Is there a connection between kayak length and seaworthiness?

Advice
#21

“In relatively rough water, a rudder may be out of the water frequently and be ineffectual for that time.”
I agree that hull design is the more crucial factor. In my experience, the above isn’t really a concern for rudders.
When a following/quartering wave acts on the end of your stern (including rudder in the water), that is where you’re most likely to be having directional control issues - where the turn of your kayak is initiated. When the rudder or stern of your kayak is released on top of the wave, that damage is already done. The pushiest moment of being turned is over. The stern/rudder/skeg already did its job to the best of its ability during the pushiest moment. It is also a moment where your kayak, with it’s end released from the water, and the wave still moving faster/as fast as your kayak in that moment, becomes very maneuverable. Even if you have a skeg down, when the end of your stern is released from the water over a wave crest, you’re going to find a big difference in that moment in your ability to spin your kayak. And again, once the stern is released, your push off-course has already occurred, and you’re in a moment of correction.

When you are intentionally surfing waves and doing what you can to work with them, this becomes especially evident. If a wave acts strongly enough on your stern, if it’s steep enough and moving fast enough and in a direction to give the stern a push sideways, any sea kayak will broach fairly quickly and easily. If you can hold off a broach (and speed in this scenario) well enough to get your stern out of the water, in that moment, you have really nice ability to steer your kayak in a desired direction. This is very different than allowing your kayak to be turned by a wave, or trying to steer your kayak with a rudder. It feels more like a quick spin of a kayak much more maneuverable than it normally is. The main point is that you’re going to have a hard time finding these moments paddling open water. So I’ve never been able to figure it much of a concern with a rudder.

You can find steep pushy waves where your rudder/stern might be occasionally momentarily released. But these are conditions where I think a rudder will prove very useful. Getting the drop down in front of the wave with the gradual directional correction that a rudder affords prove a good combination. It allows you to focus on maintaining speed to connect rides. The best thing for directional control in these situations is maintaining the speed of the waves you’re traveling with. The slower you go, the pushier they become. So it becomes a matter of getting the drop on a wave, and from there, maintaining speed as effectively as you can. While you maintain speed, your stern isn’t being overtaken. Rudders and skegs don’t absolutely prevent broaching. They just help, sometimes quite a bit. Speed does the same.

If you’re stiffened up, constantly bracing and being overtaken by every wave, that’s as tough as you can make it. Waves steep enough to hold your stern well out of the water are steep enough to take a ride. If you’re struggling and want to smooth out your paddle, try to take your focus off of bracing, and refocus on momentum and keeping in front of the steeper waves. When traveling through rough water is your goal, the boat that best allows you personally to both move through the waves, and along with the waves the most effectively, all weigh in in terms of your best rough water kayak.

#22

My big water boat has no skeg and no rudder and it is superb in big waves. steering the boat while surfing is one of the few times that I use my paddle as a stern rudder and at the same time to slow the boat so that it doesn’t overrun the wave.

When traveling with waves coming from behind, I find it very handy to have the long boat that will span several waves and not get slowed by the bow punching into the wave ahead and having that slow the boat. I’m not talking about big breaking surf–just waves big enough to catch a ride on. For this boat it needs about three footers (measured trough to crest) and it’s even better up to about six feet, or so.

When I first got the boat, I worried a bit about broaching until it actually happened when I wasn’t paying attention. Without me stabbing the face of the wave to stay upright, the boat just slid sideways until the wave petered out. It’s nice to have a boat that’s better than I will ever be.

#23

A good time to turn when heading into the waves…

1 Like
#24

@nickcrowhurst said:
A good time to turn when heading into the waves…

Started doing that last year after reading it here I think. Works very well.

#25

Hannes Lindemann kayaked across the Atlantic Ocean in the 1950’s in a 17 ft. folding Klepper fyi.

#26

@paddletothesea said:
Hannes Lindemann kayaked across the Atlantic Ocean in the 1950’s in a 17 ft. folding Klepper fyi.

