Paddling Speed: How bad do ppl lie?

Advice
#101

I did not use a GPS, trained with them and left them home on race days. The only speed necessary is one faster than everyone else.

I extrapolate speed by knowing how long the course is and timing it. So, 6 MPH is approximate and is readily available if you have a 19 foot x 18 inch wide Kevlar boat that was built for going fast.

Some of that is the form of the boat, some of it in displacement.

I could not do that in a plastic barge because I am not a superman and it has been years since I could have sex four times a night.

1 Like
#102

@CraigF, racing is a whole other game. Going fast or knowing speed for mere mortals isn’t the same. As you point out, what matters is whether you have the steam to keep up with or pass others. Your body will fail if you push it past its natural limit. It’s easy for a racer to know his or her limit, because the race is over a fixed course and the time is measure. Isn’t it a bit arrogant then for racers to criticize a guy like me for wanting to know how fast I can paddle, even though I have no desire to compete. How I compare to anyone else is irrelevant. Those who race can post the race time or share the results with pride and tout the speed as evidence of proficiency. When a non-racer records data from a measure a course and provides results collected over multiple trips, the question from the “keepers of the gate” is how do you know its accurate, and the “Greek Corus” chants, yes, don’t trust that GPS, or, how did you measure the course, and maybe you swayed off course so the results are inaccurate. Well, I’m curious how the race course is measured: is it plotted using a GPS, a map, a calibrated wheel, a long measuring tape, is it paced, do the “Race Gods” decree, or does it matter. Is speed only relevant for racers?

These discussions on GPS purity border on absurd. When I paddle alone in changing conditions, I need to know my ability. I pit MYSELF against the conditions. The GPS is the only thing I have to measure my performance, my level of conditioning, and my improvement. It tells me how far I went, and lets me plan future trips. The GPS tells me when I hit a turning point. The avg speed tells me what conditions I encountered and knowledge of the conditions tell me it may be easier or more diffucult on the return trip.

By knowing the conditions when I start, I can tell within a 1/4 mile what my avg overall moving speed will be within .1 mph, and I know, based on a chart that I made with speed/time, what my moving time will be (if I return to the launch before 1 hr and 43 minutes, I improved over my last trip of 1 hr and 45 minutes, and that time over a set course tells me the avg speed I can expect. The GPS is a tool. After 50 trips over the last 3 years covering the same course, I can tell you how much wandering from the course impacts time. I know how much wind impacts my overall time, how going into a tide at the start of the trip impacts overall time compared to starting with a falling tide. I actually know how a 240 cm paddle compares to a 250 cm, while “experts” tell me what I should be using, and 220 cm is better. Maybe for you, “but I ain’t you.”

I’m shocked that I haven’t found one person on a paddling forum who has any interest in GPS, because the discussion has been tainted by hard science and engineers. I understand how lack of curiosity for many members being unconcerned is because the interest is using the boat to take pictures or relax and enjoy the scenery. Others enjoy white water or surfing where the main goal is negotiating the challenge. Racers have somebody setting the course and recording their exploits. Apparently, the rest have the impression that the GPS is pure junk. I’m no longer shocked, just dismayed.

#103

Before I got a GPS watch, which was long after I began paddling, I used simple math plus a watch and map to estimate my speed. Day trips or camping, same method. (It’s the same method I used for bicycling before I got a digital Avocet whatchamathingie and cadence sensor.) The point was not to get a precise measurement, but to know my own typical pace and endurance well enough that planning and completing outings without getting exhausted was possible.

The old way still works well, for that kind of estimation.

The GPS watches provide a crosscheck for the above (which I still do), and they are more precise, because on the water there is no “road” or “trail” that remains fixed in place. Another advantage is that with syncing data to something like Garmin Connect, you keep a record that shows trends over many workouts and over time. To me, this is more important and reliable a fitness indicator than any one or two workouts with “fantastic numbers.”

How accurate the GPS is is secondary to the changes shown (measured by the same device) over the long term.

As for altitude, GPS measurement of that remains laughable.

1 Like
#104

@pikeabike, You explained perfectly. I became interested when I started kayaking in how far I went on trips. I bought topo maps of the areas, then nautical charts and plotting tools. I recorded duration and straight line tracing to calculate average speeds. When I found the Garmin touch screen I was hesitant about the price and durability, but it lasted over 13 years. I just started using my spare when the rubber on/off button wore through the original and a wave washed over the deck. That shorted out the unit.

