the paddler than say an Explorer that feels like it wallows and wastes a lot of energy to me (also can be a good thing depending)…

I was wondering myself
which one was the town car in the analogy…:wink:

Shoulda said
BMW 7 series for the QCC…but you guys are so much smarter than me…sorry.