I always considered the purpose of a skeg and rudder to improve tracking - one being passive and the other active. While a rudder can serve to turn a boat, that is more by crutch than design. I alluded to it in previous posts but will state now, at least as far as the Wilderness Systems Tsunsmis are concerned. The 145 is a stable kayak that’s easy to track and turn through edging (for me, edging to maintain track only takes minor input but constant hip action, while edge turning requires a more aggressive and pronounced appproac). I gave up relying primarily on paddle strokes for directional control in favor or edging. The reason is that “I” found it more useful to rely on paddle stokes for propulsion and edging to effortlessly correct tracking. When I revert to old ways, the lapse shows up on my speed graphs as a more jagged spike range between high and low, while proper form and techique is flatter and more consistent.
On the other hand, the 175.Tsunami (similar design) is a handful to keep on track without the rudder. The 175 is designed to turn, while the 145 is designed to go straight. While the 175 does track straight in calm conditions, significant wind, waves or current will confound every attempt to track straight without reliance on the rudder.
This is what happens when you have a two point failure, in both the attachmnent, and the raising/lowering lanyard. First time for me. I love the boat, but would feel more comfortable if it would respond better to edging.
Back to canoes. I actually agree with davbart, in that at least avid canoeist are typically more skilled with paddle control. Casual paddlers don’t push adventure.
Forum discussions about paddling technique are puzzling. While anyone admitting to using a long paddle in a kayak is widely condemned as a rube, yet in other discussions, it’s considered chic to use a double sided paddle in a canoe. I’ve never done so, and I have no desire to try because I feel my single bladed technique is up to the task for a canoe. Still, I would never use a single bladed paddle in a kayak. Given the unrelenting attacks specific to low angle induced yaw and the extra effort required due to an excessively long paddle, I wonder how double paddle canoeing escapes the same criticism.
The dicotomy doesn’t stop there. Consider how manufacturers constantly evaluate and drop product lines that are unpopular (discussion about why kayak offerings are geting shorter as years pass), I’m curious why paddle makers continue to offer 250 and 260 cm paddles, when most paddlers seem to recommend 210 to 220 cm paddles. Are there a lot of closet kayakers using 250 and 260 cm paddles. After all, the 240 cm paddles are often in store items.
