OPINION: Rudders beat skegs for efficiently paddling long distances

Advice
#1

Let me start by clarifying: my interest in sea kayaking is long-distance, straight line paddling. I’m not an ocean playboater, and despite a life spent paddling whitewater, I have little interest in rock gardening or surfing. So with this being said…

I paddled a plastic Wilderness Systems Tsunami 165 for many years. This boat has a rudder. A few months ago, I bought a Wilderness Systems Tempest 170 (also plastic) and have paddled it 2-3 times a week every day since buying it.

My typical paddle session is on a large, open lake (5 mile by 4 miles in size). There is plenty of fetch and on windy days the lake can get pretty rowdy, sometimes with 3-4’ waves. My normal loops are usually 4-6 miles. Half my route is across the open lake (usually into the wind but sometimes with the wind at a 90deg angle to my course), and half is in a protected marsh on a creek in calm conditions. My average speeds on these paddles are in the 4-5mph range. Bottom line is that I generally paddle long and hard!

The Tempest was my first boat with a skeg, so I was eager to see how this whole “skeg thing” works? Being a former whitewater slalom racer I’m very comfortable with and adept at leans and correctional strokes. They’re second-nature for me (slalom boats are FAR more squirrelly than sea kayaks and you are pretty much in constant correction mode with leans and strokes).

Here’s where we get down to my thesis: Almost immediately, I noticed that I had to do correctional strokes in the Tempest. Not a lot (the boat tracks fairly well without the skeg and even better with it). No biggie, I can easily do sweeps and leans (and/or maintain a lean for a while if needed). I also noticed right away that I was expending a substantial amount of additional energy—beyond what is needed for a pure forward stroke—on these correctional strokes.

​

​Now some might say “Yes, that’s to be expected and is normal.” Most paddlers of high-end sea kayaks with skegs will tell you: yes, you have to steer the boat. (The skeg doesn’t steer for you.)

And this is why I now believe that for covering long distances in a stright line (in any conditions), a rudder is superior to a skeg. Because when you paddle a boat with a rudder, 100% of your energy is focused on your forward stroke. Zero correctional strokes are needed. You are simply a forward-stroking “machine” and you just keep doing that, all the time, without deviation. Steering is effortlessly done with your feet.

Paddling a boat with a skeg, you use something more like 80-85% of your energy on moving forward…and 10-15% of your energy on steering. Obviously these numbers are guesses. Maybe it’s more like 90%-10%, or if your boat tracks like a laser beam in all conditions, 95%-5%. But I’d bet dollars to donuts that if you could measure it, it would be no better than 85%-15%.

In other words in a skeg boat, I can almost guarantee that no matter how adept you are at correctional strokes and leans…and no matter how “automatic” or second-nature they are to you…you are expending more energy than you think on steering. And when you’re paddling long distances, that’s valuable energy that could be used for covering more distance, more efficiently.

​

​I don’t dislike skegs. I’ve been enjoying paddling my Tempest! But this was my initial impression after the first week of paddling a skeg boat…and 100 miles of paddling later, my opinion hasn’t changed (but has actually just been confirmed and reinforced).

For me, paddling a boat with a rudder is not only more efficient, but more enjoyable—because I don’t have to think about steering. I just move my toes a bit and it’s done. And I focus 100% of my mind and energy on a smooth, powerful forward stroke.

Finally, I know there are other arguments in the skeg-v-rudder debate, such as…
• skegs look better; no contraptions on the stern of your boat!

• rudders catch the wind too much

• skeg cables and boxes are more easily jammed or kinked

• rudders make it impossible to do a cowboy-style re-entry from the stern

These are all reasonable arguments that may have a bigger effect on your preference than mine. For me, it’s all about forward stroke efficiency, speed and distance covered.

Finally, some would argue that a “a good sea kayaker needs to be able to do correctional strokes and leans.” I don’t disagree with this. Having well-rounded technique is good. But being able to do correctional strokes and leans and being forced to do them all the time are two entirely different things.

So for me, when I do my next multi-day trip that requires paddling long distances and/or big open-water crossings, I’ll choose the boat with a rudder.

