P&H Cetus - Any info

some more review info on Cetus
Hiya- I figured I’d throw my real world experiences with the Cetus into the fray. Just to give a bit of background,I am a P&H freak. I currently own an Outlander, a Capella 163,and Easky RM. I have owned a Capella RM, a Capella 169,and Orion. I have paddled the Sirius M, HF, L, Bahiya and Quest on multiple occasions and in a variety of conditions, overnights, chunky conditions, etc. I got the chance to play with the Cetus in the fall. It was flat water, which was a bummer, but what can ya do? So, take this review with the flatwater grains of salt as needed.

The Cetus has some resemblance to a stretched Capella or Outlander, but there are some real differences. The proto hull that I paddled has more vee than the Cap 163, and has more volume amidships at the “chine”. There is less rocker overall in this boat than is typical in my P&H fleet at least. This sucker has got some SPEED!

It is a pretty tracky boat,little too much for my taste, but I like willful boats. It wasn’t as stiff as the Sirius, but no wandering like my Cap 163 is sometimes prone to.

Which leads to the big W word. Weathercocking is something that I have learned to deal with in my boats, and the main reason I got rid of my Cap 169 and Cap RM. Not a problem in the Cetus in the conditions I paddled in;winds gusting to maybe 12 knots on a slow moving river.

It also has really wonderful stability, a bit more primary than my Cap 163, but where I was impressed especially was the recovery off the secondary stability. The boat fairly leaps back to level once you allow it to. As another poster noted, the proto didn’t have any thighbraces, and at 5’2 and 160ish lbs, it was too big for me.

I can’t wait to see what the lower volume version is like…Especially in the chunky stuff! Overall the Cetus struck me as a fast, tracky hull with better and more obvious secondary stability than any of the other boats in P&H’s line that I have experience with.

And before you ask, yes I work in the industry, and I sell both Valley and P&H boats.

ok -
so most boats in this class are



17-18’ long



21-22" wide



some kind of “semi,hard,chine…”



some kind of “hull”



and Volume all over the map…



and a cockpit somewhere.



tolerance seems to be within 10% on these variables -



this thread is awesome.



BS on the Bastardization. Design a boat or paddle - or both.












Perhaps because the Cetus is a Cetus!
Having only paddled the Nord LV briefly, it’s hard to give a solid comparison…if my post seemed to focus on Explorer/Cetus comparisons, it’s only because I paddle an Explorer and therefore used that as my point of reference.



The Nordkapp LV seems to have a bit more rocker than than the Cetus, and obviously less volume. However, I think someone in the market for a Nord LV might want to take the Cetus for a test paddle.



But is the Cetus just a stretched out Capella? Not being a boat designer (happily, just a boat paddler!) I can’t comment on how this boat came into being, but I can say that it handles VERY differently from a Capella. An earlier post hits the nail on the head regarding the differences.



I can’t speak to pre-production hype, and I guess the genesis and marketing of a design matters to me a lot less than how the boat performs. There are plenty of 100% original kayak designs out there that I would never want to paddle!

Vela: not P. Orton
"…is largely a stretched out and more recent version of the Vela, which I have and is credited to Peter Orton."



It wasn’t Peter:



from http://www.ukriversguidebook.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3565&highlight=vela



Regarding sea kayaks (P&H used to be involved in anumber of kayaking disciplines and is still 3 brands, P&H Sea Kayaks, Revenge polo kayaks and Gorilla paddles)I was involved more in the strategy side I.e. deciding what needs designing, at what length, width etc. When I got interested it was all Derek Hutch boats, Icefloe, Orion, Fjord were all derivatives of the same design at 60cm width and Baidarka/Dawn Treader, again the same design with different ends at 52cm width. Basically there were fast boats and stable boats with not much in between. And yes I do believe Derek’s boats were of a freeboard that suited himself. At the time North Shore were doing well in the middle range, I.e. boats at about 56cm. After the market research I did a marketing plan which basically said "dump the wide boats except the Onion (oops Orion), replace the Baidarka with a new design (Sirius)and put something (in plastic and glass) in the mid stability zone (Capella). Also part of the plan was to replace the seating which was in those days bloomin awful.I did some work on the Sirius (most done by Peter Orton) and also designed and shaped the Vela (small kayak, not so prominent as niche market). Years ago I shaped the Iona for Derek Hutch and a two person and three person tourer for the Swedish agent. I was also the person who instigated the new seating system after interviewing over 100 paddlers and finding comfort to be the number one selling point.



