Thinking of going shorter

[JCH_ski]

I confused myself yesterday.

I paddled for 3 hours in the 1997 Solstice ST my Dad just gave me, which was my first outing in it. Easy pace (in fact, I was waiting a lot, so maybe it’s fast?). I felt old and inflexible - couldn’t edge that boat at all. Very difficult to turn it. When I would rock my hips, I just felt like I wasn’t moving (barely moving the boat), and edging to turn was an impossibility. I’m just getting used to the rudder (how do you push against the pegs without turning the rudder?). I mainly kept a safe distance from the rocky shore and my husband and our friend, because I felt like I had so little directional control. The boat wants to go nothing but straight - it was like paddling a freighter.

When we were done, I took a quick paddle of my friend’s Tempest 170. It fit like a glove (or was just set up perfectly for me?). It’s a 2009, fiberglass. When I rocked my hips, the boat responded perfectly. I was able to carve turns. I didn’t feel old and inflexible! I am 5’-6” - this boat did not feel too big. Granted, I currently weigh more than the OP, much to my chagrin, but torso height and leg-length wise, it was great. The owner isn’t too much taller than I am, but weighs a little more (don’t know how much), and he says it rides too low for him, so every wave washes over the cockpit.

So I’m confused, because I had been reading this thread, and expected this boat to feel really big. It felt perfect. It was responsive. It felt fun, for the minute and a half I was in it. Was all this just in comparison to the Solstice, since I’d been paddling it for three hours prior to this? The Tempest is 2” narrower (22” vs 24”), 6” shorter than my boat (17’ vs 17’-6”). The current specs claim the same deck height as mine. My boat is skinny and sharp on both ends, and looks fat in the middle, with a very smoothly rounded hull - is that why I can’t edge it? I haven’t learned to roll yet - now I question whether I could even do it in this boat. The seating position in mine is less comfortable, although maybe I don’t have the pegs positioned quite right yet.

Anybody have any ideas why I loved the Tempest 170 so much, when all the comments here would indicate that I shouldn’t? Granted, it was the briefest of test paddles. All evening I was thinking how much I want my friend to find a boat that fits him better, so I can buy his. All while feeling guilty because Dad just gave me the Solstice, and I’m afraid I just don’t like it at all. I don’t feel like I can give it back and buy a different boat (maybe you’d have to understand my relationship with my parents - the guilt would kill me ).

I want to do a side-by-side comparison of the Tempest with my Eddyline Sitka LT. Maybe at that same time, the Sitka would have felt like a go cart.

[string]

Boats are like shoes so you go with the comfortable one.
PS. You are showing signs of boat fever, a life long addiction.
And you need a lot more seat time to make a semi rational decision.

[Buffalo_Alice]

@JCH_ski

a side-by-side comparison of the Tempest with my Eddyline Sitka LT

I hope you get the chance; it would be an interesting exercise.

[Jyak]

@JCH_ski, the Solstice ST, if I’m referencing the right specs, is 17’ 7" x 24" wide. That makes it comparable to the 175 Tsunami that has a max weight capacity of 400 lbs. If so, it’s designed around a 240 and 265 lb safe weight load, including paddler and gear. I’m 6’ tall and presently 235 lbs. At 255 lbs, I actually overloaded the 145 Tsunami’s 350 max capacity (214 lbs safe load), but the 175 Tsunami was and still is the right weight class for me. After droping 25 lbs, the 145 Tsunami feels far more controlable and isn’t as wet. The problem with the 175 Tsunami is the 68 lbs weigh and the difficulty keeping it on track at times without the rudder. I have no problem managing turns in either the 145 or 175 Tsunami, because my goal is tracking straight. You probably have problems with turns because you aren’t displacing enough water to put the chines at the right depth to edge effective. Its not the boat (unless another Solstice ST owner advises otherwise).

You friend may be approaching or exceeding the weight range in the 170 Tempest, but you should feel at home, because it in your proper weight class. Compare the stats:

Wilderness Systems boats are very forgiving and comfortable, even the Tempest, which is designed more for turning than the 175 Tsunami, which is designed as a touring boat for going straight. I fit a boat between 23.5" and 24.5" wide, depending on the front deck height. My sister, at around 5’ 9" at 145 lbs, hated my 145 x 24.5 inch Tsunami, but she feels right at home in a 140 x 24" wide Tsunami with a 300 lb max load capacity (180-198 lbs safe load with paddler/gear).

Max capacity is theoretically the point near sinking, and safe load is where the weight hits the designed Load Water Line. Keep in mind that safe capacity is more than just the carrying capacity. The design is based around how the boat is expected to perform with an intended load. Clearly. A surf ski isn’t designed around carrying much more than a paddler, while a touring boat will have a wider range to accommodate both a paddler and a greater volume of camping gear. Consequently, performance and speed is secondary to capacity in a touring boat.

Current Design and Wilderness Systems have very different handling characteristics, due to the chine configuration, but my guess is the Solstice and Tsunami are somewhat similar. My point of
comparison is that although the 145 and 175 Tsunami are in the same model class, they are very different boats. The 145 probably handles more like the Eddyline Sitka LT that the 175 Tsunami, which is a handful to keep on track without the rudder, under certain conditions.

If you feel comfortable in a 22" wide boat, a 24" boat is probably too wide to give you adequate hip control. Even if you load the boat with weights, the width will still make the boat feel cavernous. The 6 inch difference in length is less of an issue than the overall weight, weight capacity, width, chine design, and rocker.