Feel free to discuss! And I’m open-minded, and welcome arguments for why a boat with a skeg is inherently superior. :slight_smile: Not that it has to be—simply saying “they each have unique pros and cons” is fine too. [image]

​

Scott

3 Likes
#2

Agree that with the rudder, you can paddle with 100% of your attention on making strong, clean forward strokes, but 100% of your energy is not translated into forward motion. Rudders steer by creating drag on one side or the other, so some energy goes to overcoming that drag. On the other hand, correction strokes are inherently less efficient that straight ahead power strokes. Whether rudders or correction strokes are more efficient (assuming efficiency is a goal) is subject to many variables, and I suggest is ultimately a matter of individual technique and/or preference.

2 Likes
#3

Great point @Buffalo_Alice and I agree! In my own experience (based partly on GPS tracks), I believe any rudder-induced drag is more than compensated for by a more efficient forward stroke. (But I can’t support that with hard data.) And I’m guessing there is also drag associated with using a skeg too.

I’m probably in the top 1-2% fitness wise for recreational paddlers (not racing paddlers!) from decades of paddling whitewater…and even for me, incorporating just a slight sweep at the beginning of a forward stroke uses a lot more energy (is more tiring over time) than just doing a “pure” forward stroke. Same with leans, which require engaging a different group of core muscles than those used for rotation.

I should also add that a common technique for steering in skeg boats is to vary your stroke force on one side or the other. This works fine, but (IMO) reduces overall efficiency.

1 Like
#4

and

I agree on both counts, but my assessment is qualitative only. No real data.

1 Like
#5

Not going to argue, it’s really a ‘tool’ of choice.
Paul Caffyn chopped off the fixed skeg (Nordkapp), and swore by the rudder he put on the remaining part of his rounding Australia.
I paddled up the east coast (Syd to the top) of Aus 4 times.
The first time was using a Caffyn designed (as I was told) kayak (Arctic Raider) (built (and designed (so I’ve heard) by Sisson Kayaks).
It was a ruddered boat.
Unseen reef, surf, etc - bent it about 4 times on the trip (luckily I carried a ‘spare’ - would switch out while I fixed the bent one)
However, the worst was on starting one day - into a splashy, not too heavy surf, but I did get knocked over. After finally rolling up, discovered the rudder had been deployed in the commotion and was stuck in a left turning position. I did not want to go through the surf to land and fix so I paddled all day (crossing a large bay) paddling on one side about 75%.
The following 3 times I did the Aus paddle I used an NDK Explorer (skeg) - with no (real***) problems (skeg related).
Since then, all my kayaks have been 'skeg’d, except for the period of a few years when I wanted to become a ‘fast’ paddler (Epic V10 Sport, Epic 18X). Good learning experience - I learned that I was not a ‘fast’ paddler (no longer have the Epic’s).

*** on starting every day - would have to check (deploy) skeg to make sure it didn’t get clogged with small pebbles on launch.

#6

Here is a blog post from a website put together for people doing long expeditions. The first person quoted, Paul Caffyn, is the first person to circumnavigate Australia (among other trips). The second person who provides added comments is Sean Morley, the web site organizer but who also has lapped the UK and held the speed record for circumnavigating Vancouver Island. True expedition folks.
https://www.expeditionkayak.com/resources/skegs-vs-rudders/

That blog talks about the downside of rudders being that they can break, and the boats generally are designed to require a rudder to work, so a broken rudder then becomes very problematic. In Matt Krizan’s trip along the entire California Coast (full disclosure, I was one of his weather/safety contacts for that trip), he experienced that.
https://www.mensjournal.com/adventure/learned-paddling-california-coast

In general, for long expeditions (note - these folks would not consider your 4-6 mile loop long - they are more doing 20+ mile average days), ruddered boat is usually preferred. Being able to focus on forward stroke to get distance is a key aspect. Not having a skeg box taking away storage space also helps.

Flat water races also generally use ruddered boats (or boats without rudder or skeg).

Those who put a sail on their kayak, who are fishing, or focusing on photography all often prefer rudders, as they can keep their hands free for other activities (holding sail sheets, cameras, fishing poles, etc).

Those playing in conditions, such as rock gardening or surfing, generally use skeg or nothing. Skeg boats often have more rocker, making them more maneuverable. Plus foot pegs are locked in place, allowing the paddler to be in better contact with the boat.

