Easy answer - there is no magic additive, do what you can to smooth the hull, then keep it clean.
I’m happy to see that both articles linked in this post (kayakmedic’s link to the Gentoo Sports article and PaddleDog52’s link to the sailboat article) are full of correct information, good perspective and no BS. Both were good reads, thanks.
Agree with that. I often wondered how dings, imperfections and hull flexing affects speed. The articles show that hull design is more critical to speed than anything that can be done to prepare a hull that’s in good condition. Whether the hull is waxed, polished, dimpled, roughed up or deburred, the difference would be minuscule.
The articles made me realize the best option is to replace the paddler of my boat with someone who is around 50 years old. Second option is for me to lose 20 lbs to reduce the wetted surface. That might make my kayak faster than it was when new.
Another summary of the effect of surface imperfections on boat speed.
Another very cogent article, thanks.
It’s part 3 of a series, I remember seeing those posted somewhere, at some point.
Why 50, get someone 20?
Because I was better at 50 than I was at 20.
I knew that I’d heard of Greg Barton in his Olympic days testing some products. From the forums in 2005:
Yes, and at least from two manufactures
– Last Updated: Feb-27-05 12:51 PM EST –
Both of those coatings were tested while Greg Barton was in the National Team during the 80’s.
One of those, it is/was made by 3M, and while tested by Barton and team mates there were proven gains of several seconds. Barton did not use it at the worlds (I guess the one in German at that time) because of fear of been disqualify. Anyway, the following year, the ICF forbade its use and by microscope inspected the hull of selected boats, Barton’s among other.
Yes! Greg in person told us last February.
To me, although the coating “thing” is real, it is only worth it for world athlete who are at top performance and one or two seconds might be the different between qualify or not. For most of us, a couples of seconds per 1000m won’t change the equation much, so hit the weights, the water, wherever works for you, and train hard…
Regards,
Iceman
PS: 2 seconds per 1000m is about 40 seconds per 12 miles
12 miles races are almost always won for more than 40 seconds, even between top paddlers…
Get a faster boat.
I lightened my boat by 40 pounds.
Very funny
I will go with this idea. Really like it for my fiberglass yak. Will make cleaning a breeze.
As for my rotomould It cant hurt & the sheeting action I hope will make it glide better.
Non-chloric, silicon-based kitchen lubricant is what you’re looking for.
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=1109431cede72babJmltdHM9MTY3MDE5ODQwMCZpZ3VpZD0yYjE5ZjI1YS1hMmVkLTY5OGQtMTIyYi1mZWJiYTNjMTY4MTYmaW5zaWQ9NTQ0NA&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=2b19f25a-a2ed-698d-122b-febba3c16816&u=a1L3ZpZGVvcy9zZWFyY2g_cT1zbGVkZGluZytzY2VuZStmcm9tK0NocmlzdG1hcytWYWNhdGlvbnMmZG9jaWQ9NjA4MDQ0MDY5NzE4MDg2NTA5Jm1pZD1DQTg4QzAxOTJFMDVFMERBMTFEOUNBODhDMDE5MkUwNUUwREExMUQ5JnZpZXc9ZGV0YWlsJkZPUk09VklSRQ&ntb=1
You’ll have to remove the “Breeze” label and replace it with “Gale”.
I understand the desire to make a hull as efficient as possible. The ambitions, desires, effort and ability that you offer on each paddling day is exactly what it is, no more - no less. What can be done to change those things in the longer term at that point is irrelevant. The boat that you have and want to paddle and the effort you wish to put forth that day is what it is. The options available are irrelevant. Here I am, me paddling my boat. I wonder if some simple thing would have me gliding a little faster? How can any person not wonder about that from time to time? I certainly do. I think it’s scenes like this one! Wouldn’t it be great?!
I’ve got some choices in what I paddle each day, and i think if I can change one thing, the shape of the hull is going to be more important than the texture or the stiffness of the hull. A recent example is that years ago I finally picked up a fast tandem kayak - a Current Designs Unity. Current Designs at one point decided to have some composite kayaks built overseas, I believe in China. They advertised it, and they priced these specific kayaks at a lower price point than their US made composite kayaks. I think it was the composite Vision Series and the Unity - and the Unity was in fact priced a good amount less than their US made tandem Libra. I bought it new from a shop in Maryland around this time of year where they were offering a little discount on new kayaks. I noticed when I bought it that the bottom, in the middle of the kayak, where it’s at its widest and flattest, had some give if you pressed on it. Over the years, I’ve noticed that when the waves get a bit rougher, I have noticed some flexing of that spot in the bottom under my legs from the rear cockpit. I’ve always been a bit torn. Should I add some glass to stiffen it up? Should I leave it be? I’ve had it for 10 or 11 years, and I’ve left it as it came.
