Size 15 feet…
Forget about fitting them in the forward cockpit area - how do you get them through the keyhole!!!?
I could not get my size 11s to be comfortable in the 165. Due to the 170s higher volume, they fit much better and that was the icing on the cake.
yeah, I don’t see that happening, either
5’ 9" and size 9 1/2. Just comfortable with seat moved back 1 inch, and my water shoes touching underside of deck in T165.
hm
strangely, my RM 170 seems to have more rocker than my 165. The 170 is quite old and /yellow/orange. GreaT VIDEOS steve!
ANd to further complicate things …
I just test-paddled during my “lunch break” the Zephyr 160 in some decent rapids and standing waves plus some gusty (20+ knots) winds. I can see why some think it is a bit of a “pig” size-wise and in terms of handling in flat-ish conditions; but give it confused enough water and currents and it behaves very well. Exceedingly reassuring and quite maneuverable.
I seem to like boats with higher stability. The Z had more than needed for flat water but not that much - at my weight and height I did not think it was too hard to edge. I don’t think the rear end popped out of the water until way on edge though - I thought it would come lose easier…
Wish I could take a Tempest back there today to compare but it will have to wait… Now if these things could lose 20lb of its plastic weight …
Quick Update #1
– Last Updated: Sep-30-10 9:29 PM EST –
#1 since I expect to make a second update in a few days.
Paddled the 165 and the 170 back to back for only a few minutes today. Will take the 165 on loan tomorrow to see how I feel in it paddling it for a couple of hours - due to the lower deck I have my doubts I'd be comfortable enough...
First impressions: the 165 feels a lot more "alive" than the 170. I can "lay" on the rear deck of the 165, where on the 170 I need to "arch". The 165 feels lighter too on the water and probably is lighter off the water too. It turns easier and tighter and edges easier for me. It is tippier too but not scary so.
The 170 feels like a comfortable contoured chair and I have great knee room while still being in excellent contact. But it feels heavier in the water and less responsive. Might be faster in a straight line and still turns well but it is more "subdued" than the 165.
I did not think I was too heavy for the 165 - it edge and released on turns better than the 170 for me.
My problem is now to figure out how I feel in the 165 after a couple of hours paddling it. I have no doubt I'd feel great in the 170 but the lower deck on the 165 puts me pretty much in a position I'd be in a relatively tight Greenland boat - nearly straight legs with toes somewhat pointed forward. Not sure I'll like that for more than an hour - got to try -;)
The bottom line is, for what I want, I don't think the 170 will do nearly as well as the 165 in terms of paddling response. Stability in either seemed good enough for me and I don't mind either the more stable 170 or the less stable 165 or how they edge. Comfort is another story, and unfortunately might be a deal breaker for the 165 for me.
and…
dont forget that the knee braces can be adjusted not only lengthwise, but in two positions sideways. this can make a huge difference. I dont know what conditions you were in, but these kayaks really shine in rough stuff. get both, so you have an expedition kayak and a great playboat!!for the price of one composite kayak.
Don’t really need an expedition boat
I mainly do a few hours at a time, usually enjoying rough-ish (for me) conditions involving mainly wind and waves (no “rock gardening” kind of stuff) in open water or Class II to mild Class III white water on a big river.
If I am comfortable for about 2-3 hours and if I don’t need to spend half my energy on staying upright due to boat instability, that’s all I need. No need for extended storage.
so…
if you fit in the 165 its a great boat for that kind of stuff. I really like strong wind, and the tempest is the best ive used in gale force conditions. is got a great balance between stiffness and turns fast in waves…i love it.
Paddled the 165 a bit more today
– Last Updated: Oct-01-10 1:45 PM EST –
The Potomac is now just over 4 feet on the Little Falls gaunge, which means strong currents with nice sized but shifty standing waves where I paddle.
Yesterday when I tried the Zephyr 16 it was 3.5 feet and was somewhat calmer but I think I can make some comparisons.
The Zephyr 16 is the more reassuring boat in having higher secondary stability. In the Tempest 165 I have to be a lot more careful where my center of gravity is or I would need to brace, where I could rely on the Zephyr's higher stability to compensate for small wiggles left or right without a need for a brace.
By the end of the hour today I was fully comfortable handling the 165 (where I was immediately comfortable in the Z yesterday). Again, may have to do with the somewhat stronger and pushier currents, but I think there is also a difference b/w these boats, enoug to matter.
Comfort-wise, I'm still not 100% sure. The 165 I borrowed has the seat and foot pegs too close so most of the time I was either crammed to used them or a little too lose when just using the bilkhead for support. I think the seat position was too forward as well - the rear felt loser than I thought it should be and my bow rudders tended to move the whole boat sideways rather than swing the bow around. Perhaps the balance on the current production T165 would be better suited for me - they got the seat a little farther back than the prior years and I can actually use the foot pegs in them.
The hip pads would bite too much too so I would need to remove them for full comfort. I think I can be comfortable for a couple of hours in the 165 with no problem at all.