At shorter distances in nominal conditions (say under 10 miles), it all comes down to personal preference.

I do wonder if you haven’t quite figured out the skeg usage yet, so perhaps you may get less down on them over time But very possible you will stay a rudder person.

2 Likes
#7

One does not really ‘steer’ a kayak with a skeg. The skeg is set to counter weathercocking which derives from kayak design, speed, and cross winds. Once the skeg is set, the paddler can focus on efficient strokes.

1 Like
#9

Great replies all, and fascinating to read. @raisins your story definitely exposes a weakness in rudders—which is getting destroyed (or at least messed-up) in heavy surf. Seems to me like this is purely a design issue that could be resolved by designing a way to securely lock the rudder into place when it’s folded up on deck (I know, easier said than done, LOL). Or just avoiding heavy surf!

Some suggest that a broken rudder is easier to fix than a broken skeg…and I agree that both of those situations would be a good argument for a boat design that tracks reasonably well without a rudder…just in case. (I don’t know why anyone would design a kayak such that it wouldn’t track well without the rudder…that just seems dumb.)

To me, a rudder’s main purpose is to allow steering with your feet…and to “lock” the boat’s tracking into place (which it does—compared with not using a rudder).

From what’s been posted, it does seem that the argument “a rudder allows you to focus all your energy on your forward stroke and efficiently cover more distance” holds true (because it seems preferred by expedition kayakers).

I’m still comparing my ruddered boat with my skeg boat. Last night I paddled 4 miles in 10-15mph winds and averaged 5mph over the whole paddle…which is probably close to as fast as a 17-foot, 60-pound plastic kayak can average over an hour. Now I need to go out and see if I can do the same in my ruddered boat (though it won’t be a perfect comparison since the ruddered boat is 6 inches shorter and an inch wider).

1 Like
#10

The drag from a rudder is minimal. Can I feel it yes but all my CD boats seem faster with a rudder unless it flat water and no wind.

#11

Corrective strokes are not efficient when trying to hold a course.

Rudders RULE unless you want to be a real sea kayaker, or so they say :joy:

#12

1" wider boat is a bit slower.

#13

I would not argue with your judgement as to what is minimal vs. what is significant. That’s something only you can know because your experience is yours alone. However, the drag created by a rudder blade set at a given angle will be very close to the drag created by vertically sticking a flat paddle (with the same surface area as the rudder blade) in the water at the same given angle. Minimal? Yes, for some, but maybe not for all.

#14

@Shadepine I get your point and am interested in what you find from repeat trips between the 170 Tempest and the 165 Tsunami. Altough your log statistics show minor difference overall, still the results are different regardless of how inconsequential they seem. You’re impressions are similar to what @Craig_S found comparing the 170 Tempest , 175 Tsunami and now the 180 Tempest pro.

Why one boat has a rudder and another has a skeg is an interesting topic in and of itself, I don’t consider it the relevant point of your observation. Nor is it relevant to me, which one is more vulnerable to damage or which one creates greater drag. I hate both because they involve moving parts, and moving parts are worthless if they aren’t connected, get bent or won’t deploy or return to a stowed position.

1000007701
10000077011920×1081 145 KB

1000007702
10000077021920×3410 635 KB

I missed two fine days because, my seat stap on the 145 needs to be fixed, and the rudder lanyards broke, and the mounting bolts fell out of the rudder on the 175. That has nothing to do with your keen observation and preference. Broke is broke and unfortunately, the 175 Tsunami is a pain to keep on track without the rudder. When I find the parts and the time to fix it, it should last another 15 years. How many cents per mile did I get out of that part . . . ?

The 145 Tsunami was such an easy boat to keep on track and transport, I put the 175 in mothballs. It was threads from @szihn, @E.T, @Onski326, and now you that made me focus greater attention on the 175 Tsunami. I haven’t had enough trips to form a strong opinion on the difference between paddling with or without the rudder. I do know I hit my highest average speed this season using the 175 Tsunsmi with the rudder deployed. However, I suspect the rudder had been acting up for some time now, which surely jaded my opinion about rudders. Before I go out again, I plan to check all cables, tighten bolts, and blast any sand out of the tracks in the foot pegs. I also want to test Craig’s flotilla to see if I can form my own opinion about the Tempests.