The Sirius, Capella and Quest were all designed by Peter Orton (note that the Sirius was based around Derek’s Baidarka hull - don’t worry he knows!).

Boat Design
So a question -



if a boat has a shallow V - or shallow arch - or Deep V - or some combination similar to all the boats with similar hulls - should they still be considered an “adaptation” of a previous design?



Is it merely marketing - or subjective to whoever wants to lay claim to the “orignial” design.



Many older designs are now considered Rubbish - some are still respected, paddled and sold. The Rubbish are either tossed in the bin or updated properly. Either by massive or minor changes. I think claiming that someone has merely “bastardized” or adapted a design needs to be tested on the water and see how similar the boats truly are…aren’t all kayaks some form of adaptation of a previous design…


Not trying to be pedantic

– Last Updated: Dec-14-06 8:50 AM EST –

Not trying to be pedantic but I always like to keep the record straight. The Vela was developed from a prototype for a single hatch day boat, that we were going to call the islander. Although this never went into production (to expensive for the intended market) it formed the basis for the Vela and Easky models. Julian and I are good friends add I’m sure we wouldn’t fall out over who was credited with the Vela design, yes he did much of the shaping i.e. model work but the core design and specification had already been established and inside all kayaks was a licence sticker crediting me with the design.

Not trying to be too egotistical over this but I am very proud of the designs I have been involved with. Obviously no design is done in isolation and I have been fortunate to have had several good people to bounce ideas off over the years, Julian being one, Jason Buxton being the one I currently rely on for second opinions on ideas.

Lineage Mapping
Peter,



A chart of lineage of British sea kayaks would be of interest and useful to those of us who have an affection for these boats.



It seems as if you are carrying in your head much of the information that would be needed for such charting. I would imagine that Frank Goodman and Aled Williams could fill in whatever gaps you may have in your knowledge.



The Nigels and Derek have commented farily extensively on their designs and seem to be responsive to queries. Maybe someone from North Shore and input from Kirton could elaborate on the lineage of each’s sea kayak designs.

North Shore is now under our wing!
Could be easier than you think. We recently did a deal with Mike Nelson of North Shore, whilst North Shore keeps it own identity, a separate plant in the North East and design input from Mike Nelson, We are taking over marketing, distribution and development of the range, including new RM versions of the Shore Line and Atlantic models.



The updated North Shore Line should start to appear in the US towards the end of 2007 with full availability in 2008

Rubbish?
Boy, I bet a listing of the boats considered Rubbish would generate some interesting threads.

"Rubbish Thread"
Ed,



Who would you nominate to initiate the ‘rubbish’ thread :wink:



I’ve heard some off the cuff remarks from some very experienced paddlers/coaches which were very clear as to what they considered ‘rubbish.’



I wonder if anyone will weigh in…

After you
Well, I think you have a great opening to say, I have heard a great, but not named, paddler/coach say that boat X was rubbish. That way you are not saying the boat is rubbish, the proclaimer of rubbish remains anonymous, and we have the raw material for a great discussion/flame war/or whatever. So fire away.

Thanks!
Peter,

thanks for the details AND thanks A LOT for that fantastic boat. It fits me perfectly, looks great and paddles even better.

Too bad that P&H is having problems now and don’t even update their website. The quality of the boat is excellent…

how about that mapping?

Cetus: weather cocking
I cannot agree. In flat water, with the skeg up, the Cetus points up in the slightest of breezes. One moment of inattentiveness and the boat goes off course (I compared my Romany in the same conditions and did not have this problem. I am a level $ coastal open water instructor). The boat requires a lot of attention.