Had a chance to test-paddle the QCC 700X yesterday and noticed some things. Just curious if you, owners, agree with these.
First off, it felt very maneuverable and responsive to correction strokes. More so than my CD Extreme in similar conditions. Seemed fast enough too, though I did not take a GPS to test which is faster.
Stability was also similar if not better on the QCC - just it is different and the boundary b/w secondary and primary is more easily found than in the round-bottomed CD Extreme. End stability may be a bit higher in the QCC though - hard to tell.
Downwind in 15 mph wind with some 20 mph gusts and up to 2 feet wind waves it handled very nicely and surfed and linked the waves great. The rudder did its job and kept it on track and it felt very responsive to the rudder control. Unlike my CD Extreme, which does not seem to like short chop nearly as much and tries to broach a lot more and the rudder is not nearly as effective.
Upwind in these waves the QCC had noticeable hull slap coming down over the waves and that seemed to slow it down. The CD Extreme in contrast slices thru the waves much better and does not lift-up/go down and slap nearly as much, and thus it feels to move faster upwind and in 1 foot chop it just glides over as if it is not there. The difference in the QCC seems due to the relatively flat bottom of the hull and somewhat more pornounced chines on the QCC (they are rounded but they are there, where the CD is pretty much all round plus it has slicier front hull bottom).
So where the flat bottom and a bit more rocker of the QCC helps it in turns and surfing it hurts it upwind in chop.
Deck height on the QCC is lower in the foot area (my 15 size flappers did not fit well there, 12 size nad under would be perfect with the thinnest of footwear).
The the cockpit opening front as well as the knee braces are also noticeably lower than the Extreme - making it a too snug fit for me at 6’4" an 190lb. Pretty much impossible to do any torso rotation to speak of (as opposed to twist) unless my knees were in the middle. OK for rough water may be, but I like to move more. Speaking of which, the cockpit seems to allow good knees together position as it is nicely wide in the front (unlike the CD which is a bit too pointy there) but was too short for my legs, plus it was lower. I could not get in seat first (I can do it in the CD Extreme with the seat back released to the back) but a person of 34" inseam or less should be able IMO to move very well for knees together paddling.
Lastly, the inside of the cockpit (hull bottom) looked worse than the outside, with strands of kevlar poking-up here and there due to wear. Wondering if this is systemic problem or just this particular boat was not well finished or may be worn-out by use?
Very nice boat overall and I can understand now why folks like them. If the front bottom of the hull were a little more rounded/slimmer for better against the waves performance, and if the cockpit was 2" longer and my feet would fit in there, and if the hatches were waterproof (the CD Extreme has not leaked a drop so far for me in heavy waves and in rolling), I think I would seriously consider the QCC 700X -
rules it out for me…
Looks like my size 15 flappers won’t fit either, off the short-list, unfortunately!
How’s the CD extreme fit your feet?
Extreme
Could be better but is OK. I use it with water shoes that are just a tad thicker than water sock, basically a sock with a sole and that's the max it would take comfortably. With anything bigger, and I am mostly locked-in into a V with no wiggle room. But the center of the front deck is tall enough so if you have a foam bulkhead built-in for feet together paddling it is also good.
I think there is a "HV" version of the Extreme that would be even better, but as it is, even the non-HV is too much if one is not loading it with gear...
The foor rails/pegs are an inch or two lower than what our feet prefer but are usable as is, especially barefoot or with light shoe that does not raise your heels up (I got a 1/4" or so mouse pads glued on the hull bottom for comfort and wear protection there). I'm contemplating raising the front of the rails a bit for an even better fit - there is room to do it.
Lastly, if the seat back (and bottom) is moved a couple of inches back, then this would offer even better foot room and more importantly, easy entry seat first and also knees together paddling. I intend to move it soon but have not had the time to do it - if I keep the same seat I would need to somehow modify the suspension points as they are not designed for the seat to be in another position. Might as well get rid of the seat altogether and use a gell cusion and some foam in the back... Layback rolls are difficult with this high rear deck anyway, so might as well get legroom out of the available space behind the seat -;)
minor suggestion
Remove the seat pad and back rest from the 700. You don’t need either. This will give you some extra room. The seat pad is secured by velcro and the back rest comes off by undoing two bolts so it will not harm anything. It is easy to put it back. You will find that the 700 handles a bit differently when you sit lower.
Hull slap
"Upwind in these waves the QCC had noticeable hull slap coming down over the waves and that seemed to slow it down. The CD Extreme in contrast slices thru the waves much better and does not lift-up/go down and slap nearly as much, and thus it feels to move faster upwind and in 1 foot chop it just glides over as if it is not there…"
I wish you’d had a GPS along. If you’re really doing a seesaw thing, that might slow you more - but otherwise the slap isn’t costing you as you might think.
Consider that the slicier ends on the Extreme are cutting into the waves/chop more. That smoothness is a dampening effect comes at the expense of more drag that robs speed in most cases - despite how it feels.
QCC carries more volume to the ends and bridges and links better - and price is more slap in some conditions - but not likely to get less speed. You’re staying up on stuff more that others are digging into more.
Every kayak has quirks in certain combinations of conditions. QCC has less than most, and tend to be outweighed by corresponding benefits. The only issues I’ve had - few and far between - wouldn’t apply to one with a rudder.
man thats a stunning boat
on your profile Greyak. looks meticulously crafted.
Thanks
Looks OK I guess, paddles better. Pretty wasn’t in the spec - just sort of comes as a package deal. Craftsmanship is nothing special - I’m no woodworker in the traditional sense. Mostly done with simple hand tools.
SOF can be crude or furniture grade - but anything beyond the basics isn’t needed for them to perform well and look pretty good.
More pics: http://outdoors.webshots.com/album/550036085nCAhKP
Thanks
I did like how the QCC handled a lot! Only my feet were in an unnatural position, toes forward too much for comfort and the footpegs too low below the balls of my feet.
Best of all I liked how it handled downwind and how responsive it was.
May be if they build me a custom one with longer cockpit and higher front deck in the foot area only, and a little lower back deck behind the seat… Guess I’m going home-built next time -
Design your own!
I’ve read a bit of your stuff and it seems you are very analytical…probably part of the fun for you.
I say shape your own kayak and build it. That way you can apply your theories and see how they work.
Yeah, sucks you don’t fit
It is a nice ride. Lots of other good kayaks though - and I’m sure you’re used to those fit issues in a lot of things by now.
I’m shorter and have much smaller feet but one I want next I’ll likely have to build too. Commercial stuff gets really over-generalized trying to hit widest target - and know way I’d expect one to offer what I’m looking for.
Some lucky few find one that is near custom for their size and uses, but not many. Luckily, even fewer notice