Looking forward to your next post.

#15

Rudders takes very little off center angle to keep you on course. All the rudder you see much of it is not even in the water.

Surf skis have small looking rudders but it’s all in the water.

1 Like
#16

There was a time not so long ago that if you tried to start a Skeg versus Rudder debate you would be locked out of paddling.net or at best sentenced to only post in the Bicker and Banter subheading. (now defunct and forgotten). Search the archives here and you will see this poor dead horse has been flogged too many times since 1999 when Pnet got started. I’m a “skeg or nothing” man myself.

SYOTW Seadart

1 Like
#17

I have 2 kayaks with skegs and 1 with a ruder. Up until very recently I had 2 with each.
I prefer the skegs, but in the wind and big waves I do acknowledge the usefulness of a rudder being more versatile.

But, I also like to hunt with flintlock rifles and some times a wood bow and wood arrows.
Why? Not because the older arms are “better” in any way then newer ones. It’s because I like them.

When it comes to skegs, rudders, and even paddles and materials to make kayaks out of, much is said about the merits and lack of merits of each, but if we were 100% honest with ourselves the reason we pick what we use if because (A) we can afford them and (B) because we like them. Technical ability of each variant is considered, but it’s not REALLY the only reasons we use what we use because the fact is the kayak is old fashioned in it’s design and motorized power boats can do more, faster and better.
But to a kayaker that is not the point at all.
So trying to win an argument of “skeg VS rudder Vs nothing” is useless. Comparative notes are good and welcome, but “winning and argument” is meritless because of the fact that motorboats and jet skis exist.

2 Likes
#18

Absolutely. I like light boats, but value durability more, which is why I use plastic boats. I’ve never had any problems turning a boat, because I generally try to go straight. I prefer simplicity because mechanical devices fail, and when they fail is when you probably need them most. Then you’re stuck with relying on your skill.

What a person prefers or wants isn’t of much value to me. What I value is that @Shadepine offered a comparison describing the performance of two boats, and the effort to keep them tracking straight as equipped, either using the tracking aid or not. Even he keyed in on the idea of using the skeg partially deployed under different conditions, rather than all or none.

I can tell you from experience that I own a range of Tsunamis between 12 ft at 14.5 ft equipped with rudders. They’ve been paddled by people age 11 yrs old through 76 yrs, and none of those rudders have been deployed. The reason is that they’re designed to be manageable without, but that doesn’t mean I haven’t wished my 14.5 had a rudder on a few occasions, nor does it mean I’ll go out and install one on it, but that’s just my opinion. When conditions get that turbulent, I take my 175 Tsunami out.

I personally don’t care about anyones preference or boat handling skill. What I want to know is how the boat performs, as well as how to develop the necessary skill to control the boat without needing a skeg or rudder. That’s not to imply that itsca crutch to rely on a skeg or rudder, because some boats don’t don’t perform well without a rudder or skeg.

It’s interesting to know that certain members initially disliked a particular boat, but have grown to appreciate it. One thing is certain, thanks to detailed reports from a few members who were willing to take the time to share, I now have a good knowledge base about the WS lineup including the Pungos, SP and 125 through 175 Tsunamis, and how the 140 Tsunami compares to the 165 through the 180 Tempest Pro. Additionally, I may have learned more about the Kalliste paddle and my boats in the past three years than the previous fifteen years.

Most of all, its important to realize that new members come on the forum every day. Just because a reader has evolved to the point of not needing to discuss a topic doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be resurrected. Maybe the forum can make a badge level where members can graduate to a level that screens out the minutia. I’m happier being in the weeds with new members. That way I feel like I can help them develop skills. So one day, they can surpass my skills and teach me a new trick.

I gained insight from an individual’s perception rather than an opinion. It’s how we learn. I didn’t join the forum to hear somebody tell me to take a course. I can figure that out on my own.

1 Like
#19

If I’m using my skeg properly I don’t need much correction.