Using knowledge accumulated over the years, I can assess my physical conditioning, check tides and winds and predict my overall speed for the trip within .1 mph. The trip today was my first since 1 Sep. I predicted I would lose .3 mph since my last trip that was 4.5 mph avg overall. I started out at 4.5 mph and estimated the falling tide assist compared to the anticipated speed going into the tide, estimating 4.2 mph overall for the trip. GeoTrack recorded 4.22 mph avg. Elevation, as you stated, is a joke.

I’m happy with how the GPS and the phone app come up with similar tracks and stats, even though I set them up with different refresh rates. I don’t look at tracks or the app until after the trip is over.

The Garmin screen is deck mounted. I know the cadence by watching the seconds tick by. I can see how speed changes based on cadence, how fast speed decays after I stop paddling (about .2 mph per second, then it takes about two strokes for every .1 mph to get back up to speed, because I intentionally accelerate slowly to reduce paddle slippage. It isnt about how fast I can go. It’s about understanding energy management. Today, for example, I push past the average speed of 4.2 mph to 4.9 mph for about 30 seconds, then speeds fell below 3.7 and 3.9.mph for an interval before I could get back to 4.2 mph consistently. It show how to manage energy output. The speed is relative to my effort and ability to read and understand the impact conditions have on speed. That’s how I can manage to keep consistent speeds going into tides orvwith the tides. I know what average speed I can maintain and bracket it. How well I managed is reflected in the graph at the end of the trip. If it trends up, I had energy to spare; if it declines, I used everything I had.

It could be argued that I only hit 4.2 mph avg because I skewed my performance to achieve that speed. I wouldn’t disagree, because I do exactly that. However sometimes, I can squeeze in an addition .1 mph in the last two mile leg. That wasn’t going to happen today, but it usually does. My graph was a virtual flatline. I was worn out, and ot showed in the track, because the straight line trace started to falter when I quit worrying about edging.

If anyone thinks a GPS is junk, then make up a number based on perception and tell everybody you like a boat or paddle because “its faster!” Not sure why, just that it feels faster. Then profess that satellite speed varies, based on sunspots and . . .

#105

But what do you really think, Mr. @Jyak ?

#106

I, for one, am totally obsessed with my Garmin watch. Skiing, running, biking, paddling….

I don’t do canoe or kayak races (but do ski races and some years running races). I’m obsessed with doing my best. Comparing myself to myself. You don’t have to be a racer to care about speed. The races I do compete in, I use the watch. Training, I use the watch. When I race, yeah, I like to beat other people, but mainly I want to do the best I can do. It’s more of a race with myself.

And by the way, an awful lot of races are not measured accurately, even for official timing purposes. Maybe high end, big deal races, like the Boston Marathon, and qualifiers for it, but there is still a +/- amount allowed for most things. And your little local 10k run? Ha! A trail run? Ha! And I cannot imagine an accurately-measured paddling course. Back in the day, every event I did was approximated - not many races were wheeled off, and GPS didn’t exist.

You use the tools you have. If I’m paddling and use my GPS, and I squiggle around a bit, and don’t take the best line, it still gives me a result that’s as close as I’m going to get. And if I squiggle, I go FARTHER, and it will take me longer. It will never make me appear to be faster. If I just have a stopwatch and a distance that may or may not be measured accurately, then my numbers might not be too precise - but it’s what I have to work with.

Has my GPS ever given me unrealistic spikes? Yes. So I ignore those. I do look at my max pace, though - I just don’t claim I did the whole thing at that speed. Do some people take spikes of data (even realistic ones) and use them to claim a faster pace than they can actually maintain? Probably. Do I care? Well, it can be good for a laugh. Like the guy biking at 44 mph :rofl:

There was a saying my boss used to use - you can make data say whatever you want it to. You have to be able to sift through and throw out the outliers and come to the actual truth.

In the end, a GPS watch gives you a distance and an elapsed time. You don’t have to rely on any instantaneous speed reading.

