For many years I have had both a 220 cm Werner Kalliste, and a 226 cm AT Exception Tour, both bent shaft unfeathered and used in a low angle stroke. I recently acquired a 223.5 cm (88") gp with 3.5" blades. I paddle a Q700X 99% of the time on day paddles of 2 to 2.5 hr at about 4.2 kts (not mph).
In recent comparisons I noted a distinct advantage from either the AT or Kalliste over the gp. Subjectively I feel notably more fatigued at the end of 2 hr with the gp. Objectively, speed goes down by about 0.2 kts. I cannot detect any difference in speed or fatigue between the AT and the Kalliste.
I don’t have much experience with the new gp, perhaps 200 miles total. But I think I get both the canted angle and good immersion at the catch, which results in a very quiet stroke.
I think the stroke with the gp is a bit longer, and there is less grab at the catch, but I think this is the way it is supposed to be. Since I paddle low angle unfeathered anyway, my stroke angle and geometry with both are about the same.
You have to wear sealskin for the GP
to show its full potential.
And keep a harpoon on the rear deck
Jack L
Thanks for the observation
It would be interesting to hear your observation after you learn how to use a greenland paddle efficiently. The greenland paddle, as you commented does work differently and can only become efficient after learning and practicing the many techniques that will allow the paddle to work at its fullest potential. When I first started using a Greenland paddle I thought it was a joke. After a few years and instructions from many competent greenland paddlers was I able to use the paddle efficiently. Only then was I able to say, I get it.
I don’t have a few years and my Onno
is very efficient right now.
You have a …
Great set of Euro paddles to compare to. Is your GP up to their standard? Not all 2x4s with a loom perform the same -
That said, I think you should be able to maintain that 4.8 mph over 2 hours with either paddle in the QCC. Heck, my average over 15 mile paddles has been 4.7mph in the 13.5 foot long Perception Sonoma with a GP… If you move to average speeds over 5.5 miles, I think you will be better off with a wing or a strong Euro than a GP.
I’m not any kind og expert on GP but I can share that in the first few months of using one I felt my shoulders and arms were more tired at the end than with other padldles. It took me some months if not years to feel that I can go longer and be less tired with it. I still feel I prefer other paddles for other purposes (full power, stronger and faster bracing/correction strokes) but for rolling or 2-3 hours at a non-racing pace I would normally chose the GP…
GP
At two hours and 4.7 mph, you are a better man than me.
response to Kocho
"You have a …
Posted by: kocho on Oct-31-11 7:22 AM (EST)
Great set of Euro paddles to compare to. Is your GP up to their standard? Not all 2x4s with a loom perform the same -;)"
My gp is an incredibly beautiful and very light Novorca. I wanted very much to prefer it to my Euro’s, but so far I don’t, based on the time trial comparisons.
“That said, I think you should be able to maintain that 4.8 mph over 2 hours with either paddle in the QCC.”
That is what I thought. But, so far, it is not the case.
" Heck, my average over 15 mile paddles has been 4.7mph in the 13.5 foot long Perception Sonoma with a GP…"
This is remarkably fast for the Sonoma at that distance. I do not aspire to such speeds.
" If you move to average speeds over 5.5 miles, I think you will be better off with a wing or a strong Euro than a GP."
No way am I capable of 5.5. I do have a wing, but find the high wing stroke tiring over 2 hrs. Over short distances, less than 1 mile, I can go a bit faster, but I don’t find the wing enjoyable.
“I’m not any kind og expert on GP but I can share that in the first few months of using one I felt my shoulders and arms were more tired at the end than with other padldles. It took me some months if not years to feel that I can go longer and be less tired with it. I still feel I prefer other paddles for other purposes (full power, stronger and faster bracing/correction strokes) but for rolling or 2-3 hours at a non-racing pace I would normally chose the GP…”
My rolls with the Euros are close to 100% reliable. Considerably less so with the gp. As a result I am hesitant to take the gp into rougher conditions. Perhaps more time with the gp is required, but I am not confident of the result.
very interesting data
Thanks for sharing your information. Few people actually share their experiences in such a direct and measurable way.
In fact I’m not even certain myself if my GP is faster over any length of time less than two days. I do notice that day two and three are much better for me if I’m using the GP when compared to using a Euro. But I am pretty sure the Euro is faster most of the time. I also notice I can brace better with the Euro.
