I’m going to try the water ballast too – I am probably loading it around 165 with my clothed self, paddle, water bottles and lunch. And I noticed that it tracks better when I am kneeling than when sitting (weight more forward).
@willowleaf said:
I’m going to try the water ballast too – I am probably loading it around 165 with my clothed self, paddle, water bottles and lunch. And I noticed that it tracks better when I am kneeling than when sitting (weight more forward).
I’d also suggest that you try to add 25-30 pounds so the change is significant and easy to feel. I’m curious to hear your comments.
In my simple mind (and I could be dead wrong) most canoes with fixed seats are set up a bit bow light for ease of handing and to accommodate additional loads so it does seem like adding some weight up front could well help the boat achieve a more ideal trim…a little bit more bow down for speed. I also feel that many modern sport canoes (including Ladybug) have such outstanding acceleration from rest or low speed that it’s easy to give up a little since you get some additional momentum in return which translates to glide and I’d guess that almost everyone likes glide…especially in shorter sport boats that don’t come with a lot.
I’m very curious to hear comments from scottfree and willowleaf. Remember to fill your water jugs completely because extra weight moving/sloshing around could detract from your experiment (just like sudden movements from my 60 pound mutt can be quite thrilling).
I have all my gear sitting out in anticipation of paddling tomorrow. Included in that pile are four one-gallon jugs. I was originally only interested in knowing if the additional weight would add to efficiency. Thanks to the input above, I’m now also interested in playing with weight distribution. I’ll report tomorrow evening.
Love seeing this thread. We got our sister a Ladybug earlier this year. It’s such a cool boat. She is a canoe woman from girls scouting days but hadn’t tried a solo before. On her first outing, she was cruising the cove immediately just as confidently as a swan.
Sorry, but the orthography police are here. That’s the regal and aristocratic name for spelling, for you commoners.
Are we going to follow the common Webster or the regal Curtis? It seems every dictionary spells the namesake of the titular canoe as one word: “Ladybug”. However, all the catalogs and price sheets from the guy who spec’d, made and sold said canoe spell it as two words: “Lady Bug”.
To pry apart the horns of this orthographic dilemma, I suggest we honor the creator’s wishes, for that also seems like a regal and aristocratic thing to do: Lady Diana and Lady Macbeth and Lady Chatterley, I give you the venerable . . . Lady Bug.
I usually have less than 170 lbs total load in my Lady Bug and like the way it handles that way.
Mine is equipped with an adjustable foot brace.
Seat height in any solo canoe makes a huge difference in the handling and control of the boat. I encourage you to investigate altering the seat height up or down before going to the inconvenience of adding ballast.
Have fun.
I just got back from the lake. Besides ballast, there was almost exactly 155 lbs in the boat (me, paddles, kneeling mat, etc.) Specs say most efficient between 150 and 200. As for ballast, I had four one-gallon jugs of water weighing 8.4 lbs. each. Trying between 2, 3, and 4 jugs, the total weight in the canoe was either 172, 180 or 188 lbs. So, I paddled, switched things around, paddled some more, added and subtracted jugs, and did more paddling. I kept trying different weights and different placements for about an hour and a half. At 188 lbs. it seemed sluggish but maybe that was because the boat seemed to be sitting too low in the water and my impressions were all in my head. I mostly settled on three jugs—one between my knees with the other two just in front of my knees. I stopped by a dock and dropped off all the jugs and paddled empty for a bit. Then returned to pick them back up.
The verdict? Tracking and glide seemed to be a little better, but not a hugely noticeable difference. Maybe these things seemed better because I was expecting them to be better. I really don’t know. Of course, physics won’t be denied. Glide had to be better—maybe just not to a noticeable degree (at least to me.) I don’t think I’ll know to what degree unless I use a GPS to measure my speed.
I’ll continue with the experimenting but will probably settle on 2 jugs of water—which will put me closer to the center of the efficiency range.
I admire your enthusiasm and for doing a systematic evaluation of weight. When I think about it for a moment 150-200 pounds is already a very narrow efficient range (just a 50 pound range) so maybe the most important thing is that you are just somewhere in the range. Most solos have a range well over 100 pounds.
I have a weird obsession with efficiency in practically everything. In other words— I’m lazy and I’m cheap.
I’m probably not the best person to be doing these kinds of experiments. Others here regularly notice the seemingly most subtle of differences between given boats and paddles. For me, and my experience level, I don’t notice a lot of differences between two boats of the same basic lengths and widths and designed for the same tasks. I own a paddle that is supposed to be quiet according to some here. In fact, it is quiet. It’s not like my other paddles are loud, though. It’s not something I notice. Maybe the more experienced here would better notice the difference in glide between no jugs and three. The best I can say is maybe probably.