agree
– Last Updated: Apr-01-06 9:33 AM EST –
well said Brian
Best Wishes
Roy
Stable, but not perform well?
“As a result many boats have enough flat water stability designed in so that they feel more stable in rough water. This does not translate to performance.”
Would you elaborate on exactly what you mean by this? Curious what distinctions you are making. Do you mean a boat might make people feel comfortable in rough conditions, but not be able to travel easily or move directionally easily in rough conditions. Typically I see people referring to rough water boats as those that feel comfy in the rough stuff.
how the boat turns & following seas
Aside from the obvious how much secondary stability the boat has and how evenly does it come on, the two other areas paddlers feel more confident in rough water is how does the boat turn and how well does it handle following seas.
Although it may well be true that more experienced paddlers can adapt well enough to any boat, most paddlers will feel more confident in a boat that does NOT require severe edging to accomplish turning in really large conditions. If one has a boat the turns predictably and linearly without edging and linearly even more with edging, the paddler is likely to be abel to execute necessary moves with more confidence and finesse.
Similarly, if the boat resists broaching, does not “catch an edge”, and resists perling, then then in following seas the condifence is higher and the boat may actually be able to be driven at higher speed than another boat known for its flat water efficiency.
Salty’s a good guy…
Some boats have to be compromises…
For example, when I go kayak camping, my boat must be capable of hauling my gear to the next site even in rough conditions. Then once unloaded, it becomes a fishing boat, firewood hauler, or used for a little exploration around the coastline or up a shallow stream. I have even dodged moose with mine. Then, if the coastline and waves are favorable, a little kayak surfing is in order.
How secondary comes and goes
"Aside from the obvious how much secondary stability the boat has and how evenly does it come on,"
Would it also be important how it goes away when you go beyond the max? Seems to me the more feedback you have and more linear on both sides the better.
Depends on the paddler
But secondary that falls away quite quickly does take a little more equinamity on the part of the paddler to handle. The extreme case would be the old Solstice hull from CD, especially the GT. This tendency was mercifully less so in the narrower Squall that I started with, but in the wider Solstice boats the boat gets closer and closer to a rock hard secondary stability that you could sit on, keep going, and suddenly the boat just rockets over on you.
It can make sculling quite difficult, especially if the boat is too big for you. So that was a big issue in most of the Solstice line for most women. It also makes it tougher to follow the coach’s instructions to slide smoothly off the back deck. Instead you suddenly flop.
It’s not fatal if the boat is well matched to the paddler. My Vela wants to do that, but since it is so low volume (and I moved up the seat and padded down the thigh braces) I have gotten to where I can manage that transition zone pretty smoothly thru pool sessions this winter. But it has taken practice, whereas in my Explorer LV it is what happens naturally.
I’m a bit grumpy at the notion
that 20th century Brit guys invented ocean kayaking, and perfected kayaks to handle rough seas…Not only is that innaccurate and arrogant, but just plain silly. People have been transiting large bodies of water for thousands of years!!! I think the Polynesian folk, and just about every other coastal culture, might laugh. I also strongly believe that many commonly held notions among sea kayakers about what constitutes performance and “sea worthiness” are simply wrong. I’d argue that a North American Coaster is a far more “sea worthy” and capable, and more fun craft in huge seas than the “almighty explorer”. Apologize for previous grumpy post…I just needed to surf…feel better now…
Designed to perfom
A boat designed to survive rough water might have its center of bouyancy just behind the seat, with soft chines and significant flare.Conversely if you wanted that boat to perform you might lessen the flare, harden the chines and balance the bouyancy. The first boat would feel more stable, but move slower, have less grip on wave and tend to turn to the weather. Just three considerations regarding performance vs stability.
Falcon
You may be right…
– Last Updated: Apr-03-06 12:58 PM EST –
My point is that there are no clear, exact differences between boats.
Also, the idea of "brit" boat is a concept that may have changed over time.
To me, the Romany is the "true" brit boat.
As far as I know, the 16ft Romany came before the ~18ft Explorer. Part of the motivation for the Explorer was long trips (ie, carrying lots of stuff). Thus, more PNW-like.
The key attribute (in my opinion) is open water manueverability. The Romany is more maneuverable, the Explorer is less so.
The original Nordkapp was a boat out of the mainstream. It was concidered an expert's boat that handled best when loaded (note that the following Nordkapps are rather different boats). It's certainly a British boat but it isn't what most people think of now as a "british" style kayak. It's quite possible that the P&H Serius had more visiblity than the Nordkapp in North America.
In North America, in the 80's, it was boats from Aquaterra/Perception, Necky, Current Designs that made up most of the market. That is, PNW boats were what most people knew.
The Romany (I'm pretty sure it was this boat) popularized a shorter, more manueverable type of sea kayak. This type of boat (to me) epitomizes "brit" boat.
Explorer…
“Explorer has PNW design influence”
I’m not saying the Explorer has PNW design influence. In performance, it is somewhere in between a Romany and a PNW boat. The design intent shares many of the intents of the PNW boats.
Market influence
The really great thing about “brit” boats is that they have made North Americans aware that PNW boats aren’t the only kind of sea kayaks.
