does this mean
my Penobscot 16 Royalex needs to be consigned to Davy Jones’ Locker? Despite me and my son’s best efforts to sink it, the darn thing still floats and carries my heavy tail down the river…
Kaps
question
I’m not disputing what you’re saying but, why does the V hulled Malecite seem (to me at least) such a fantastic design? I actually love the V on that boat. I’ve been spending a lot of time with it in sizeable surf on Lake Erie and to me the V hull seems to let me deflect waves better and more quickly than a shallow arch. The lack of primary allows me to instantly turn up a side to deflect water and the V bottom firms up instantly. Turning is no problem. I feel like I can pretty much do anything with that boat.
So here’s my question: Am I naive or is there something special about that particular V hull that is not shared by the Explorer?
Eye of the beholder
– Last Updated: Aug-14-06 6:35 PM EST –
"They do NOT offer optimum primary stability, they do NOT offer optimum secondary stability, they have too damn much wetted area, and they resist turning"
Resist turning? Perhaps not everyone wants a boat that spins with a single paddle stroke? Optimum secondary stability? What is that? Is it the same in all situations?
You can rest assured that people value different design features than yourself. Imagine a fan of solo flatwater cruisers blathering on how the likes of the NovaCraft Supernova and Bell Wildfire are crap because they just don't track or glide worth a damned.
My old royalex Mohawk tandem is superior to a Kevlar Wenonah Spirit. How's that? I could *afford* the Mohawk.
Different strokes for different folks, indeed.
Phreon
MR Explorer/Independence…
Excuse me but are these the same canoe with different names or just different canoes?
I know
The Tripper, to me, will feel deeper and fatter, harder to paddle and (more) sluggish to turn.
The Tripper’s a great workhorse for big water and long trips - beyond carrying a load, I’ll bet there’s nothing everyone will agree that a Tripper does better.
It’s preference, not fact.
I’m not defending the Explorer or saying it’s a better all-round canoe than the Tripper, or any other real canoe. It just seems you’re splitting hairs and making big declarations over minor personal preferences.
Tripper, Prospector (my choice), Explorer, Discovery, Dumoine, etc., whatever, they’re all just regular canoes. None much better or worse than the other for most people’s needs/tastes. And none are about to become obsolete.
PY.
different
The Explorer is a tandem. The Independence is a solo.
Independence
c2g,
thanks. one more question…are their hulls both v formed or different?
don’t remember on Indy
I don’t remember if the Independence has a little bit of a vee or if it is just a shallow arch. However, there are several folks on the board who own Indys and would probably respond to your question if you were to post it as a separate thread.
Serious Questions
To make up for my earlier silly post, I want to more seriously side with g2d here.
From what I’ve read the v type hull is not an optimal design generally. I haven’t paddled the MR boats enough to have an experienced opinion, but I’ve read enough stuff written by designers to have a half-baked inexperienced opinion.
So objectively, my guess is that g2d is right that the design is outdated and maybe never was the very best. Still, the Explorer has to have had some other attributes that have made it so popular. If your pretty darn good in a sea of mediocrity, maybe there is no shame in that.
Myth or no myth, there are thousands of happy owners out there who logged many satisfied miles in their Explorers. Thats a good thing.
And its sure OK to love your boats, even if they aren’t the last word in design. A certain forest green Sawyer Cruiser will always be number one in my heart, even though it wasn’t real dry in the waves and didn’t turn very readily. Would I take her back? You bet. Would I take her back instead of a Bell Northstar for close to the same money? Absolutely not!
Secondary stability of shallow-v hull
I have been thinking v-hull design sometimes. Problem of v-hull in whitewater usage is that it will run deeper than shallow-arch hull. So it requires more water and it will wear more easily.
But how about secondary stability of v-hull compared to shallow-arch hull? I have some experience of Explorer but I haven’t run rapids with canoe having shallow-arch hull. Comments, please.
Pete
Be careful what you say
– Last Updated: Aug-15-06 8:27 AM EST –
A few years ago when one of my wife's friend's husband found out I was into canoeing I was on my way to having a new best friend. He would stop me whenever he saw me and ask a zillion questions. Of course I always like to talk canoes so that was no problem. I took him out in some of my boats for a paddle and lent him books and magazines to pour over.