1 Like
#107

You quoted it. GPS is not absolute. I know my paddling is more consistent than (+/-) .2 mph, so my goal is to keep speed beyween a 5 pt spread. The GPS may show 4.0, but it will.fluctuate between 3.8 mph and 4.2 mph. The goal is to dwell as long as possible at 4.0 mph. All the while, realize that .2 mph isn’t a lot. Its easier to say my average speed is 4.0 mph than between 3.8 and 4.2 mph.

#108

an average can only be one number, no?:laughing:

with all the variables in paddling I would say your paddling varies .2 mph and more.

#109

Sure!

#110

??? Seems like lots of folks use a GPS, even engineers like me. I don’t think I’ve ever been tainted by any pcom thread. I don’t mind a bit when folks share their detailed knowledge and experience, then I decide how to react to it. I like doing spot checks on my speed and I’ve had 3 GPS’s side by side that convinced me that even the junk $30 Chinese GPS was usable for instantaneous speed estimates if I waited until the readings stabilized. I agree that it’s just a tool.

1 Like
#111

So I use my gps for mileage. Most years I’m somewhere between 500 and 600 miles. I find my gps unreliable for speed. What i can do accurately is figure my avg speed by tracking time and distance. I tend to have my fastest days going solo.

I think my highest speed was somewhere around 11 mph on the north fork of shoshone river in wyoming outside of yellowstone. The first year that I did it, it was really moving. The last time, not so much. I can regularly crank out 4.7 miles in 45 minutes on the New River even at low flow but that has me continously paddling. That’s also a solo run for me. No desire to do that group paddling. I would rather play a bit.

Floating, not paddling at all accept to steer, I’ve averaged 6 mph after a flood event on the Buffalo R. A day and half later the speed had dropped to below 4 mph. I floated because I didn’t want to beat my shuttle down the river. Of course all of this is not really paddling speed but depending on the flow. Attaining, i figure I’m doing well if I am doing 2 mph. I’ve had a number of trips where I traveled less than 1 mph. Usually a lot of dragging and portaging involved. I don’t think of paddling much in terms of speed. Some days are easy- you can cruise, and others are a slog. So it is more about the effort required.

Overall, I can keep up with most folks in my plastic 12’ ww kayaks (vanguard, 12r). Add some tides and wind and I would struggle (lots of rocker). One of the cool things about the ww kayaks I paddle is that they behave pretty much like a regular ww boat when floating or at regular paddle speeds (easy to turn, surf, ferry, peel outs, eddy turns). When you get the boat up to speed the waterline lengthens and on most ww kayaks the pillow in the bow just keeps building. On my boats there is a sweet spot for speed. Usually I’m not there though and float a lot. Staying in the current and being lazy is more my style. Let the river do the work. If I’m on a lake I’m usually checking out shoreline features. If I wanted to go fast I would rent a motor boat.

#112

For most of my paddling I really don’t care how fast I’m going anything above 4mph is fairly easy for me and that’s kind of my all day speed.

When I do race (I usually enter one or two a year.) I track my speed both VIA GPS, both my Watch and Phone, and via time over distance.

this year I wimped out and only ran a 1 mile race, injured Bicep tendon in June (end of) and am still suffering with it today. though I mostly have full range of motion back now just not full strength. So that hampered things a bit

we were told the course was 1 mile, it turned out to be 1.12 miles according to both my GPS’es. and my max speed was 5.92mph Downwind/downstream the slowest was 3.42 at the turn, and then coming back up wind/upstream I was around 3.83mph, averaging over the whole course a 4.09 mph average.

River was running at about 2-3mph (Its a guess on my part.) but the wine was about 40mph directly downstream kicking up 1-2 foot waves, enough chop that all the surf ski racers got dumped at one turn or another in the 3 mile race. Letting the kayaks rule the day in that race but I digress.

The year prior, I ran the 3 mile race conditions were Ideal for that race so we only had to contend with river current. On that Race I ran a 5.90mph average calculated via time, however… it was incorrect as I found out later that course was 3.2 miles. (I calculated base on 3 miles.) SO I may have hit 6 mph average. The course was 90 deg across the river current, then directly up into the river current then a 45deg run back across the river current. SO up and back didn’t really cancel things out. This was probably my best run ever and I was physically spent at the end as it was more like a sprint.

