I've moved this over from the fishing forum.
Anyone here have experience with both the Mohawk Solo 14 in Royalex and the Wenonah Vagabond in the same? I can buy a Vagabond near home for about $125 more than I'd pay to have the Mohawk delivered. Is it worth the extra dollars for the Vagabond?
My use will be about 50 percent in Ozark streams and 50 percent in small lakes and strip pits.
compare
I have them both and like the Mohawk a little more on Moving water, and the WeNoNah a little more on flat water. I wish you were closer, I would let you paddle both. I would rather fish from the Mohawk.
Why?
Why would you rather fish from the Mohawk?
Stability
I don’t own one, but the Solo 14 is reputed to have good initial stability. This makes for a good fishing boat. The down side to this is that it will be a little slower on the lakes.
I had a Mohawk
but it was the 13…a fun nimble boat that taught me a lot. Unfortunately it was the short boat for Ozark streams though I had a great time with it on the Buffalo all the way from Ponca to White River (my husband carried most of the load)
I paddled the Vagabond for maybe twenty minutes. Stable not exciting. I dont fish but it might have attributes for fishing that the Mohawk does not have.
The Vag was not a great turner…I could if heeled to the rail but you most likely wont want to do that fishing. I would take it down Ozark streams but given a choice I would go for the Mohawk first.
Have paddled both
Have paddled both and agree with madmike. I have a Solo 14 and since I paddle mostly moving water I prefer it. On large flatwater (like the lower Wisconsin River or lakes) I would give the nod to the Vagabond. Also, with the stock seats you sit a bit higher in the Solo 14 which I prefer, however you could always adjust the seat height in either both to meet your preference. Both boats handle both types of water well but the difference is on the margins.
Since I don’t fish I can’t help you with that part of the decision.
Final choice is up to you and it would be best if you can test paddle each boat. But if you can’t test paddle the Solo 14, and a test paddle of the Vagabond (should be no problem test paddling that with a local dealer) meets you needs I would choose the Vagabond. Better to choose a boat you have paddled and liked than to buy one blind.
I’ve owned one, not both
I had a Royalex Vagabond for a few years. It’s a decent choice for fishing, and I’m sure it would handle your needs just fine. I’ll also say that for a ho-hum Royalex solo, you might be surprised at how nicely it cruises along. For Ozark streams I’d prefer something more maneuverable than a Vagabond, and if the Solo 14 is better for twisty-turny stuff as some have said, you’ll have to weigh that aspect against the faster cruising speed of the Vagabond.
Well…
...tough call. I've paddled the Vagabond a few times and the wife has one. It works very well for her on Ozark streams. Two other friends (Bob's wife, JoAnne, and Duggae) also own Vagabonds and they too paddle theirs on Ozark streams and have for a few years now. One more paddler whom I believe also favors the Vagabond for Ozark rivers is artist, Al Agnew (Al_A here on P.net). My impression is that the Vagabond is a bit better than the Solo 14 in windy conditions and flatter water while giving up little in maneuverability or stability to the Solo 14. IMHO, it's not "Fast," but faster than the Solo 14 and easy to get up to and maintain a decent pace.
I paddled the Solo 14 for 5 +/- years. Not very fast, but maneuverable and well mannered. Very stable for a solo canoe. Only problem I ever had was with large wave trains and some Class II drops where this boat will take on some water. Only "Swims" I had from this boat were on the shut-ins section of Big Creek, in the MO Ozarks. But the time I ran the Ponca section of the Buffalo, I wallowed to shore a couple times with a boatload of water and a friend with a Solo 14 swam a couple times with that moderately low bow. The Mohawk Odyssey is a better boat if you plan on bigger water like that.
Both boats will work on Ozark streams. Having owned the Mohawk and seen and paddled the Vagabond, I'd give the Vagabond a slight "Edge." If the Vagabond was cheaper, that would be the "Clincher" for me. If the Mohawk was cheaper, heck, that makes it a little tougher. But, IMHO, the Vagabond is a little bit better boat. WW
I bet it comes down to the price
Either will worrk for sure. Twisty little streams and less rockered boats can work if you put a little heel on the boat during turns…that is if the stems will free up a little.
One Buffalo trip at just below flood stage I ran in a Swift Heron…relative of the Hemlock Peregrine. Now Gray Rocks did get me dumped…wave train number one through four was fun and then I realized I had so much water in the boat that number five would be a bath.