One evening my wife and I were sitting on the deck when a mini-van with a canoe turned in. Now I have a rather long dirt driveway so I got to watch them drive up. My wife says "its Kathy and Brian they must have bought a canoe" "Yea" I say "a Mad River Explorer" "Is that good?" she says."wouldn't be my first choice" say I."Don't tell them that" she says.
They come up and get out of the van and are excitited as kids at Christmas, as well they should be. Well after what seemed like forever listing to him tell what a great boat it was I finally said "you know Brian I think the Explorer is way overrated" His jaw dropped about 6 inches and they left soon after. He has not spoken 5 words to me since.
That may be why my wife says I am a grumpy old fart.
Cannot resist a comment
If shallow vees are so inferior, why does QCC & John Winters incorporate them into their designs?
Jim
Got my asbestos suit on now.
Obsolete?
Well I’ll never argue that the Explorer is the perfect canoe. It’s kind of slow and the freeboard that’s so nice when it’s loaded makes it tough to paddle in a breeze when it’s not. I’d say the same things about the Tripper.
But like the Tripper the Explorer is a pretty good river boat, poles OK and as long as you raise enough sail to overcome the freeboard it sails alright too.
Is the Tripper a better design? Could be. I guess the only thing I like better in my Explorer is that it’s a few pounds lighter.
I have heard some grumbling about the shallow V from the guys who still think the Tripper is a play boat.
I bought my Explorer when the local Old Town dealer wouldn’t sell me a Tripper with anything but those nasty molded seats. (Now there’s a crappy design!)
I learned whitewater in the Explorer. Learned to pole in the Explorer. Now I’m learning to sail in it.
Can’t complain.
Resolution suggestion
Could this debate be resolved around the campfire at Raystown?
Jim
Why I call your Resolution, and…
will raise you one Solution.
Though at Raystown oft confusion
plies the solvent with pollution,
which from un-jockeyed dillution
races minds in revolution,
till in blended state of fusion
(or bouncin’ a skull-duggerous contusion)
all pros and cons are in collusion,
as Topher stacks question to conclusion.
Remember, obsolescence in absolute is extinction.
As long as I am able to ply the waters in all my and my vessels imperfections (I, too, like Tommy, shall continue to have use for my Explorer), we are like ole worn and grizzled Papillion floating upon his coconut raft. That’s right, “Hey you bastards! I’m still here!”
TW
The Malecite was the boat where
everything came together in a V-hull. But I can tell you, less V is more. My MR Guide is otherwise similar to my old MR Compatriot. The Guide has just a hint of V with basically a shallow arch, and it is wonderful at letting cross currents under it. My old Compatriot had a strong V bottom, and those flat surfaces made the boat susceptible to being hurled sideways by large waves.
It’s not a matter of opinion when people
tout the ancient MR Explorer design as a wonderful hull. It is good enough that it is reasonable for people to like it, but it is OBSOLESCENT. I started this thread to make exactly that point.
You’ll never see a V-hull on a Winters
boat that is anywhere near as pronounced as they were on the early MR designs. There are NO modern designers pushing V-hulls like those on the Explorer. None.
What you see are blends of shallow arch and V hull design, like the Mad River Guide and the Mad River Synergy, both of which I happen to own. Want more tracking, crank in a little more V. But modern designers know better than to use a lot of V because it increases wetted area, and often spoils initial stability.
Harder to turn? A Tripper is better on
a slalom course, solo or tandem, than an Explorer.
Just like…
Just like a flared, rockered whitewater boat like the Esquif Canyon is better to paddle on a lake than an Explorer?? C’mon, take that back!
Maybe there’s objective proof that the Tripper is a better turner than the Explorer, I don’t know. I’m just saying that, to me, the Tripper feels big, deep and wide.
My point isn’t that the Explorer is better than the Tripper. Or even that the Explorer is good. I’m just sayin’ whether you personally like its design or not, the Explorer is popular for a reason, and it, or boats just it, will continue to be popular.
Debating the performance differences of these all-rounder canoes comes down to personal uses/tastes.
P.