Prior to that I ran a 10 mile again conditions were optimal, 5 miles down stream and 5 miles upstream, I ran that in 2h 1m 0s Even, the guy he beat me did it in 2h 0m 46s (I was reeling him in but need another 500 yards to catch him. we were both spent.) I say it was 5mph, that I did 10 miles in because math is hard. but the GPS logged me at 4.98 mph, I never did find out if the 10 mil was actually 10 or followed the same “the course is slightly longer than advertised”

The one I;m most proud of was the W2W (Walnut to Walnut, down the Schuylkill and then up the Delaware.) Not technically a race but I did it to see how fast I could do it in. That run was 15 miles, which I did in 3hr 30 minutes and a few seconds. During that run my rudder line broke (it was DuPont Spectrix and the set-screw cut the line.) It took me about 30 minutes to repair on the Jersey side of the river. (Luckily the CG has a 5mm Allen wrench.) SO I’m guessing I did this at 5mph.
conditions were ok until you hit the Delaware, the Tide was a slack tide, It would be another 30 minutes before it came in. but the wind was South to north making nice waves you could surf all the way upstream.

So If I’m healthy I can get my Tsunami, to 5mph over distance, under good to Ideal conditions but not really much faster, at 3 mph I do closer to 6 but it’s basically a sprint and endurance race.

I don’;t know yet about 1 mile since I was injured but again I’m pretty happy with that time for an old fart.

But I am at the limits of a Tsunami 175, that I can tell, but a 4-4.5 it’s an easy paddle for me. For going racing I’m looking at the P&H Valkyrie, Still want to race Kayaks, not Surf skis, but need a slightly faster hull, I could probably work on getting stronger but after I was what the P&H scorpio could do (that the guy who beat me in the 3 mile and same boat, different guy in the 10 mile I figure I need to stop bringing a knife to a gunfight.)

I still love the Tsunami, it’s a better boat I think, I hauls me and all my camping gear (and a ton of it.) and does everything I ask it to do, well (except be the fastest boat on he water.) and it’s definately more comfortable than the Valkyrie, but that the difference between a SUV and F1 I guess.

Anyway the whole point is I do both the GPS and the time, especially when I know the difference since technology can fail, and math never does especially if you know the variables. and I find the GPS is rarely off by more than .01 mph which is negligible.

#113

Jyak, are you okay, buddy?

I did not disparage you or GPS technology. I was not trying to be arrogant. I wanted to lay down a base line of what someone who dedicated a bucket full of time and energy into going fast in a kayak.

I haven’t got a real problem with GPS for several reasons. First is that it was, originally, and still is, a military tool. When it first came out the military only allowed it to be good to within 50 feet.

50 feet doesn’t seem all that far, but if you are checking for an elevation mark in a place you have never been and is covered in 6 foot tall weeds, 50 feet can be a football field. That was the first time I used GPS. A map would have done more, but the biggest problem is that it took almost five minutes to fix a satellite and say something.

It has greatly improved, or the military has had to allow it to get better. The main thing is that it was not meant for anything other than location. Using it as a speedometer takes you back to the computer GIGO rule (garbage in/garbage out)

The extrapolation of speed from GPS points is the same as any other time and distance equation. If the GPS fails to grab a satellite every once in a while, it will come up with a speed that is almost double what is true. The faster you so, the bigger the disparity.

Sometimes the algorithm that performs the extrapolation try to compensate for those missed plot points. Then the output can get really wierd, but they are still within 15-20 percent of the real world.

#114

According to both Strava and Garmin my average speed on most paddles is 4.2-4.8mph with my Stellar S14 G2 but that’s because I mostly go on flatwater lakes with a lot of curves, inlets and what not so steering a whole bunch and never have the chance to go straight for long. According to same apps when I can get the boat going in a straight line I always get 6.2 to 6.3mph. Since its so rigid and never more than that I figure 6.2-6.3mph but keep getting this number it has to be the boat’s hull speed. T

That latter number is extremely consistent for a long time irrelevant of weather or conditions strongly implying its the hull speed especially if I go 100% the boat starts to feel very heavy and I cannot pull the paddle back any harder almost as if I am trying to paddle against cement. I feel just about any pond is a very good place for average speed because you are going all around it slowly but surely in all cardinal directions and what goes around comes around wind or current wise negating any possible wind advantage regardless the direction its blowing. Surely enough those above numbers are extremely consistent and the biggest variable then is how hard I actually want to train (what zone or intensity) that day that dictates the speed and not anything else.