I have done it in a Merlin II also. All will make it but the Solo 13 was just more fun…did not have to plan and set up so far ahead when there was whitewater.
I bet it comes down to the price
Either will worrk for sure. Twisty little streams and less rockered boats can work if you put a little heel on the boat during turns…that is if the stems will free up a little.
One Buffalo trip at just below flood stage I ran in a Swift Heron…relative of the Hemlock Peregrine. Now Gray Rocks did get me dumped…wave train number one through four was fun and then I realized I had so much water in the boat that number five would be a bath.
I have done it in a Merlin II also. All will make it but the Solo 13 was just more fun…did not have to plan and set up so far ahead when there was whitewater.
Thoughts…
I agree that the Vagabond is faster, better-tracking, but less maneuverable. However, I’ve never had any problem maneuvering mine, and I float and fish all kinds of Ozark streams from little marginally canoeable ones to the bigger rivers. And in my opinion, unless you’re planning on running the few stream sections in the Ozarks that are considered whitewater, you do not need a canoe that’s highly maneuverable at the expense of tracking ability. In fact, my solo canoe experience went from an Old Town Pack–very maneuverable but doesn’t track well at all–through a Wenonah Sandpiper–slightly better at tracking but not much–to the Vagabond. I’d only had the Sandpiper for about a year when I paddled a friend’s Vagabond, and immediately dumped the Sandpiper and got a Vagabond expressly because of its better tracking ability.
The most common hazard in Ozark streams is the fast, curving riffle with drift logs and overhanging trees on the faster outside of the bend. You most easily negotiate these places by back-ferrying–pointing the front end of the canoe where you DON’T want to go and backpaddling, keeping the canoe at the right angle for the current to work with you rather than against you, as happens if you try to forward paddle past the obstructions. A canoe that tracks well is much easier to hold the angle without a lot of switching sides or making less powerful corrective strokes.
Also, all the larger Ozark streams have a lot of flat water, big pools that are not the best places to fish for smallmouth bass. I generally paddle through the slow middle portions of those big dead pools, and I want a canoe that will get me through them with a minimum of effort. (And, I want one that will get me down the river in a hurry on those rather common instances when it’s a half-hour before dark and I’m still two miles from the take-out!)
So I think the Vagabond is the better choice. However, having said all that, the Solo 14 is good enough that the cheaper price might offset the Vagabond’s advantages. However, I wouldn’t recommend the cheaper Royalite version of the Solo 14…I’ve heard too many complaints about its durability.
I agree
Either would work fine. It is a matter of preference whether to lean towards the harder tracking or the more maneuverable boat. For an equal mix of flat water and relatively straightforward river use, I would probably prefer the Vagabond as well.
I’d go along with that too.
When I said that for streams I’d prefer something more maneuverable, I was saying that from a “canoeing” standpoint. The fact is, the Vagabond not as much “fun” when working around bends and obstacles as a more maneuverable canoe, but it’s maneuverable enough to get the job done, and your point about more easily passing through each long pool of slow water is a good one.
Odyssey
Also take a look at the Mohawk Odyssey. It is not fast (but not very much diff than the “14”) but much more versatile. If you install a foot brace, you can sit and switch paddle with a bent shaft and it does surprisingly well (aka marathon canoe race style). For rapids, install kneeling pads and switch to a straight shaft paddle and use northwoods style. Then just move back and forth as the water type dictates.
For Mohawks, definately do not be afraid to raise the seat or move the seat foward a bit. At least on the Odyssey, I do not get their seat placement, it is too low.
The Odyssey (aka Challenger; original design by no other than Gene Jensen I beleive) has the advantage of holding 100+ lbs of gear for camping and easily handling Class 2s. The “14” may not work as well for that, especially in rapids.
I have used it on most the Ozark Rivers, Wisconsin Rivers, and bigger stuff in Canada. With a decent bent shaft paddle and some practice, you can pace or stay reasonably close to the tandems most the time; not so if you prefer just J stroking. Learn to ride wake and you are golden.
Empty it is a hoot. Very menueverable. I bought the light wt version and though a bit less rugged, I have beat the snot out of it and still going after 10 years. Do install skid plates.
Great and underated boat. Have fun.