Best way I know…
…to test the engine is to race!
Anything else whould be require VO2 MAX & lactate threshold tests, and those only show potential capacity - not what is truly applied.
There is now way to equalize things. Even in same boat you’ll have different weights (more drag and differnt hull performance), different power/endurance, more/less familiarity with that boat/course/conditions, and widely different skill levels in general. That’s what makes it interesting.
All I can tell you for sure is your faster than I am!
Why speed?
If one is racing or if one never got it out of ones system when a teenager and for some reason does not want a surfski or rowing shell, I can understand the obsession with speed and sea kayaks.
If one is not racing, is great speed of ultimate importance?
comparisons
I have kept a log of times over the last three years of boats paddled and training in them, although I’m not sure where they have disappeared to. But comparisons of the logs would not necessarily tell too much. I have improved my speed through technique and endurance training over the last three years. The Looksha II times, I paddled three years ago as compared to the razor, that I am now trying out, would not mean much. Also tide and wind play such an important element that unless it was done in the same conditions each time, the numbers would still not mean much. I do think that over time after paddling many boats, a paddler can become experienced and have an intuitive knowledge that can determine which boat is faster as compared to another, especially in conditions. If a paddler tried a series of say 4 different boats over a small course on flat water in the same day, it could give a hull speed reference point, but how the boat handled conditions would not show up in such a test.
Fast Enough
– Last Updated: Oct-18-04 9:32 PM EST –
I agree that everyone seems to be consumed with speed these days. If I'm not racing, why do I need to be in the fastest kayak on the water? And if I'm in the fastest kayak, what other performance characteristics might I sacrifice?
Last month I did a day paddle in my kayak from north of Stonington, Maine around Isle au Haut and back in 8 1/2 hours, going with the tide. A distance of 30 miles on my GPS. Now my kayak is not known as a particularly fast kayak, nor am I a super strong paddler, but I had no problem covering this distance.
Afterwards, I realized that I had been worrying way too much about speed and that my kayak was fast enough. More importantly, it was stable and predictable in all conditions I encountered. So now when I start obsessing about speed and worrying that my kayak isn't fast enough, I just think back to that trip and lessons learned.
It’s about efficiency, not speed…
…for me anyway. Speed is just easier to measure, compare, and discuss.
I’ve only raced my 700 once - and not all that impressively.
Is speed the “Ultimate” factor? No, but it’s a big part of a mixed bag of overall performance in a sea/touring kayak.
With a kayak like the Q700, you really give up nothing. It is a well rounded and well behaved kayak. Amazingly so.
Beyond the Q700 on the speed scale, one has to pay their dues a bit in terms of stability and other handling issues - but that gets back to it being more about the paddler.
Just depends on what you want to do. Once you have a certain level of efficiency (and one of it’s benefits - speed) though, it’s very hard to go back. The only slower boats likely to be of interest would likely be for more specialized things like surfing, rock gardens, etc.
So I ask the reverse question: Why this resistance and negativity toward a bit more efficiency? That seems a lot stranger than the speed demons on the board.
8 1/2 hours is a long time
Did that 3 knot average include stops?
Personally, rather than doing 3 knots for 8 1/2 hours, I’d prefer 6 1/2 hours at 4 knots (still and easy enough pace in many kayaks) - or beter - if wind & waves allowed. More daylight left, bigger safety margin, etc.
Can’t imagine missing much by going just 1 knot faster.
Jumping back a bit…
After resisting this thread as I do all cults…
I finally read it and if I replied where I should it would be lost in antiquity.
I looks to me that the Caribou is symmetrical at the waterline… don’t know how the do that…
GH
focus of kayak speed
“If one is not racing, is great speed of ultimate importance?”
These are valid points you guys have made. There are many enjoyable aspects of paddling and not everyone does it to see how fast he/she can make their boat perform.
I think a number of us like to paddle as a form of exercise and, as a result, like to push ourselves to go fast. And, when you’re putting effort into it, you’d like to use a boat that doesn’t paddle like a barge but rewards your effort. So if you’re kayaking primarily for fitness, it’s inevitable that you develop some focus and interest on which boats are faster.
Of course if you’re racing you want as much advantage in boatspeed as possible to beat the other guys (and Greyak, if we ever race our Q700s, you’ll win).
But I think of kayak races like participating in the local charity 10K run: a majority of the participants are running to be part of the event and maybe to try to beat their own best time, not necessarily, or realistically, to come in first.
I like to race, (and obsess with my speed), because it provides the motivation for me to regularly get out on the water and exercise.
I don’t knock you folks who are enjoying the serenity of paddling at 2-3 mph.
But if you’re paddling to improve your fitness, especially if you’re with other people in different boats, you’re going to take notice of which boat is faster. That’s why there’s so much discussion on boatspeed.
I can
When our average comes out to 3 MPH, I know we have not missed any inlets, dead end streams, aquatic as well as shore type wildlife, or any other unique items waiting to be discovered.