#115

I went 12 mph with the rotation of the earth. I couldn’t verify it because I don’t trust GPS numbers. :sob:

#116

@CraigF, I didn’t take offense or consider any comment to be a personal attack. My wife often accuses me of coming on strong; I don’t deny that, but must add that I have mutual respect for anyone with equally strong opinions. My son opined that I don’t like weak people. I asked for examples, and after a brief discussion concluded that he is right. I respect disagreement and don’t give a hoot if someone fires back. If you have conviction, you owe it to everyone to stand by it. Don’t worry that you might hurt feelings. If I have something toxic to say, I’d rather side channel it so it is personal rather than public.

This topic had been covered previously. I backed off my assertions about GPS accuracy because I couldn’t counter negative points. That made me look more closely at my GPS data and cross reference the results. I respect the reality that many kayakers have no interest in speed or improving technique. If speed is not important to you, ignore the discussion. My goal is to pass on what I learn so paddlers with similar interest can build upon it. If you feel speed isn’t important, there is nothing of interest for you past this point:

      ______________________________________________

An accurate method for measuring speed is critical for assessing personal performance gains, evaluating equipment, comparing technique, monitoring energy expenditure, and for evaluating how changing conditions impact your plan, but only if it is IMPORTANT to YOU. What astounds me is how of all the sports I follow that measures success by calculating time over distance, kayakers are the only group where I’ve heard the comment, “speed doesn’t matter”, or GPS doesn’t work - I understand the limitations of GPS and potential for error, the problem of using GPS to measure elevation is indisputable, but there is no better way that I can think of to measure speed over diastance. I have no objection to any objection to questioning a comparison of one unit to another; however, I believe there is no better method, once the user verifies the relative limitations, than the GPS. My objection is to the claims that the GPS is largely unreliable. I simply ask those who feel that way to offer a better alternative, other than “speed isn’t everything!” That isn’t an argument, it’s a drop out of the discussion. Challenges to pure speed claims are valid, but that doesn’t mean the claim is wrong, it just isn’t “certified”, but it still can be valuable for a means of comparison.

It’s ironic how fans don’t questions the speeds recorded in a bike race, a kayak race, or a road race, we can jump in our car and plot a trip that gives three or four optional routes, each with an arrival time that typically calculates projected time within minutes.

I can think of only a few ways to verify speed over water - plot on a map/chart using a scale and calculate travel time, or use a GPS. I’m not offended when challenged about the speed I report when discussing a technique. My objection comes when the argument suggests that making a wide turn or drifting off track skews the accuracy. Before using such a riduculous claim, consider that by traveling further distance over a set course actually results in registering slower average speed, if the map/chart plot calculates a straight line between all turning points. Therefore, the avg speed would be higher if factoring in the actual extended course deviation, but the corrected avg speed typically amounts to only about .1 mph. My sister would typically deviate from my course by as much as 200 yards. I know she factually deviated, because I also carry a chart and note that she passes within an estimated 25 yards of green Channel Bouy no. 6 that’s located in a diverging channel. Yet she’ll argue I was off course and the GPS track is in error, despite an arrow straight GPS line. At our point of conversion on the targeted destination, I would see her boat broadside too me, so please forgive me if I find suggestions that GPS tracks are not accurate - my experience suggests otherwise. I can show charts where I follow another paddler or allow the wind to blow my boat around. I also have tracks for comparison that I control through edging. The results, as well as the perception is vastly different. I trust the GPS every time. The same is true of perceived speed. I’ve turned a corner that put the course into current or winds, only to have the person with me proclaim that it feels like we’re going faster. I break the news that our speed actially dropped by 2 mph, only to have them protest in disbelief. I take GPS over perception EVERY time.

Discussions about GPS accuracy isn’t just about how fast someone can paddle. If the unit is subject to error
it will typically be consistent error. My GPS shows the accuracy is typically (+/-) 12 to 16 ft. (I don’t display that value anymore; I rearrange the dashboard and selected a display with a bigger MPH readout - watching the accuracy of a satellite pings is of no value to me, because I concentrate on staying at a specific MPH readout).

