First, is the Aquanaut HV and the former Argonaut (sp?), the same boat?
I’m interested in a comparison of the T170 and Aquanaut HV, both in fiberglass. I wouldn’t buy without demoing, but it would probably be a 5 hr drive plus a ferry ride for the Valley boat.
Uses:
Mostly day tripping. Lakes, bay. Wind up to 20 knots. Up to two foot chop. Also, I do enjoy flat water paddling, calm lakes and big flat rivers, and will do that at least half the time.
Body weight 260 lb. Waist 44” Gear might be 20 lb. Will probably trade the boat by next fall. Intend to be 200 lbs by then.
Interested in the following characteristics, and anything else you care to mention:
Fit. Which cockpit is larger? The T170 fits me just right at the moment.
Handling characteristics: primary stability (tippyness), secondary stability (ease of lean and sits on a definite edge), tracking, weather helm. Which has the lower back deck? Which rolls easier?
I already understand the quality/workmanship considerations. No need to discuss that for my purpose.
Thanks,
Paul S.
Primary stability
The Aquanaut hull, as does the Avocet, has maybe more initial motion than a lot of other boats but an astounding ability to hang on its edge - no problem getting the skirt into the water with this boat. In fact it’s a wet ride if you don’t have a tight skirt. Carves a gorgeous turn though.
No question that at 135 pounds I am a lot less likely to accidentally overcome the secondary and go swimming than a larger and taller person, but that’ll be true for any boat. Within its cohort this hull is likely to feel more active.
AS above, the downside to the HV is that it is more subject to windage than the regular size unless fully loaded. I even found that on a dealer’s site. Both the regular and the HV have the same size cockpit, so if one tight around the middle the other will be equally so. We have had friends who waffled betwen the Aquanaut and the Explorer but made the final call based on the specifics of the cockpit opening.
I don’t know a lot about the Tempest from being in one. But a local paddling friend who got one to use while his Aquanaut was being repaired found it to be a very good boat. He’s a real Greenland buff - found he could do all but one specific thing with it. Alison Sigethi also uses one as her demo boat in classes, she said there are a only couple of the 68 greenland rolls that she can’t do with the Tempest. (She purposely uses a regular boat in classes so that people doin’t walk away thinking they can only do this stuff if they go out and get a rolling boat.) So it obviously has a decently low rear deck.
I want to make sure I understand
"Both the regular and the HV have the same size cockpit, so if one tight around the middle the other will be equally so."
Is the same width available at the hips in both the HV and regular, is that right? That would be great! The HV hull is 22” vs the regular 21.5” I think (Valley site is down at the moment.) My butt is getting bonier, so I think I would sit low enough that the lower front deck of the regular might be OK. I would definitely prefer the lower windage, and don’t like my knees lifted too much anyway. It may be more a question of whether I can get my hips in.
“We have had friends who waffled between the Aquanaut and the Explorer but made the final call based on the specifics of the cockpit opening.”
Which did they choose?
“I don't know a lot about the Tempest from being in one. But a local paddling friend who got one to use while his Aquanaut was being repaired found it to be a very good boat. He's a real Greenland buff - found he could do all but one specific thing with it. Alison Sigethi also uses one as her demo boat in classes, she said there are a only couple of the 68 Greenland rolls that she can't do with the Tempest.”
Do your fiend and Alison both roll the T170, not 165? I’m asking because the specs show an inch lower deck in the 165 than the 170. Good endorsement, whichever they use.
Thanks a lot Celia. Good info as usual.
A person in Newport, straight out to the coast from me, offered to let me try his Aquanaut, not HV, so I”ll get to find out how it feels. pdxseakayaker is a great community!
Paul S.
smaller paddler=
smaller boat.
yes the 165 has a lower deck, narrower, shorter.
All 3 Tempest models are EZ to roll, along with prawlee, oh just about 90% of the Brit style boats out thar! It’s about technique as much as boat.
steve
Steve, you probably know
Which boat will take wider hips, T170 or Aquanaut?
Alison and Alan
Alison has a Tempest 165 and Alan has T170.
Alan is 6'4" and not a small man. He finds both the Tempest 170 and the Aquanaut work well for him. He used his Aquanaut for Woods Hole training and his Tempest for his BCU 4* training. He was quite happy with the performance of each in each situation. As I recall, he noticed differences in personality, but not faults.
The coaming is the same size on all Valley composite boats with keyhole cockpits. The Aquanaut is a half inch narrower and has lower decks than the Argonaut (Aquanaut HV) so it will feel snugger.
Sea Kayaker stability curves seemed to indicate 250 pounds as optimum load for the Aquanaut. I think Valley states 200. In my experience, the boat gets livlier with less weight and seems absolutely fine heavily loaded.
In answer…
Is the same width available at the hips in both the HV and regular, is that right? ... The HV hull is 22” vs the regular 21.5”
It appears that the HV flares a bit lower down if the width shows an additional 1/2 inch? Probably worth a call to a dealer to talk about the specifics of how that happens. Question I would have is whether the seat width is different between the two, Possible that the seat is the same and that half inch happens in the hull without affecting the seat width. So you'd only notice the need to pop in a half inch of padding if going with a foamed in seat.
“We have had friends who waffled between the Aquanaut and the Explorer but made the final call based on the specifics of the cockpit opening.”
Which did they choose?
One of each actually. Both are quite tall people, but they are built differently thru their hips. Also a bit of diff in their leg lengths.
“I don't know a lot about the Tempest from being in one. But a local paddling friend who got one to use while his Aquanaut was being repaired found it to be a very good boat. He's a real Greenland buff - found he could do all but one specific thing with it. Alison Sigethi also uses one as her demo boat in classes, she said there are a only couple of the 68 Greenland rolls that she can't do with the Tempest.”