Take a look at some of those things on http://community.webshots.com/user/nlamarre, and you can see why slower is better.
There is a time for speed, (racing) and I time for leisure.
I like them both.
Cheers,
JackL
Getting further
– Last Updated: Oct-19-04 10:34 AM EST –
in my case is one of the big reasons. I like the hobby for the exploration aspects, in addition to other reasons. So if I can get further with the same effort, that's a good thing.
As has been noted, all boats like this have a sort of "wall" out there somewhere around 5 knots or a bit more, or at least a steep hill. If you are bumping into that it's probably not all that gratifying to expend twice as much energy to only net a few tenths more mph. Time for a longer boat, that puts the start of the hill further out and perhaps makes it a bit less steep too.
The Hudson has a special problem, compared to lakes anyway, the tidal current. Pretty demoralizing to be paddling against that, getting tired, look over to the shore and realize you are hardly getting anywhere. A speed advantage of even one mph is significant in that case.
Mike
Speed helps where conditions overwhelm
I agree, the more difficult the conditions the more efficiency of hull, lower windage, ease through and over waves, etc all can become more and more important. Frank Burch’s book on navigation shows the physics of how hard it is in wind waves and current and under difficult composite conditions a more efficient boat can be the difference in getting back or not.
efficiency of hull
in challanging conditions is more than waterline. Efficiency of kayak in challanging conditions is more than waterline.
Hull profile (or cross section) is also important in challanging seas. The contours of the hull section have a significant impact on how the boat will handle seas.
Look at the hull cross section near the bow of a Valley Aquanaut, an NDK Explorer and a QCC700 boat. Each is very different. These differences in hull shapes are there for reasons related to performance. This is an aspect of why each of these boats handles seas somewhat differently.
Windage is also an issue. Even the lowest profile QCC boat (700) has 2.5 inch higher rear and 1 inch higher foredeck than my primary boat.
Q Ship on the Hudson
Mike,
Curious where on the Hudson you paddle. I’ve had mine out frequently in the waters off Cold Spring (Journey’s End, etc.) and where the in laws live up in Saugerties. I’d hazard to guess that your 'bou (I’ve paddled one before.) will feel ‘livelier’ and more ‘playful’ (How’s that for empirical measurement?), but the Q will definitely be faster through the wind driven chop and refracted wakes the Hudson is infamous for. I think you’ll find you’ll cover the miles quite quickly, and surfing the wakes will be a hoot. If you paddle in either of these locations, you’re welcome to try my boat and see what you think.
Mark
Yes
Well said. Surfski = top fuel dragster. Long lean sea kayak = street racer… if you want it to.
Some folks like to push and some like to relax. Let’s not make judgements about the ‘right’ way to go paddling.
Norrie Point in Staatsburg is
– Last Updated: Oct-19-04 5:58 PM EST –
my usual departure location, since I live a couple miles south in Hyde Park. Very handy, and a really beautiful stretch of the river, with not too much powerboating activity. Also have gone out of Rhinecliff, Tivoli (right across from Saugerties) and Germantown, once each this season.
Thanks for the offer, I think the season is winding down for this year but I'll keep it in mind. I find my 'bou to be nothing but fun in "conditions" and probably really don't want to know if something else is better...
Hopefully by the time I get strong enough to exploit the waterline of a Q700 they'll have come out with a low-freeboard version.
Mike
low-freeboard version
As much as I’d like to see it - you’d better look elsewhere. The Q700 IS their low version of a kayak! Foredeck height is fine (lees than many and lower than your Caribou) but aft deck could drop a good bit (but then so could the 'bou’s if I recall…).
Regarding the 'bou, “more playful” works as good as anything for comparision, but there are times when you want to get across a stretch - not play in it.
Probably so
but from the cockpit you still have to paddle around the fat part.
The Caribou isn’t as low as
I’d like, measuring keel to deck, but I suspect it sits lower in the water than many, just by comparing pictures I’ve collected. I’ve been put off by discussions in other topics of the design-displacement of the 700, and that it therefore doesn’t draw much water with no cargo and a not-too-heavy paddler.
Mike
Numbers were made up
– Last Updated: Oct-19-04 11:33 PM EST –
Many happy owners large and small. Same as 'bou.
Q700 is only 2" longer, and is 3/4" narrower and 1 1/4" less deep than the 'bou. So how much bigger can it really be? It has more waterline length and fuller ends (so more volume there), but also less volume amidships. Go with the specifications - not the speculations!
Best thing is to compare side by side - which I've done.
If I were you, I'd probably keep the 'bou. I like the 700 a lot more - but 'bou is nice enough I'd keep it if that's what I had unless I had a strong reason to change.
Take people up on demos if you can though, the Q700 is not the huge flat water cruiser many people who have not paddled one seem to think it is (that would be the 500!).