My assessment is based on the years I’ve been paddling, the miles I’ve traveled in the same boat and others under various conditions, and evaluation of my logs that include conditions such as time of high/low tides, temp/humidity, water temp, wind direction and speed as reported and as perceived by the Beufort scale. The test course I’ve practiced since starting kayaking has two near equal 2 mile legs with a 1/4 mile neutral zone at the middle and the influence of a constant outflow current of about .5 mph from the Gunpowder River on the 2nd leg. You can verify the distances yourself - get a 7 1/2 minute topo map or a nauticsal chart and measure the distance compared to my printed course track. The values are good enough for me, but if I made a mistake, I’ll be happy to consider corrections. I measured the distance as roughly 8.5 miles, round trip. The range of GPS values for that set distance range from a low of about 8.36 miles to 8.64 miles, depending on how wide I make a turn or where I turn around. That is less than .3 miles deviation between all trips and can be accounted for by how I make turns or the loop at midway. Other factors that skew numbers depend on whether I beach the boat to stop the moving time or allow the boat to drift. I typically limit the water stop at esch two mile leg to about 30 seconds, so that could mean my actual average speed could incease by .05 to .1 mph. Boo hoo!

I made a test chart for 8.5 miles, listing in one column, the avg speed, time in hours/minutes, then a column that converts the time into a decimal equivalent, (4.0 mph avg = 2 hrs 7.5 min = 2.125 hrs). That chart has every finishing time for 8.5 mph in .1 avg mph speed intervals. I dont need a GPS to tell me the overall average speed. I know the measured distance and GPS data readout for eah turn. I know how many minutes it takes to get to turn A, B, C, D, and E, then time to landing. That’s how I validated the accuracy of “my” GPS. I accept that the distance based on turning point, going off course and time stopped will impact actual overall average speed and distance, but I found that any error, based on the 8.5 mile/total time chart, amounts to around .1 mph. Furthermore, the time spent setting the app and GPS, listing the actual start/stop times, then beginning to paddle or stopping the devices and capturing data with a screen shot increases the run time by 30 to 90 seconds. If you look look at the chart example, you’ll see that for the 8.5 mile track, about a three minutes difference changes the average speed by about .1 mph. So a 90 seconds delay means a final reading of 4.55 mph is actually 4.6 mph. Rather than nit-pick seconds, accept 4.55 mph and the next time if I register 4.65 mph, it means I jumped .1 mph rather than a mere .05 mph. The point isn’t the speed today, it’s how much I improved as well as what time I need to finish the course and reach 5 mph (1 hr 42 min, or 3 minutes faster than my top speed of last year and 19 minutes faster than my speed average speed from yesterday).

8.5 mph Course:
4.2 mph = 2 hrs 1.4 min = 2.0238 hrs
4.1 mph = 2 hrs 4.3 min = 2.0731 hrs
4.0 mph = 2 hrs 7.5 min = 2.1250 hrs
3.9 mph = 2 hrs 10.7 min = 2.179 hrs
3.8 mph = 2 hrs 14.2 min = 2.236 hrs

4.84 mph = 1 hr 45.6 min = 1.756 hrs
5.00 mph = 1 hr 42.0 min = 1.875 hrs

An argument can be made that I need a different chart if the GPS displays 8.36 miles or 8.6. It doesn’t

  • all I need to do is check the specific distance and moving time, and accept that it’s accurate within a .1 or .2 mph of the average speed, about the range that I see on the MPH display. Feel free to believe what you will, I trust the relative accuracy based on comparisons with the chart. (+/- .1 mph overall).

When padding in water with a relatively constant current or a flat current like a lake, the best I can do to stay at a select speed is (+/-) .2 mph. For example, paddling at 4.0 mph, I can manage to keep at 4.0 for a few seconds, typically 5 seconds at most. While striving for 4.0 mph, i can expect to get readoits of 3.9, 3.8, 4.0, 3.8, 4.0, 4.0, 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.0, 3.7, 4.0. 4.0, 4.0 3.7, 3.9. The question is what’s the right speed. If my goal is 4.0, I paddle to keep as close to 4.0 as possible. That’s my speed! Does it matter if the actual speed is 3.9 or 4.1? Check the 8.5 mile chart.