Love to count someone like Alison as a friend - would suggest I was a hell of a paddler - but my only contact with her was as a teacher in a Greenland class. Oops - I was wrong in first post mayhaps it's a 170 v. a 165. Regardless of which, I am assuming that if you are considering the T170 and HV versions of boats you are reasonably tall so a half inch increase in the rear deck height wouldn't be real noticeable. I may be missing something there.
Our Greenland buff friend is like 6'4", and has built a couple of traditional SOF's, so he probably doesn't notice rear deck height much unless it is way tall.
pretty close
I paddled an Aqua HV on a 8-day solo Alaska trip a while ago and liked it. It was different (not worse or better) than a T-170. I remember the fit was similar and both both were comfy for me. but… that said…I am 5/10" /175 and quite slight in the hips/butt. I can easily fit in a T-165 tho it’s snug.
hope this helps
steve
Same seat
Same seat in Aquanaut and Argonaut (Aquanaut HV).
The Argonaut preceeded the Aquanaut. According to Valley the Argonaut was derived from the Avocet which in turn was derived from the Pintail - supposedly the same hull section.
As of when the Aquanaut was introduced, Valley stated the beam of the Pintail, Avocet and Argonaut as being the same - 22" and the Aquanaut as 21.5" As the Aquanaut is slightly harder chined than an Avocet or Pintail, I'm guessing the 1/2" narrowing in the Aquanaut may have been attained by flattening the chine (sides) of the hull. I've never seen waterline beam figures for the Argonaut or Pintail. Sea Kayaker figures note that the waterline beam of the Aquanaut is exactly 1/2" less (@250 pounds load) than an Avocet. The difference gradually diminishies as the load lightens.
Rear deck hight.
I'll tell ya what got me thinking about the rear deck height. I was at a pool session in a ww boat and I could lay all the way back and touch my head on the rear deck. Not sure what model it was. Had to lift my butt off the seat, but still. That was cool. Opens up new possibilities.
Can't do that in my T180. I should have tried it in the T170 in the show room but didn't think about it at the time. It's right downtown, so I'll try it later.
I'm 6' 2".
Paul S.
My reasons for wanting a smaller boat
Feel free to question my reasoning. That's what I'm posting for.
1. Last weekend, I missed my offside roll in some really murky water, from all the rain, then set up on the on side and came up. Coming up though on the second try, I was slipping out of the boat. Not cool. I know, I can pad it out more, and I am.
2. The 180 doesn't want to go straight in quartering wind. Just a function of its volume I think. Especially as I get lighter. The skeg will take care of that most of the time. Once in some wind and waves, even the skeg left me paddling mostly on one side. This probably isn't unlike people talking about weather helm issues on the Aqua HV more so than the regular. Trade offs. Since I've been exclusively a day tripper, I figure if I don't need the extra volume, including in the cockpit, I don't want the extra volume.
3. As I mentioned above, I found in a pool session last week in a WW boat, I could lay _all_ the way back. Rolling was easier (not hard in the T180, granted) and side sculling esier too (I can't really do that in the T180 yet.)
It sounds like I'm still a pretty big guy compared to some of you who are in the T170 or Aqua regular. I'll be finding out soon what I think.
By the way, I might not go for an Aqua HV over regular based on fit right now. I'd be able to fit in a regular in a few months and then I'd be lusting after the regular. It would be better to wait until March on the Tempests too, to get the better hatch covers. Tough decissions. I'll know better when I try them.
Paul S.
Tried the 170
Paddled a rented RM T170 today for a couple hours on the lake. Wind was variable up to about 20 mph. Just 9 inch chop, maybe some 1 ft waves out in the middle. Boat handled fine. At 22” wide, a little twitchier than the rock solid 23” T180, but not bad. I only even noticed it when getting in, or when passing paddles back and fourth with another kayaker on the chop. The tempest has good primary, but still rides up and down on side approaching waves without rocking. I like that. The lower volume T170 probably bounced up and down less than my 180 when heading into the waves, too. Also less weather helm as expected with the lower volume. I tacked every which way and never needed the skeg at all. That was cool. I probably would have needed the skeg in my 180, again just a function of volume.
I’m not sure which paddles more efficiently or has more glide for me, 170 or 180. I’m thinking the 170 but could just be adrenaline of trying a new boat. What would hull theory say? 260 lb paddler. 18’ x 23” vs 17’ x 22”?
I brought the 170 to a pool session too, and rolled it a couple times in the lake. The 180 rolls fine, but the 170 rolls super easy as I can lay all the way back. On attempted hand roll, I can barely get the 180 to budge. I actually have a prayer some day with the 170 I think. I can bring it up enough to swing one arm over, but still quite a ways from completing the roll. Can also side scull better. I’m sure it’s because my hips are lower to the water.
So, the 170 is confirmed as an easy logical next step. But I’m gonna cool my jets for a bit until I can fit in and try some more boats, including the 'naut. I’d like to wait for the KS hatch covers anyway if going for the 170.
Edit: One thing with the 170 is I can't quite go butt, foot, foot, on entry. I lose skin on my shins even through the wet suit and with RM coaming. Would be no way with fiberlgass coaming, or in the 'naut. Back to square one on cowboy self rescues, too. Gosh, another balancing act to learn. Does it never end? I hope not!
Paul S.
(the journey is the reward)
It never ends 
There are always more skills to learn and others to hone.
And there are always more boats to try!
BTW, the NDK boats have longer cockpits than the Valley boats. I know one paddler who traded an Aquanaut for an Explorer fo rthis reason.