The dilemma is that I thought the Z handled these particular conditions a little better and I thought was easier to roll despite being wider. But actually paddling the Z (as in going some place vs. playing in place) was not as good as paddling the Tempest - the Z is just too wide for my tastes where the paddle enters and I would not want to paddle it for too long, perhaps just enough to get to the play spot -;)
Bottom line, for rough sea kayaking where going forward is part of the equation (e.g. surfing following seas or just movind through rough water), I think the 165 has an edge. For "playboating" the Z has an edge. I do both but the river is closer and I end-up paddling there more often than going to open water with waves. I already have a WW boat but that's good for playing in place only, where the longer sea kayak I use to paddle up-river to some nicer bigger waves where the short boat can't play... Food for thought... May be I need one of each -;)
then…
you have the zephyr 155…i have owned this kayak some months,and know it fairly well. Its a very sweet boat.
ITs easier to turn than the T165, very playful. its also a very nice kayak for rolling.and its very light for a plastic boat. very light indeed.
I Gotta Ask
Why are you paddling the bigger Z? At your weight I’d paddle the smaller one.
And remember, when you move the seat back 2 inches in the 165 it makes a tremendous difference in comfort and ease of entering and exiting. The Z already has the seat moved back. Very nice.
Your fit in the 165 …
… sounded tight. This may have had something to do with feel of the boat. Did you move the foot pegs back? And your legs were still crammed? Sorry if I’m not understanding that from your post. If so, you can as others suggest move the seat back. Problem is demo’ing a boat with the seat back … other wise you’re taking a chance that is the answer.
Funny how even little adjustments can make a boat feel different.
To clarify…
– Last Updated: Oct-01-10 5:55 PM EST –
Why not the Z 155 - because the 160 was available to try. I will see if a 155 is available to try too.
As in fit in the T 165, the distance b/w footpegs and seat was at least 3" too short, while the bulkhead felt a couple of inches too far. That's fixed in the current model year and can be adjusted in older models to match. The hip pads just need to be removed and undergo some weight-loss surgery; whish the foam were not glued to the outside fabric though...
Anyway, I got some thinking to do, and possible seek out a P&H Dolphin...
Thanks for the suggestions.
The Smaller Z…
might be the boat for you. I don’t know about footpeg location but I do know it’s the most shin-friendly sea kayak I ever paddled.
yep
big shin clearance and sized similarly to the T-165. A little less sleek and bit chunkier in the hips BUT a real fun tool. I just recently acquired a carbon Z 155. REAL cool!
steve (boat whore)
The carbon Z
Now, the special edition Zephyr 15.5 is in my preferred weight range but I gather it’s “a bit” pricey -
hehe
flatpick,thats a nice piece of gear. i find the zephyr 155 veru manouvrable, surprisingly fast nice in wind,
a very comfortable back deck. quite flat like an avocet, but with harder chines around the BOXY area, which is much smaller than on the tempest: hm that was a long sentence. i acually feel that the bigger cockpit/kneesupport gives plenty of torque, and it of course is very easy to get in and out of fast.
its not THAT wide…1cm more than av avocet.And the sides are flared…
I weigh ~190…
…and I own a Tempest 170. I know that we have beat that dog down in this thread. I also have an Arctic Tern 14 for a playboat. The T170 is a good tripper but I wanted a dayboat and maybe something fun enough to replace the Tern 14. I paddled the T165 quite a bit as well as the Z160 thinking that those sizes would be about right but the Z160 felt big (like my Tempest) and the T165, while a very nice boat just wasn’t different enough to suit me and certainly wouldn’t ever replace the Tern.
Then I borrowed a Z155 for a week. It felt very different than the Z160 and much more fun, to me, than the T165. I bought one late last year and have pretty much paddled it exclusively ever since. I have paddled the Tempest a couple of times this year and the Tern about 6 times on special occasions.
The Z155 uses the same or less energy than the T170 to paddle at a touring pace. The T170 may be a little faster if I really burn the calories and push hard but that’s not what I do. The Z tracks better, is more neutral in wind, handles way better and is more comfy in rough water. It paddles fine with an additional 60 pounds of gear but that isn’t what I use it for. The T is still my choice for camping and will remain so.
The Tern is being edged out as a playboat, too. There are a couple of things that it does better than the Z but it sort of feels like a small blunt instrument by comparison. I’ll probably keep it as a loner for smaller folks and for a couple of days each year that it works really well for.
At your weight I think you are a better candidate for the Z155 than the Z160 and encourage you to try it out. It may surprise you and feel familiar yet very different than what you have paddled.
Don’t stress over the tight hip pads. Take them out (like Flatpick) or crush them in a vise like me to make them thinner. After the vise treatment they still hold their shape, are very comfy and do the job.
Flatpick………I want your carbon Z. Wanna trade?
Jon
http://3meterswell.blogspot.com/
Z 155 vs. T165 sizing?
– Last Updated: Oct-02-10 11:57 PM EST –
For those who have paddled or have both the Zephyr 155 and the Tempest 165, could you compare the cockpit sizing in terms of foot room? I'm not asking length or width or height of the coaming, but if you put the pegs all the way forward, which one has more room for large feet? Specifically near the front bulkhead, perhaps eye-ball or measure if you can't reach all the way there with your own legs -;)
I can't seem to find a local Z 155 to try and before I decide if it is worth a long-ish drive to see one, I'd be interested to get some idea of fit.
Looking for the poly versions, if that makes a difference (and if you think it does, compared to the "pro" versions, let me know how).
Thanks!
Z155…
…has more foot room for me being 5’10". It also has more foot room than my Tempest 170.