has 3 seats
Can be paddled solo or tandem!
a relatively small tandem day tripper or a relatively large solo that could be used as a tripper.
Not all Malecites were sold with a center seat.
They’re pretty, whatever they are.
Fast enough for you or me.
But even a lowly Wenonah Solo Plus should edge out a Malecite, solo or tandem. Too much wetted area on the Malecite, and as I recall, not symmetrical.
It’s an OC-2 : )
g2d, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong …
about being symetrical...I have 2 of them and they sure look symetrical to me....but you are one of the expert know-it-all's here....and incredibly seaworthy too!Maybe Clarion will chime in here...He's gotten to be very intimate with his.....And for Andy, one has a middle seat and one has a kneeling thwort instead.....
The bow height on the Malecite is one inch greater than the stern height, so by definition it is asymmetrical.
To my eye, the water footprint of the Malecite looked pretty symmetrical, but I doubt I examined it closely enough to tell for sure.
well there ya go…
I was talking about the shape of the hull from looking at it from above…the little intricacies one learns from others’ knowledge… thanks
so by definition, none of my boats are…
symetical?..my Magic, or my wildfire, or Prism or even my Kestral. It was my understanding that they all appeared to be symetrical...I swear I've seen them all pretty much described the way I thought...(symetrical)
Cs and OCs and ACA DR Race classes
A C boat would be a decked canoe, hence Rob's OC means Open Canoe. It's a European thing.
The Malecite is one of the finer ACA Down River short class tandems of all time. Other neat hulls in the small tandem group include Bell's NorthStar, Sawyer's 190 Cruiser and Swift's Kipiwa and new Keewaydin 16. For average sized folks they are fine tandems as long as the trip isn't too long. I've been out for ten day tandem sojourns in a both Malecite NorthStar and had nothing but fun.
They are compact tandems and really too wide for most to solo as the width eliminates cross strokes / maneuvers. There are good solo hulls available for the supersized amongst us.
The Malecite did start my solo paddling career. A partner didn't show so I turned the thing around, knelt against the back bar of the bow seat and have gotten in a canoe with a partner damn few times since. That said; didn't take long for me to acquire a Screamer; ~ 4 inches narrower and a dedicated solo boat.
Symmetry usually refers to waterline footprint, not shear profile. Malecite, 190 Cruiser, WildFire and the hull Kestral devolved from, Curtis's Vagabond, are all symmetrical. Magic, Prism, Kipiwa and NorthStar are Swede-Form, the widest section aft of longitudinal center. The other option, Fish-Form or Cab-Forward has the widest section forward of longitudinal center.
The theory is that Swede-Form hulls push the water aside more gently, hence generate less wave making resistance and are thereby faster. Recent research indicates that symmetrical boats generate less wave making resistance. Google L. Lazauskas for more; much more.
For most of us the choice of Swede, Symmetrical or Fish-form impacts handling more than speed, and unless R Santorum implausily gets elected, we'll be free to please ourselves in that regard for decades.
For what it is worth
the Malecite hull is described in the Mad River catalogs as “asymmetrical”.
I believe that is due to the asymmetrical sheer, because to my eye, as for others, the water footprint looks symmetrical.
I really don’t know if it’s symetrical
... or not
It's an interesting question. Like Pete said, the shear isn't symetrical. But under the water line? It's sure "looks" symetrical, and I think the specs say that the rocker is the same.
But, the Malecites were not all the same hull shape. The earlier ones had less volume in the bow. I first saw this at Dave Curtis' shop. He had a nice (76?) malecite in his shop. When I looked it over I told Dave it doesn't look like my Malecite. Dave explained that the Jim Henry got complaints that the wives were getting too wet in the bow. So, he increased the bow volume. That's what Dave said, and that's what my eye told me as soon as I saw it.
So, were the earliest Malecites swede form? Didn't look like it. What exactly did Jim Henry do when he increased the bow volume? Was the end result a symetrical hull under the waterline? I'd love to hear more.
Btw, I sold mine to Johnny. It needed gunnels after I pushed the "seaworthy" bit too far. It's a long story. Johnny is putting new gunnels on it and fixing a broken seat and a short tear to the fabric. I had to sell something to make space for another WW boat, but I miss her already. I will have another.
According to the 2006 MRC catalog
spec sheet the Malecite has 1.5" bow rocker and 2" stern rocker. I guess that makes it at least slightly asymmetrical.
Now I’m confused
Would a boat with differential rocker but identical shapes and equal volumes forward and aft of the center be considered symmetric?
No, I don’t think so
I think everyone would consider a canoe with differential rocker to be asymmetrical.
The MRC catalogs I have access to just describe the Malecite hull as having “slight rocker”.
My post was incorrect. I’m sure the
Malecite is/was symmetrical in hull dimension. I’m pretty sure the Solo Plus is not symmetrical. Sorry if I have caused any conceptual pain.
The Malecite is one of Jim Henry’s very best V-bottom designs. A nice pocket tandem, and ok as a solo if you’ve got the reach for the beam.
But based on my Mad River canoes, and in general, I think the less V bottom, the better. Shallow arch works better, whether you want a lot of speed, or some speed and some stability.
Let’s face it, unless we require
complete symmetry in waterline footprint and in rocker, underwater taper, etc., then we’re going to have to settle for some shading and qualification in what we say about certain hulls.
For example, I’m not interested in sheer line asymmetry as a criterion. A swedeform hull is seriously asymmetrical, while one just trimmed differentially at the sheer line is usually a more conservative design.
For what I have seen of the Malecites, from my erstwhile MR Compatriot, and from my MR Guide Solo, what I see is symmetry. My MR Synergy is seriously asymmetrical in several ways.
We don’t want to get McGrady back in here with his charts and slide rule, do we?
Ohh the conceptual pain!
I think the Malecite is symmetrical below the waterline as well. I was surprised to hear about differential rocker, if that is a fact.
I have paddled a Malecite solo a bit. It is wider than ideal for that use, but I didn’t have too much trouble with it. A number of early solo whitewater OC-1s were about the same width at the gunwales, such as the Blue Hole Sunburst and Sunburst II, the Whitesell Piranha, and the Dagger Caper.
Shallow V bottoms do take a little getting used to, but they aren’t unpleasant once you do. I agree the shallow arch bottom is probably a bit more practical, and offers a little less wetted surface area.