Not that many years ago, it was only PNW boats that people knew about.
The P&H Serius was another early “important” boat.
The Nordkapp is important but few people in North America really knew about it.
Yup…
– Last Updated: Apr-03-06 1:15 PM EST –
A good short summary of the two boat styles and purposes.
It used to be that, in North America, the only easily available boats where the big ones.
Tried going from skegged boats…
…to a ruddered boat and simply can not make the transition. Rudders just feel funky to me now, though I don’t have as much of an issue with a skegged rudder (under hull) as on my We-no-nah Javilin, but it’s an outrigger. I got a C.D. Stratus last year and hardly ever paddle it on account of the rudder. Mostly paddle the C.D. Andromeda or Kajak Sports Vivianne, prefering to adjust a skeg and/or simply edge the boat. I must admit I’ve considered altering the rudder sliders in favor of locked, pivoting peddle rudder controls. I guess my main bitch is I like to pump the footbraces as I stroke and moving/sliding peddles don’t cut it. My attitude towards rudders may change with this mod. I believe the Stratus came out in '06 with the pivoting rudder peddles installed. And I’ll admit it is easier to load a hull without a skeg box in the way.
Brit or N.amer–what about Canadian/Germ
I’ve got several Brit boats and several n.american boats but look at history and the BIG crossings of say the Atlantic and you see that folding kayaks have a def. place in rough water…Klepper Feathercraft…look at Kruger Canoes (i think that is right). my point is that there is more than one way to skin the rough water cat.
Was going to just let this slide
But now I’m confused.
First Salty tells me not to ask about alternative designs and I don’t want anything other than an Explorer, then he tells us “many commonly held notions among sea kayakers about what constitutes performance and “sea worthiness” are simply wrong” and that the Explorer aint so almighty.
I don’t think I ever said British designs were almighty, but whatever. Chaulk it up to the internet being a lousy communication medium compared to say, a couple of bar stools and a couple of Grant’s Scottish Ales. If we meet up, Salty, I’ll buy a round. I’d suggest we just go paddle but, given your obvious abilities and interests, vs. my skills, it would probably just bore you.
… Ok. I’ve been sick and crunched at the job and haven’t been on the water in weeks so I guess I’m getting a bit ornery, too.
My fault
for coming off badly, which I do on occassion. Sometimes I think people just need to categorize and stratify things needlessly. I do not get that!! After years in the business in one form or another I’ve heard a lot of it, and I think it’s common thinking that limits people. For centuries there have been all sorts of craft plying the waters of this mud ball. Just last night I got an ear full at the pub from a guy who can’t even roll about how the Brit boats are the finest made, and the BCU is awesome etc… He was already told that N. American designs were not as good, and about how much tougher Brit boats were etc… Total nonsense… Nice guy, but already spewing dogma rather than exploring different approaches and figuring out his own style etc., which was my advice to him. Look, I’ve been paddling Brit boats for years, and I like that style of boat. But that doesn’t mean another type of boat isn’t just as seaworthy or valid. I believe people get evangelical about certain boats to the point of losing objectivity. BTW, some North American “Brit style” boats are as “Brit” as your boat. Necky Chathams for example were designed by a Brit who paddled for England. Hutchinson with CD, Foster with Seaward, and CD…It’s all interwoven.
The best boats are the ones with the best paddlers in them, regardless of where they are made. My poorly made point is that there is NO Wrong or Right, and there is NO best boat, or most Seaworthy boat. It’s what you like and works best for you… I like the post about folding boats, as it’s a great example of seaworthiness that defies common thinking. What about Audrey Sutherland in her little inflatable boat cruising through all sorts of conditions with ease? The Brit thing, and the BCU gig is great, but folks it’s just one tiny aspect of paddling on this planet. Why not do what works for you, and feel good about it without having to place your boat or methodology on some scale.
What’s Wrong With You…?
You asking folks to think outside of dogma… to think about and work on their skills as opposed to hanging on to the “hand-them-down-gospels” and the blessed amulets from the north sea… 
Forget that. I am with you on the first idea. Break out that jetski with the sled and let’s go for some tow ins on some offshore playground!
sing
We’re cool
Nothing in your last post I disagree with – except that I paddle a Tempest 
My #1 rule is not to diss anyone’s boat. If it gets you out on the water and you know your own limits, it’s all good.
Scoped out some surf sites
today via Jet Ski Sing! SOOOO much fun. And sips fuel too! Honda…I went through deception pass at 50 mph! Plan on riding that thing to Alaska in one day this summer. What a blast…something is wrong with me…how can I like that and paddling at the same time? To haresurfer…what’s wrong with a Tempest? Have fun.
Great thread
I have been wondering lately why so many ocean paddlers choose brit boats here in the northeast. NDK, P+H, Valley is all you see and hear about with a few Chathams and Tempests thrown in. I don’t see many QCC’s, Eddylines, CD’s (other than the Gulfstream). I have 1 year on the ocean and own a CD Storm. I was starting to wonder if I have the wrong boat for the area. Is it a club perpetuated fad or are the brit boats really better for this area? Maybe a little of both.