1 Like
#20

Just a quick data point in the “for what it’s worth” category:

This week I paddled the same workout loop on my local lake on two different evenings. The first I paddled in my Tempest 170 (with a skeg)…and the second loop I paddled in my Tsunami 165 (rudder). My GPS track results are interesting…

Tempest 170: 4.18 miles, 50:08 total time, 5mph avg speed, 673 calories burned, 137 avg heartrate

Tsunami 165: 4.07 miles, 50:47 total time, 4.8mph avg speed, 623 calories burned, 131 avg heartrate

Obviously the two workouts weren’t identical; my route varied slightly (hence the small difference in distances). And conditions on the open water third of the loop were windier and rougher during the Tempest 170 paddle than the Tsunami paddle.

Though my calories burned and HR differ, I’m fairly confident that my overall “intended effort” was the same (meaning I don’t think I was subconsciously trying to paddle faster in either boat), because during the summer I paddle 2-3x/week so am fit and very familiar with my general effort level. So what’s also interesting about my stats is how both calories burned and average heartrate suggest I worked harder in the Tempest for an almost equal result.

Bottom line? The Tempest 170 (skeg) seems a bit faster. Which would make sense since it’s 6" longer and 1-2" narrower. But the other obvious takeaway was that the Tsunami 165 (rudder) wasn’t much slower, if at all—because how much difference would you expect from a boat 6" shorter and 1-2" wider?

Next comes my subjective impression: after 6 weeks of paddling the Tempest 170 exclusively (2-3x/week), the loop I describe here was the first time I’d been back in the Tsunami 165 in more than 6 weeks. And I’ve gotta say, I enjoyed paddling the Tsunami more!

I say this because of what I’ve said elsewhere: paddling the Tempest is more work for a given distance, period. (Or at least it feels like more work.) Because I expend more effort steering the boat. Paddling the Tsunami was just a joy—because steering was effortless (literally just requiring moving my toes a bit). So both my mind and body were more free to just enjoy the paddle, because I never even had to think about steering.

Whereas in the Tempest 170, my mind was often occupied with thoughts like.…“Bow drifting to the right, need to compensate with a sweep. Bow still drifting right, need to add a right lean. [a minute later] Bow drifting left, increase power a bit on the left side, decrease power a bit on the right side.” (etc.) Doing all this wasn’t difficult…but just the mere fact I had to do it at all meant I was less fully able to just enjoy the experience of paddling and pay attention to my surroundings. I think the fact that despite all this mental activity I was still faster in the Tempest suggests I was steering with reasonable efficiency and not struggling with it. But it felt like “mental drag.”

So this “experiment” just confirmed for me what I already intuitively knew: that I prefer paddling a boat with a rudder. (But I don’t dislike paddling a skeg boat. I just don’t like paddling it as much.)

Finally, a quick note on the Tsunami: at one point (for just a couple minutes) I did raise the rudder and paddle without it, because I was curious to pay attention to how well (or not) it tracks without the rudder. The answer is reasonably well—but not as well as the Tempest without the skeg. Without the rudder, the Tsunami did not yaw all over the place. It was pretty easy to keep it going dead-straight. (Granted, these were in calm conditions.)

I also noticed (which is what you’d expect) that the “rudderless” Tsunami was considerably easier to turn than the better-tracking Tempest without a skeg. Not just easier to turn via a sweep stroke…but even just a good lean in the Tsunami would put it into a nice, smooth turn. This is likely due to increased rocker (and being 6" shorter). I’ve found that without the skeg, you still have to work to turn the Tempest—doing both a deep lean and a sweep stroke at the same time.

2 Likes
#22

@szihn - I totaly agree with your comments that this isn’t a winnable argument. :slight_smile: And I’m truly not trying to win it (despite my “clickbait” thread title, LOL). I’m just describing my own process.

I do know this horse has been beaten to death…and I find that (in itself) fascinating, and wondered why? I’ve also noticed that more sea kayakers seem to prefer skegs than rudders, and also wondered why?

I’ve always considered myself open-minded…so I just decided to see for myself, which is why I bought a boat with a skeg after paddling (and loving) a boat with a rudder. And I genuinely gave the skeg a chance! I paddled 2-3x/week for 6 weeks, and each time, I was open to the nuances and differences and pros and cons.

So this thread is just me describing that process. :slight_smile:

4 Likes