I’m certain the boat isn’t speeding up and slowing down by that much. So I simple accept that 4.0 mph is in between those extremes. Even if I can get a consistent readout of 4.0 mph that shows up more consistently, that doesnt mean its true, because the error is about (+/-) .2 mph above or below 4.0. If it hits 4.3 mph, I paddle slower, and if it hits 3.8 mpg, I paddle faster until I hit 4.0 imph. Works for me. However, I know four things from watching my GPS:

If I stop paddling, speed drops consistently, for example, from 4.0, to 3.8, to 3.6 to 3.2 mph. Its linear. When I accelerate to get back up to 4.0 mph speed, ot takes two strokes for each .1 mph increase to get back to 4.0 mph. Each stroke is one second each, and I can see the second digits tick by on the GPS.

I don’t mind a challenge to my math, but I won’t accept a challenge unless someone actially paddles with me. Renember that I cam vark, but I can’t bite you. I hope somebody can benefit from this. I already did the work. Hopefully it helps someone check and validate their own GPS readout.

The advantage to being able to trust the reading is that you can compare paddles lengths and blade surfsce area, boats, conditioning, recognize over working and recovery time, and more. If this seems like a lot of work, it is, but once you gain confidence in the GPS unit, the work is over. A you have to do is check it occasionally over measured courses. Scrutiny and challenges from the forum gave me the motivation to check the potential. As usual, I have the forum to thank for my improvement. I never said paddling is fun, just challenging . . . and satisfying.

2 Likes
#117

Jyak, I really really admire your discipline in taking lots of data in reasonably-controlled conditions and using it for self-improvement. Totally cool. I think there are many racers and hard core types like raisins on this site that are sitting on a wealth of knowledge.

I’m actually keenly interested in cruising speed too but I kind of give up before I start on doing anything other than spot checks since my main paddling venue is the St Joseph river plus I have six solos and like to switch around so sometimes I do “tests” on a small local lake with a GPS, but I don’t have data that can be used to measure self-improvement like you and some others. However I do warm up on one of those Concept II rowing machines at the YMCA and I think that machine may have wicked capability for measuring self-improvement. Fortunately I can’t see the display. I also bought a hard copy of The Science of Paddling and have been looking for concepts that I might experiment with. There is a short chapter devoted to Velocity Based Training where the idea is that lifting lighter weights at an optimum speed will build better paddling power than strength training. So I’m experimenting with that a little.

Here’s my on-water speed metric. Two days ago I’m about 3.5 miles upstream near my turnaround point when I see a kayak floating ahead and since the paddler wasn’t paddling I decided to leave some space and just turn around early. As I start meandering back I glanced back and the kayaker is paddling and the kayak (maybe 13 feet +/- 1 foot) is closer so I focus and paddle at the best pace I can set for 3+ miles, totally using up everything I had. I never looked back but it worked and I loaded and left and never saw the kayak. I did not want to get passed in this friggin “fast” canoe! I sure wish I had captured that run on my GPS since I’m still sore.

PXL_20230929_191215256.MP
PXL_20230929_191215256.MP1920×1446 438 KB

I also used a GPS to time The Bob’s Blackhawk Zephyr (a red hot low volume, low-wetted-surface 14’2" kneeling boat) versus the same Wenonah Advantage in the pic above (16’6" sit-down boat) and trying to maintain same “hard/serious” effort over a 5 mile total upstream and back route I got 4.4 mph for the Advantage and 4.6 for that rascaly Zephyr! Just one run, doesn’t mean anything real other than man that Zephyr! So I traded an email with Shawn Burke (Science of Paddling) about whether kneeling is more powerful than sitting and he felt the opposite so I’m trying to build my strength in sitting boats since I only have high confidence when kneeling.

20230226_151422
20230226_1514221920×1080 266 KB

At 6’4" or 6’5" (I don’t remember) I doubt that The Bob ever got to experience the Zephyr so I think about him sometimes when I’m paddling it and wonder.

Cheers jyak!