I’m sure I have a lot more to learn about the differences between the GP and the Euro, but now that it is cold I’m using the single blade. So according to many I’m only canoeing now. Which I think is funny because I don’t own a canoe!
http://paddlingandsailing.blogspot.com/2011/10/am-i-canoeing-or-kayaking.html
We all have preferences
"Heck, my average over 15 mile paddles has been 4.7mph in the 13.5 foot long Perception Sonoma with a GP…" - This is remarkably fast for the Sonoma at that distance.
The interesting thing about the Sonoma was that, because it is an efficient swede form with a relatively narrow beam but short waterline (probably 12.5 feet), it was effortless to paddle under 4.5 mph but beccomes a good exercise pace for me to maintain for an hour at 4.7-4.8. I tried to make over 5mph average in it a few times over 5 miles and did it, but was half dead at the end of the 5th mile at 5mph average. The 4.7 over 15 miles was with a GP (and includes all rest times). The 5mph was with a wing. And I am not much faster over longer distances even when paddling much “faster boats” - in my 18 foot Rapier (competitive with the QCC700x) I had very hard time beating 5.5mph for any distance longer than 5 miles. So I am not a very strong paddler physically either.
Without turning this into a debate of GP vs. the rest, here is some more info. I am generally faster with euro or wing if I have to put down some good effot for a short time (e.g., up to a few hours with little breaks inbetween). But as was mentioned by someone else too I think, if the speed requires effort well below max effort (max over whatever the distance), the GP leaves me less tired at the end.
Also about rolling - I did my first rolls with a wing of all paddles, then moved to rolling with a euro. Only later did I pick-up a GP. With a GP now I feel my rolls are easier and the paddle is more controllable underwater than a long euro. I use a Lumpy paddle, but I don’t think it would make a huge difference over a Novorka for this. The only two things I can think of for you to be more tired with the GP over a Euro is that you are not using it to its best advantage or if the blades on the GP are too slim and/or too flexible and you are overpowering it.
ymmv
I deliberately refrained from making any general statement that gp’s are more or less efficient, or allow one to go faster or slower. I only stated the results of my own experiments, with my own paddles and boats. The result is that right now, after a few months with the gp, either of my low angle, un-feathered, bent shaft euros are faster and less fatiguing. No doubt, I could improve my gp stroke, but am not optimistic that I would achieve the level of my Euros.
Since the stroke of the unfeathered low angle paddles is so similar to the greenland stroke, I would be most interested in someone else’s comparison test. I don’t think it appropriate to compare a feathered, or high angle Euro, or a wing to the gp.
I don’t think one can use …
a GP the same as a Euro and expect similar or better results from the GP. You wrote: "Since I paddle low angle unfeathered anyway, my stroke angle and geometry with both are about the same". I don't think you should use the GP the same way - if you do a canted stroke with it, it will dive towards the end of the stroke, then you slice out. With a Euro you want to avoid the diving down part and instead pull straight back. At least this is how I do it, without having had formal instruction for the GP. I use all my paddles un-feathered, by the way, including the wing.
Basically, even when I start my GP stroke as a fairly low angle one (I do do that in strong winds), towards the end of the second half of the stroke it tends to look like a mid or even high-angle stroke...
If you keep the GP at the same low angle throughout the stroke, I think you are not using it to its best, e.g., not benefitting from its foil shape. And because it is narrow bladed and short-loomed compared to Euro, if you are using it as a Euro, you have more water spilling around the blade and you have less leverage and thus more wasted effort and less speed.
I would also say that body rotation (especially at the catch phase) may be more important to get the most of the GP since you are kind of losing time to submerge the long blade so you want to start as far forward as you can. So by the time the blade is submerged well, you will be in a power position to "pull". With a low angle Euro if you over-rotate forward you get no benefit and actually you will make the boat zig-zag more and it will be harder on you, since you will be pulling sideways relative to your motion rather than back. Another way the stroke "geometry" I think would differ...
testing
Kocho: Everything you say about techniques makes sense. However, I am basing my statement on actual comparative test paddles. Perhaps, after more refining of gp technique technique I will be able to match the performance of my Euros, perhaps not. I will continue using the gp occasionally, get some instruction, and try to improve. My main blade remains the Kalliste or the AT, doesn’t matter which.
