PaddleWise by thread

From: Peter Rattenbury <ratten_at_uow.edu.au>
subject: [Paddlewise] Lightning v AT paddles
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 11:20:01 +1000
	Both the Lightning and the AT Xception Tour paddles sound wonderful,
cutting edge, examples of high technology.  And fiendishly expensive too.
	I wonder if any Paddlewiser has actually trialled these products in a
comparative sense in the environments for which they were designed, ie,  a
reasonably long sea trip? 
	Reading the blurb from the two manufacturers, they appear to be similar in
weight,  around 800 grams, with the AT retailing at US$449 and the
Lightning at $360 for the expedition model. 
	I note the favorable review of the AT in the April edition of SeaKayaker.
Both makes offer breakdown models, and  of course, the bent shaft
technology of the AT is a major differentiation factor. So has anyone
actually compared the two?  Regards, Peter Rattenbury,  Wollongong, Australia. 

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List
Submissions:     paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net
Subscriptions:   paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net
Website:         http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/
***************************************************************************
From: Gerald Foodman <klagjf_at_worldnet.att.net>
subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Lightning v AT paddles
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:17:25 -0700
> I wonder if any Paddlewiser has actually trialled these products in a
>comparative sense in the environments for which they were designed,

I have had a Lightning, and a number of other paddles,  and now use an AT
exclusively.  I don't think you can compare them.  The Lightning is a fine
paddle but is fairly conventional.  Both the blade shape and the shaft
angles make the AT quite different from any conventional paddle.  You must
try it.

I found that it takes no time at all to get used to the compound bends in
the shaft.  On the contrary, it is now the straight shaft that seems
unnatural and hard to get used to.

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/
***************************************************************************
From: Gerald Foodman <klagjf_at_worldnet.att.net>
subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Lightning v AT paddles
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 10:19:44 -0700
Peter,
Someone mentioned to me that the AT works best when it is unfeathered,
because the compound bend in the shaft is awkward when feathering.  I don't
know if this is true since I do paddle unfeathered.  I believe that several
top paddlers use feathered AT's, but I am not sure and wonder if they use
lower feather angles.

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/
***************************************************************************

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:32:58 PDT