#118

@TomL truth is that not many people want to get into thst much detail. A few posts with you made me understand that pure speed isn’t relevant to most canoers and kayakers. In fact, I never cared how fast I could paddle a canoe. All I care about was how far we went. Always distance and never speed. A state map is all I used to check trip progress. On white water trips similar to where you typically paddle, we measured the trip by time. It was 4 hours or 5 1/2. We didn’t sight-see as a matter of speaking, but we mostly relaxed and drifted. Speed meant nothing

It wasn’t until I got on open water and experienced the varied conditions that I considered a GPS. The price was a major factor that compelled me to use it to the fullest. When I post, I try to address a larger audience mostly the beginner. My intent is not to school experienced kayakers and definity not anyone who races.

Most racers have techniques they dare not share with competitors, but then many do share after they give up racing. Part of the problem is that you can explain techniques to someone, but unless they’re in a comfort zone to learn, it doesn’t help. On the other hand, a person has to commit at some point to learn. If I can offer one tidbit of info that advances a person’s level, it’s a success. After three years of posting, you’ll either read my drivel or move on. Matters not to me. I already came up with it, so maybas well share it. I also found that helping someone stimulates retention and sorts out the rough spots.

#119

Well I’m hoping to improve my technique using a GPS too. I tend to use it when I know I don’t understand what’s going on. I spent 6 days comparing my 15’ x 25.5" waterline Merlin II to a 16’ x 25" Magic. Magic has solid reputation as a fast boat but never felt super fast to me. After six days of back to back testing I convinced myself that the Merlin II (kneeling) is more effortless for me than the Magic (sitting) at all speeds! My main conclusions are that the data are consistent with my perception plus I need to spend a lot more time on technique and conditioning for sitting boats since I just don’t know how to paddle them yet.

1 Like
#120

I’m sure GPS accuracy varies by brand and maybe by device, as well as where they’re used and how they’re set up, but I’m convinced that if a specific GPS unit is used in the same region, with the same parameters, I have no doubt the results will offer at least consistent values. I Consistently get slightly different values from my GPS and the phone app, by as much as .05 mph. Although I haven’t verified the cause, I attribute the difference to how I systematically start the recording sequence on one first then the other, and they both have a different setting where speed sensitivity transitions from stop to recording.

Considering how the difference of 3 minutes accounts for about .1 mph, a sampling error of 12 to 16 feet seems insignificant, especially since that error becomes less significant as it recalculates as the total trip distance increases. Even if the overall error is a much as .25 mph, its insignificant, unless its used as a measure against another setup. We aren’t racing, where all boats are compared under the same conditions. It’s the difference that’s important. How close do they split finishes in international races .01 seconds or .01 miles?

Personal records that aren’t certified are less significant when compared to another person, but I’m comfortable that it represents what I need to know. It only matters to me, but the results can easily be apply to anyone for relative comparison. Paddling can be different things to different people.

Each person has a different power range, endurance, and form efficiency. Even if everyone else gets more power from a sitting position, you might have greater physical dexterity.or strength in muscle groups that favor the kneeling position.

The easiest way to make comparisons is to have a set measured distance, then simply time the duration. Then compare the value to your GPS. With all my hype about speed, when put in perspective, the difference between 4.0 mph and 4.2 mph over a 2 mile return leg of my test course only comes down to finishing the leg about 1 minute and 30 seconds faster.

It just clicked that you’re 4.4 and 4.6 mph in a canoe is smoking. My last trip was 4.2 mph avg. Dang! I had no clue that a canoe could be that fast@

An argument can be made that 1/2 the trip was with the current. Then that means 1/2 was into it. That’s a wash! Separate the down stream and up stream legs to see how much assist you get from the river. The .2 mph difference between the canoes may not seem liike much, but that .2 mph difference can be felt, yet its hard to know the difference unless you test the boats equally. Then there’s a difference in acceleration, hull efficiency and how quickly glide speed falls off. I consider the tests valid if consistent back to back tests between them show consistent results.

Comparing my trips, I found that I can consistently increase my average by .1 mph if I go out once a week. If I miss a week, the avg drops at least .2 mph on the next trip. Based on that evaluation, I try to make it a point to go out once a week. I missed a month and dropped .3 mph. Readings are consistent enough to see general patterns. There was fog this morning. I went out 2 days ago, but my seat strap broke and I haven’t fixed it yet. I love paddling fog.

Let me know how you make out.