Yeah, you might even be able to sell the 170 on for that same $300 loss.
1 Like
Or try padding the deck down with something and the permanently with minicell if you like it.
Read return policy they have listed.
Well, that was a quick experiment. The 165 arrived, and it’s just too small in the foot area. I can’t imagine how some people who are 200 lbs and 6+ feet thought it was a good fit. Actually, it felt pretty dang good everywhere else, but my legs are long, and with anything but water shoes, it was too cramped. I paddle in cold weather, so I need to be able to wear shoes, maybe even boots.
I did make a quick attempt at moving the seat back, but one of the screws was in too tight, and it started to strip. On top of that, I’m not keen on having to drill holes in a brand new boat because the manufacturer designed it poorly (the seat should be easily adjustable, and it is too far forward as is). So, back it goes. It’s too bad because other than the foot area, it fit me a lot better than the 170.
My experiment with moving the seat on a 145 Tsunami to the rear by 43 mm made the boat uncontrollable in following waves.
I don’t understand why WS doesn’t make it easier to adjust the seat on the 165. It’s clear from many, many posts over the years that the seat is unnecessarily far forward. It’s too bad their engineers don’t listen and make refinements, instead of selling the same very old design.
Moving the seat changes the weight balance and the way the boat steers. Look at the profile and the measurements. The 165 has 1 inch lower deck, .5 inches less width, and 6 inches shorter. Cockpit is the same size.
Cockpit doesn’t feel the same size to me. I have to cram my legs into it, and my shins will bang into the front lip if I’m not careful. Getting into the 170 is easier.
The deck is 1 inch lower, width is .5 narrower, 6 inches shorter. Can’t gain more space in a smaller boat.
You may want to look at boats that are more play/surf oriented as they tend to have more volume in the bow which often translates to more foot room. Many of these boats tour very well in addition to being playful.
1 Like
Sure, but not for long. Smooth is energy efficient, so you get the most sustained ban for your buck.
I can, not today, since I screwed something up in my shoulder, but I can push 6.2 Mph on flat-water but I’m not smooth doing, and as such I can only sustain for about 500 yards.
Now if I slow things down, and get smooth I can hold 5.8 Mph over three miles, easy-peasy, and an all day speed of about 4.9 Mph.
1 Like
had a race recently with a guy in a 170 tempest and me in my 175 tsunami, we’re both fat bastards, he’s rolling in at 250 and me at a svelte 248. He parks his weight in belly and shoulders, and I park mine all over my body. He fit the Tempest where I with my Good childbearing hips couldn’t as well. the only real difference was in height. he was about 5’8 or so and I’m 6’2 other than that we’re same age and fatness (close enough for government work.)
being next to him the entire race the differences didn’t seem to matter one-whit. It only seemed to matter at the end where surprisingly I was in better shape endurance wise. so I still had enough gas in the tank to sprint and edge him out.
In this case I think it’s just come down to I’m maybe a better paddler than he was, I was injured so way off my best times. (still injured but now at about 80% vice, 60 when we raced.) I think if I was at 100% I could have walked away from him. so really I don’t think it matters one whit.between the 2 boats, Ive got half a foot more waterline, he has somewhat less drag as a Tsunami’s rear is squared off where the Tempest is pointy so it’ll have less tail eddy currents producing drag.
But I’d say having the variables as close as possible as we did there’s not enough difference to matter.
5-8 vs 6-2 and two pound difference is not even close to the same.
I can feel the difference in my CD Solstice GT 17-7 x 24, Extreme’s and my Expedition 18-10 x 21. Sprinting 6.80, 7.20, 7.50 but you can feel it when paddling at 4-5 mph. Just mre zip or glide.
@Craig_S, typical is the word. I’m suprised a guy that size fit in a Tempest. An excellent post by an unrecalled member pointed out that boat length accounts for about 90% of the kayak’s speed potention. I would agree and hope that I read that correctly.
The 175 Tsunami is a fast boat for its bulk. One point that many overlook.is displacement. Consider two boats of near equal length but different widths. One is 56 lbs and the other is 63 lbs. The Tsunami with you in it will displace 9 additional lbs or one more gallon of water. However, the Tempest must, MUST, sink deeper in the water because it’s 6" shorter and 2" narrower. So as far as efficiency goes, the question becomes, which one is faster - the one with less draft or less width. If I were there, I would’ve urges him to trade boats for a run.
Craig, I’ll tell it to you plain, I dont think its fair for you to compare the speed of any boats based on you paddling one and another person paddling the other. You are a strong paddler, and I wouldn’t be suprised if the other guy had up to a .3 mph advantage. If he weighed 175 lbs, I would expect him to have at least a .5 mph advantage.
We’ll never know now. Next time, knock him out of his boat and go for a spin. Or let him try yours. He’d probably think you attached an anchor to it.
Good to hear you’re back in business.
Sorry, the other guy was a svelte 248, not 250.
[quote=“Jyak, post:116, topic:123559”]
However, the Tempest must, MUST, sink deeper in the water because it’s 6" shorter and 2" narrower.
[/quote] This is fundamentally incorrect. Firstly, we have overall width and length, not waterline width and length. The tsunami has more of it’s length in the water at the stern, but may or may not at the bow. Secondly, rocker makes a huge difference in waterline height. A boat with less rocker will sit higher in the water, all other factors being equal. Third, the below water portion may be more full (tending toward an ellipse) or pinched (tending toward an elongated diamond shape) in its profile. A fuller hull will sit higher in the water, and a more pinched hull will sit lower. Fourth, cross section makes a difference. A shallow arch will sit higher in the water, and a hard chine V will sit lower. Therefore we cannot generalize about depth of displacement from maximum width and overall length.
Come on! I’m not talking about draft. Displacement is displacement. Are you seriously suggesting that one boat with more rocker than another has a different displacement. Now that you corrected my ignorance, please let me know if you think I should delete the post so others arent misled. It doesn’t matter to me.
My mistake then. When you wrote “sink deeper” I thought you meant draft. Now I have no idea what you meant, which is OK. Regardless, don’t delete anything for my sake, even if someone came to an erroneous conclusion by misconstruing your post as I did it would not endanger their life or limb.
2 Likes
Then that is my oversight. Thanks for pointing that out, and I agree that the rocker has a big influence on draft, as does the other things like V hull. My intent was to discuss displacement. I believevadding length to a hull give a higher speed potential, if the paddler has the power to push the boat. I think were both on the same track. Thanks.