Since you do paddle unfeathered, I would request that you try a modern low angle Euro of comparable length to your gp, and do a few 8 or 10 mile back to back comparison paddles, and report the results. I make no predictions.
I’ll try…
Maybe next week. I would be interested in my results too. I have measured my effort (speed vs. heart rate) on short distances with various paddles, when making choices to buy them or not, and if I remember I did not see any significant difference in effort to maintain the same speeds with any of them, as long as I was not pushing my speed limits. The differences were only when paddling near the top of my speed range or in sprinting, where the GP was slowest, Euro in the middle, wing - fastest.
I still have a Lendal Kinetic Touring in carbon so it will be the one to compare to. After I got used to the GP, I use that or a wing for most of my flat water paddling, and only use Euro for following seas active “surfing” and for white water or if I expect to need to tow someone.
kinetic touring
I am not familiar with the Lendal Kinetic Touring. But to make the test fair vs the gp, one needs to compare it to a paddle specifically designed for low angle, i.e., with a slightly longer and slightly smaller blade. For instance, in the Werners the comparison should be to the Kalliste or Athena, not the Ikelos or Cyprus. The Kalliste has a blade area of 650 cm2 and the Athena 550. My AT has 602 cm2. If the blade area of your Lendal is larger than the Kalliste and the blade is not relatively long and narrow, the comparison will not be appropriate. Also, with the smaller blade, the overall length of the low angle Euro should be within an inch or so of the gp length.
Thanks for considering doing this test. I am highly interested in your results.
hmmm
And if youare a high angle GP paddler? Or one who uses a GP in whatever way the situation demands it?
Paul
650cm^2, I think
I think I have the 650cm^2 version (it comes in 3-4 sizes if I recall). It's a medium-angle as I would characterise it but works fine in high-angle or low angle, IMO. The blade is not quite as long and narrow as on the low angle paddles but not as chubby as on high-angle paddles either. Mine is 220cm and my GP is 88", which comes to about 223cm so fairly comparable in length and I think it is 3.5" blade, so similar to yours (but heavier probably by at least 50% and stiffer than yours since I have a composite-covered wood version). However, I know I can put a lot more power to the water with the lendal than with the GP (that's why I much prefer the Lendal for active paddling such as catching waves or towing). So the experiment will be at quite a bit less than max output since I already know the GP will lose otherwise -;)
sounds good
Sounds like your Lendal is good for the comparo. The test that interests me is to paddle 2 or 3 hours at normal cruising effort, rather than catching waves or racing, and deciding if you go faster or work less. This is what I found. Your interests may be different.
To address the comment above: Sure, the gp can be used in a high vertical stroke, and if that is what you do when cruising for 2 to 3 hours, then this comparison test might not be of interest. But most gp paddlers do not cruise this way.
I beg to disagree
As Greg Stamer says, there are as many ways to paddle with a greenland paddle as there are greenland paddlers. the same would apply to Euro paddlers.
Any comparative tests would only apply to the paddler and only if the skill sets using either paddle were the same understanding that those skill sets are by default different. And this would also depend on personal biases.
I much prefer a Greenland paddle for touring over a euro paddle but that is a preference. I also much prefer a GP over a Euro for towing…especially for towing…much less strain on shoulders etc.
having said that I teach with a Euro on occasion and try to keep my practice up because each blade, even among euros is different and requires a different skill set to use efficiently. the same can be said for GPs.
Paul
who do you disagree with?
“As Greg Stamer says, there are as many ways to paddle with a greenland paddle as there are greenland paddlers. the same would apply to Euro paddlers.”
I agree. That is why I suggest doing a comparison with a low angle unfeathered Euro, and doing it over a 2 or 3 hour cruising paddle.
“Any comparative tests would only apply to the paddler and only if the skill sets using either paddle were the same understanding that those skill sets are by default different”.
I agree. My comparison test only applies to me, with my present skills. That is why I am interested in someone else doing a similar comparison.
“And this would also depend on personal biases.”
I agree. My bias is toward the Kalliste and/or the AT. But I am trying to also learn the gp, and am much better than at first.
"I much prefer a Greenland paddle for touring over a euro paddle but that is a preference. "
My question is whether you have made a direct comparison with a low angle unfeathered euro before coming to that preference.