Yeah, but given the choice, I’ll bet he would rather have had a Nordkapp.

#27

A lot easier to stretch out and sleep in a Klepper.

If you’ve never been in a folder in rough water, you wouldn’t know how secure they feel compared to a hardshell in those conditions. They absorb some of the wave impact rather than bouncing off of it.

So, sure, while paddling, a Nordkapp would have been faster. But if I had to live aboard a kayak for an extended period in open water, I would pick a folder too.

I knew a gal some years ago who did polar research in Antarctica and she used a Feathercraft Klondike (a folding tandem with a large open cockpit. During the Austral Summer when she and her crew were a ways from the research station doing field work, she could sleep stretched out inside the boat and had made a tent that mounted over it…

#28

Lindemann used a sailing rig on his folder, too. Folders can really fly with a sail rig. Due to the frames they are easier to retrofit with sails and the lightness helps with speed.

This video illustrates quite well the speed potential with just a small downwind sail on a folder. They are using Pakboat XT-15’s with Kayaksailor rigs. Note how easy self-rescue is – these boats have multiple inflatable sponsons down both sides so they are very buoyant. And the hulls flatten out somewhat under your weight on the deck when you are climbing on which makes them more stable during the maneuver. Trak folding kayaks even have a hydraulic system that allows the paddler to change the hull profile while underway to give it more or less rocker to adapt to conditions. Can’t do that with a hardshell:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpDexKHf0LQ&list=UUx8sBAlriktHCW9cDaQy8Ug&index=13&feature=plcp

1 Like
#29

Noticing almost very few roughwater ocean paddlers left on Paddling.net to make informed comments.

#30

I have one 17’-8" sea kayak (Current Designs Caribou) and one 13’-5" Hobie Revolution 13 (pedal kayak). For convenience reasons I only kayak on Lake Whatcom (in WA) and Lake Havasu (in AZ), but it’s my daily exercise so I go out in almost all wind conditions.

There are three main differences in how these two boats handle wind and larger waves, of which two do have to do with the length. Traveling diagonally downwind is a much tamer experience in the sea kayak because each individual wave is less able to lift the whole boat and cause it to yaw back and forth. In the Hobie I watch my bow make big circles - if I were prone to seasickness I would be pretty green! The Caribou does the same thing but on a much smaller scale. The other length-related difference is just a comfort issue, not a safety/stability issue: going directly upwind, the longer sea kayak slams down into the troughs more violently than does the Hobie.

The difference not related to length, BTW, is that I have much better boat control with my hips in the sea kayak. My Hobie has the new “Vantage CT” seat which is like a beach chair. Very comfortable seat, but using my hips to “edge” the kayak is pretty much a nonstarter. If the kayak tips left, I can still lean my upper body right (within reason) to keep it more centered over the boat, but I am not securely braced against anything and could more easily lose my balance.

#31

I am not a sea kayaker nor a skilled paddler, rather a perennial recreational, now geriatric kayaker. After owning a number of WS Pungo 140’s (not a sea kayak) at 65 years of age , I bought an SUV and the 14 footer was suddenly felt heavier for me to car-top so I opted for a WS Tsunami 125. Wow, it turned on a dime, seemed faster than the old Pungo’s and it was lighter to car top. For the previous 18 years I had paddled down the Piscataqua River in New Castle NH, over to Kittery, ME, and sometimes out to the 2KR Buoy, Certain times of the month, the outgoing tide changes one area of the rivah into almost rapids; in the old Pungo’s (famous for not turning on a dime) I simply dug my paddle into the water and rode the tide - never a major problem. During my first saltwater venture in the shorter, more maneuverable Tsunami, the faster current, at that spot, spun me around like a straw. Before starting homeward, I thought about selling the new Tsunami 125; soon afterward, I purchased a returned Pungo 140 at an LL Bean Outlet; The previous buyer(s) had been rough with it but when the manager marked it down to $499, I bought it. Maybe the increased length of even a wide hull is better for those rolling waves, even if it means less speed.

