Re: [Paddlewise] volume and safety

Bill Hanson wrote
>There is no inherent safety in large volume boats, as such. Some boats are
>better designed for some purposes, that's all. My subjective impressions
have
>been that shorter boats are easier to control in following seas, **all
other
>things being equal

I don't want to compare large volume boats to narrow boats in following sea
conditions.  Rather the comparison is between narrow boats and SLIGHTLY
wider ones.  I mean those with a bit more, but not too much, stability.
That was why I wondered about the Mariner MAX compared to my Mariner
Express, only about 1" wider.  Or the Mariner II, only about 1 " narrower.

I used to have the shorter Coaster and find that the Express is much easier
to travel with in following seas; even though it doesn't play as well in
surf or rips.  It holds a line down weather with less attention than the
Coaster.

Bill Hanson wrote:
**. Also, I've thought that very long boats may be harder to
>control in surf. Boats with very finely drawn out bows (like many of the
>Current Designs boats) will bury their noses in a sea, "pearling".

The older Current Designs boats did this very badly but the latest Solstices
have a more flared bow and resist pearling fairly well.  I don't mean in
shore break surf, but in following seas.  In my experience the Solstice GTS
is extremely comfortable holding a line when travelling down weather,
infinitely more relaxing and easy than the Coaster.  Even though the Coaster
is infinitely easier to manage for surf play.

Kevin Whilden wrote:
>I do not think that volume will make too much difference in the likelihood
>of capsize in following seas, and in fact too much volume in the form of
>extra width would result in extra initial stability and increase the
>likelihood of a capsize.. Paddler ability is the most important factor in
>likely hood to capsize in following seas. Second to that, is the
>likelihood of a certain hull to broach, which is the cause of most
>capsizes in following seas. The least likely Mariner boat to broach is
>probably the Coaster -- a very good boat overall, and probably an
>excellent complement to your Express. In general, hard chine boats tend to
>broach less, and I really like my Pygmy Arctic Tern

The reason I wondered about volume and the likelihood of capsize is that
with a bit more stability, especially with the chine as in the MAX, a non
professional like myself will lean  more confidently and be less likely to
lean either too much or too little.  The boat would be more forgiving of
mistakes.

It was not my experience that the the Coaster is less likely to broach than
the Express.  You have to have faster reflexes to prevent the broach since
the boat turns so readily.  I was wondering if the MAX or II would require
even slower reflexes.

I would love to try the Arctic Tern but having thumbs instead of fingers
would not dream of trying to build one.

John Myers wrote:
>I recently talked with Cam Broze about the Express, Max and M-2. He puts
>the M-2 in the                                       skinny boat category,
>more likely to capsize in rough conditions. His personal favorite is the
>Coaster which is not surprising since this is his own design. Somehow the
>canard that "narrow" is seaworthy and "wide" is not has become a widely
>held belief but one which I think is invalid. My personal bias against wide
>kayaks is based more on sluggish performance and sloppy fit. Evidence seems
>to suggest that very narrow boats [less than 22"] are more likely to
>capsize even  in the hands of an expert.

I think that you may be correct.  But I have found no experts to agree.

Jerry

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List
Submissions:     paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net
Subscriptions:   paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net
Website:         http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/
***************************************************************************