[702Candace]

I don’t know about it being hotter, but seems like it will be harder to see on the water. Everyone paddles in different situations, though, so that might not be important for you.
My kayak has a swirl pattern with a range of colors. On a warm or hot day, when it’s time to load it, the light-colored plastic feels just as hot as the dark-colored plastic. Mechanix gloves are helpful. BTW, I live in Las Vegas and usually paddle on Lake Mead…

[JCH_ski]

Absolutely. My friend just texted a few like-minded individuals that he’s decided to sell it. I said I was interested, pending a much longer test. He said I can take it for a day. So I will see if I actually do like it.

[JCH_ski]

I wonder if the interior temperature would be more affected than the surface

[JCH_ski]

Soon - very soon

[ppine]

why?
Slower, less room, less stable.

[E.T]

@JCH_ski Thanks for the post. Honestly, I don’t feel like the Tempest 170 is too big for me. I think since it’s my first 17’ boat, I just wasn’t sure what to expect, and the sluggish acceleration and slower turning might just be a characteristic of longer boats? Or, maybe it’s just the hull design. I’ve heard the 165 is more lively. When my friend gets his 165 back (it’s being patched up and painted), I might give it a try to see how it feels.

I’ve been using a GP with my Tempest lately, and I like it so far. I didn’t think it’d be the case, but turning seems a little easier, especially of I move my hands way out to the end of the GP. I’m sure acceleration is about the same (or maybe even slower), but due to the ease of using the GP and the feeling of less force required, it actually seems like I speed up faster. Then again, it’s easier to pick up a faster cadence with the GP, so that could be part of it. All I know is, it feels pretty good so far =)

[sing]

A perspective from Bryan Hansel (used to be on this site WAY, way back when it was PNet):

Illusory Truth Effect and Sea Kayaking (Sort of Off-Topic)

sing

[Jyak]

That a long way of saying:

I found it simpler to say, “Perception is reality!”

[CraigF]

My history in kayaking is in racing, so most of my boats are 19-21 feet long.

When I had surgery on my left arm my racing days were over for a long time, so I built a few 12 footers to stay on the water.

Though the arm is finally better and my cadence just needs work, I use those 12 footers more than the racing boats, even though the racing boats cost a lot more than the shorter boats.

Do whatever it takes to make the water comfortable to you and you will enjoy it enough to keep going out.

[pbenter]

I used a Tempest 170 composite with a GP for several years. I found it comfortable, sea worthy, and response enough for me. But at 6’, #220, I also found the cockpit a little too small, but the thigh bracing good. Getting into and out of it became an issue.

[E.T]

@sing website not loading for me?

[sing]

Hmm…the link works for me…

No biggie - basically, Bryan basically thinks that folks making statements about “minimum length of 16” for a seakayak as a mantra are missing a lot of other critical factors that are just as relevant, if not more so. For example, a smaller/weaker paddler is better served in a smaller kayak that s/he doesn’t struggle with then with a longer kayak, provided the shorter kayak is outfitted for open water conditions, e.g two bulkheads, smaller cockpit for skirts, etc. Theoretically a longer kayak is faster, but only if the motor (paddler) has enough power to push it and to do so for extended time. If not, a smaller paddler will be able to go probably as fast at a sustainable level of energy with a smaller/shorter kayak. A smaller and more maneuverable kayak may also may as fast, or faster, in challenging conditions than a longer, trackier kayak, etc.

Bottom line, you are better served test paddling different kayaks and seeing what feels good for you in different conditions and then made sure it has the features that will allow you to deal with open water conditions. Heeding advice from someone on kayaks who may not be with your physical attributes, skill level and conditioning can lead you to picking the “wrong” kayak.

sing

[E.T]

So…I am going shorter…by 6 inches, haha. I ordered a Tempest 165 off Amazon, and I’m really hoping it’s a good fit. I don’t know what to think because I see so many posts on here saying one thing or the other. Some big guys (over 6’ ans 200+) have said the T165 is just fine. I guess we will see. If it’s too tight, I can just return it. Unfortunately, I now have a T170 to sell.

I was thinking about this for a while, as the T170 is a chore to paddle. I like how it performs when using my Greenland paddle, but I think the problem is it just has too much volume for me (155-160 lbs and 5’11-ish). What really made up my mind was, my buddy brought out his 165 today, and I took it for a quick spin. It felt so much more responsive than the 170, and stability was just fine (felt about the same as the 170), maybe even better because I felt like I was lower. Only catch is, his boat is probably 15+ years old, so the seat and outfitting is slightly different, and it’s fiberglass. I don’t think the fiberglass alone would make that big of a difference in feeling. It’s probably more that the 165 really is a different boat, not just a downsized 170. It should be coming next week, so looking forward to finally getting the “right” boat.

[kanoniem]

@sing

Theoretically a longer kayak is faster, but only if the motor (paddler) has enough power to push it and to do so for extended time. If not, a smaller paddler will be able to go probably as fast at a sustainable level of energy with a smaller/shorter kayak. A smaller and more maneuverable kayak may also may as fast, or faster, in challenging conditions than a longer, trackier kayak, etc. […]

The weird thing is that many so called sea kayaks of 16 feet long have an effective waterline much shorter than their overall length, say something like 14 feet long.
And it is the effective waterline that determines its speed potential.

[Rex]

We can talk. I did the same thing. I had owned a Tempest 170 then paddled a 165 and immediately realized I had bought the wrong boat. The 165 was better for me. (I’m about your size… a little shorter and heavier). You can move the seat back on the 165 to make getting in and out easier.

[sing]

@kanoniem

The weird thing is that many so called sea kayaks of 16 feet long have an effective waterline much shorter than their overall length, say something like 14 feet long.

Yes. Usually the case for the Greenland inspired hull profiles that sport long rakes.

https://www.rebelkayaks.com/product/ilaga-2-2/

In comparison, the OAL of a QCC 700 is almost the same as its waterline because of the nearly plumb ends.

sing