#32

@tlb said:
I am not a sea kayaker nor a skilled paddler, rather a perennial recreational, now geriatric kayaker. After owning a number of WS Pungo 140’s (not a sea kayak) at 65 years of age , I bought an SUV and the 14 footer was suddenly felt heavier for me to car-top so I opted for a WS Tsunami 125. Wow, it turned on a dime, seemed faster than the old Pungo’s and it was lighter to car top. For the previous 18 years I had paddled down the Piscataqua River in New Castle NH, over to Kittery, ME, and sometimes out to the 2KR Buoy, Certain times of the month, the outgoing tide changes one area of the rivah into almost rapids; in the old Pungo’s (famous for not turning on a dime) I simply dug my paddle into the water and rode the tide - never a major problem. During my first saltwater venture in the shorter, more maneuverable Tsunami, the faster current, at that spot, spun me around like a straw. Before starting homeward, I thought about selling the new Tsunami 125; soon afterward, I purchased a returned Pungo 140 at an LL Bean Outlet; The previous buyer(s) had been rough with it but when the manager marked it down to $499, I bought it. Maybe the increased length of even a wide hull is better for those rolling waves, even if it means less speed.

tlb, I too am a perennial Rec boater but I mostly paddle a Tarpon 160. I also have a Pungo 140 which is a quicker boat.

1 Like
#33

Long answer made short, yes kayak length is a key factor in seaworthiness. However, it is not the only factor or necessarily the most important. Probably the most important advantage that length provides is more buoyancy. Since most sea kayaks have similiar sized cockpits and bulkheads, every inch of added length is more square inches of sealed buoyancy. Width, hull design, and deck hieght affect stability, tracking, and shedding waves but without buoyancy they don’t help.

#34

It would be good to start by defining exactly what “seaworthy” means, but I assume you are referring to stability, safety, maneuverability, tracking and speed—all of which are concerns with other types of paddling, like paddling large lakes. It would also be good to define the “sea” conditions that you will be paddling in.

I know of at least four shorter kayaks that I would consider seaworthy: the Delta 12.10 and 14 and the Hurricane Sojourn 135 and 146. There are advantages to shorter kayaks. You might lose some efficiency but gain easy transportability and maneuverability. You might find that you end up using a shorter kayak more often because it’s easier to get out of the garage and load on your car. There are an amazing number of 17’ kayaks on Craigslist that are advertised as having been used only a few times.

If to you seaworthy means fast, remember that a longer kayak is only faster to the extent that you have the physical ability and desire to push it at high speed for a long time. I lack both of those so I favor a shorter, lighter kayak that will work in most conditions. I value glide more than actual speed—being able to go farther with each stroke with less effort. Some shorter kayaks have great glide, like the Delta 14.

I downsized from 15.5 feet to 13.5 feet and am really glad I did. The shorter kayak is about four times more stable than the longer one due to a better hull shape and it weighs 7 lbs less. I trust the 13.5’ kayak much more than the 15.5 in rough water. There isn’t a huge difference in speed between the two, at least at my pace.

To my way of thinking, safety always has to come first. Your skills + hull design = safety. You should choose a hull that works with your skill set. A less skilled paddler will do better in rough water with a hull that is inherently more stable, that naturally resists overturning and has buoyancy to ride up over waves. This is why I now prioritize hull shape over length. The Delta hull is well known for its stability (designed for the Pacific) and the Hurricane Sojourn has the same high volume in both ends. Compare these to the extremely low bow and stern of Eddylines and you will see a big difference.

Not enough attention is paid to hull shape in marketing kayaks as “seaworthy.” Some manufacturers say nothing at all about their hull shape. Virtually all claim that their kayaks are fast, stable, and maneuverable. So it’s important to know how to read the shape of any kayak you’re considering. Personally I look for high volume in the bow and stern and a moderate V.

Seaworthiness also means having the proper bulkheads and perimeter lines for safety.