Recently I came upon a great opportunity to pick up a used Seaward Passat G3 in nearly perfect condition. I posted here about some of the same thing you’re wondering about. There is a factory-installed keel guard on the bottom. It has a slight texture to it, meaning not a polished finish like the rest of the gelcoat. I posted here about it, and actually emailed Seaward about thoughts on removing it. I got a confident reply that it makes no appreciable difference in efficiency, and there is really no way to remove it besides sanding it off. I figured as much, but that wondering had snuck into my brain. This was enough for me to leave it and appreciate that it’s there.
Now to tie back into the Current Designs Unity tandem, the bottom of the hull on the Seaward Passat is nice and stiff everywhere. The Passat is the tandem I always see recommended for adventure race racers and the like. It’s advertised at 22’ long, the Unity at 21’, and they’re both 26 inches wide. Upon measuring and leaving out the rudders - just the hull length, the Unity measures 21’ 5", and the Passat measures 21’ 11", so they’re really only 6" apart in total length. The Passat has that extended bow rising forward and up above the waterline. I find those proud bows a very pleasing aesthetic. I really like the look. The end result is that the waterline length isn’t any longer on the Passat. So we’re really down to hull shape and stiffness. I hoped and expected the Seaward Passat to be faster, I think mostly based on stiffness of the hull.
We had gotten into pretty regular training in the Unity this spring and summer, preparing for the Fort to Field Paddle Battle back home on the Missouri River in South Dakota, a 50 mile stretch of a beautiful, more natural section of the Missouri River. After a while, without even knowing it, you develop a strong rhythm in a kayak. You develop a strong feel for your cadence and the corresponding resistance you feel. It is through this that we immediately recognized the efficiency of the Stellar ST21 that was generously brought to the race for us to use (21’4" long - 22.4" beam) compared to the Current Designs Unity. It is also through this that we both noticed a reduction in efficiency going from the Unity to the Passat the first time we paddled the Passat. We felt the Passat may maneuver a little easier, but that seemed subtle. The added resistance to our regular rhythm and cadence was noticed by us both. My heart did sink just a bit. I was somewhat confident that we’d edge just a bit faster.
Now these are different hull designs. There are performance characteristics outside of efficiency that we haven’t explored as deeply, as I hope to do over coming months. So this isn’t to say one kayak or the other is better for you and your partner. It’s just an experience that confirms in my mind that hull design will fly above something like stiffness and texture within reason.
How you paddle exits the water will give you more glide than than any coating.
Hull design is everything I have three CD Extremes and one CD Expedition . Same widths and lengths same basic design same manufacturer, two have same layup schedule. Expedition has rounded bottom you can see with your eye.
Expedition feels faster on acceleration, glide and top end. It’s is just faster by slight design change in the bottom. Tad more tippy than an Extreme. It also has a bigger rudder but it’s still faster. Almost like my tandem Libra XT tandem if not the same.
Like changing the oil on your car it always feels better going down the road. We all know it doesn’t mean squat unless it my friends leased car where he put 40,000 on it with no oil change. Even then a person driving it probably couldn’t feel the difference.
Glide is nice it’s like free energy and it makes you smile.
My CD Solstice two inches wider same type of hull design feels dead if I paddle it after my Extremes. Even if there’s a few days in between it feels sluggish in performance. Jump in my Libra XT tandem and if feels like death. Even though the tandem can cruise at 4+ mph it tops out probably about mid or high 5’s. If I had a paddling partner who liked fast and thin hull I’d probably buy a tandem surf ski. My partner would never feel safe in a surf ski so Libra it is. Glide in a tandem is great you stop paddling it keeps going. 
So for more glide the real answer is not what most want to hear a new hull.
All very true. If someone wants to gain a few seconds, go for it, but you can gain a few tenths of a mph by improving paddling efficiency, better physical conditioning, and by losing several pounds of body mass. Upgrading to a more efficient boat can gain several mph improvement.
I found that a lighter paddle with a better blade design may improve average speed only by around .1 mph; however, it greatly improves comfort.
As far as waxing goes, at least it doesn’t detract from performance and you get the pleasure of a shiny new boat that sheds dirt and products like 303 protect it from sun damage. Sounds good to me. Now we know.
Better paddle can gain you much more than a .1 mph. Even two high end paddles like my Ikelos or Corryvreckan CF vs my CD Celtic 750.
Waxing slows you down I have read. More surface tension.
I’ll go with America Cup racing opinion as they spent untold sums of money.
More BS I think.
Raced offshore boats for a long time nobody ever did coatings.
Oh, what the heck…
Yes, you are correct, that is quite a load of high-flying BS re drag reduction by using hydrophobic coatings.
The whole thread is a waste of time.
If you want to get fast, get a fast boat, and learn to paddle fast.
Fun to discuss things no matter the outcome. Kills off wise tails, sometimes subjects go off topic but you may still learn something. It’s all free anyway just cost your time to read. Then it’s the individuals choice.