#35

Waterbird: Unlike you, I look for low volume in the bow and stern. The reason being, when entering or leaving a steep wave at an angle, The low volume end sinks into the wave rather than floating high and allowing gravity to turn the boat. My 14.5 foot boat has high volume at the bow and stern, while my 17 foot has very narrow low volume at bow and stern. The 14.5 is as fast as the seventeen, because the effective length of the waterline for flotation is as long as the bigger boat. It is more tiring to maintain a course in rough water with the shorter boat. This may not affect you, if you do not do long crossings.

#36

@harry0244 said:
Waterbird: Unlike you, I look for low volume in the bow and stern. The reason being, when entering or leaving a steep wave at an angle, The low volume end sinks into the wave rather than floating high and allowing gravity to turn the boat. My 14.5 foot boat has high volume at the bow and stern, while my 17 foot has very narrow low volume at bow and stern. The 14.5 is as fast as the seventeen, because the effective length of the waterline for flotation is as long as the bigger boat. It is more tiring to maintain a course in rough water with the shorter boat. This may not affect you, if you do not do long crossings.

I understand your point of view. As I mentioned, you should choose a hull that works with your skill set. My results with a low-volume bow and stern were (really) unsafe at my skill level. There came a day (after owning the kayak for 4 years and trusting it) when I found myself in conditions that overwhelmed my skills and this kayak. I wouldn’t encourage beginners and lower intermediates to choose such a hull. When I switched to a high-volume hull the difference was like night and day—much more stability in rough water at my skill level. The difference is felt with all wave angles. The high-volume kayak may or may not be turned as you describe, but most importantly, it remains upright and is much more forgiving of errors. I think that’s an important aspect of seaworthiness.

I forgot to say for the OP that low volume comes from both fine ends and a low deck. In photos you can often see the stern of Eddylines actually submerged or nearly submerged. I’ve never understood how that enhances control, other than reducing windage.

#37

@Overstreet said:
Depends on the type of waves. Banana boats are easier to manage in waves and surf. Touring boats can be a hand full on turns and quartering waves/wind.

In rough seas I’d rather be in my 17’-8" Solstice than some shorter rec or transitional kayak. I don’t have to turn on a dime in the rough. I just need to edge in the rough…

#38

Don’t really like totally plumB lol bow either. Not that I have used one. I have seen videos. Thoughts?

#39

Plum bows allow the boat to have a few more inches of waterline length. Surfski’s have plum bows for that reason. There is a distinct difference in the bow wave in my sea kayak versus my surf ski. Surfski has a much smaller bow wave and is faster than my sea kayak. Kayak is 18’, surfski is 19’ and 2" narrower.

#40

Volume of the bow and stern affect handling in rough conditions. One of my favorite boats to paddle was the early solstice, which had a low volume bow (long nose at the front and the bow rocker began several inches from the nose). I laughed every time I took that thing out in surf as it was the wettest ride possible, but he handled really well in bad conditions (http://alturl.com/77gr4). It was like being on the bow of a WWII submarine and would go under pretty much anything that rippled the water.

As you may be able to imagine, a higher volume bow will tend to lift (buoyancy) as it is submerged, but rocker is more important to getting the boat to lift with contact with the wave. Both volume and rocker affect performance in waves and wind. Often, additional rocker adds to the wind profile, as it decreases waterline length (LOA) in calm conditions. As I stated in a previous post, this is one of those tradeoffs.

Distance between waves is also a consideration. On the bay here, often one paddles in chop with a very short frequency, so a 17’ boat will be on several small waves and 10-20 kt. winds simultaneously. A low profile is more important to handling than is a bot with high ends and lots of rocker. On the ocean, with longer moments between waves, less wind, and larger waves, that same hull design could be an annoyance.

It comes down to what fits your paddling preferences and paddling profile. If it didn’t there would be one kayak hull design and everyone would use it because it was the best.

I just wish that kayaks cost about as much as hammers, in which case, I could always bring the right tool for the conditions.