Re: [Paddlewise] Rocker: too many sea kayaks

From: Matt Broze <mkayaks_at_oz.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 23:47:39 -0700
-----Original Message-----
From: Kenneth Cooperstein <cprstnc1_at_optonline.net>


>I am perplexed by the variety of sea kayaks and the use of rocker.  Once
>you decide on total load and your level of skill (stability), it seems
>to me that the intended use dictates the rest of the design.  Yet every
>manufacturer seems to offer several boats with variation in rocker being
>one of the principal differences.  What am I missing?

Lots. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. As I have said before,
I'd suggest as a buyer you judge a kayak by how it feels to you under a
variety of conditions when you paddle it and quit trying to analyze what you
think it should do based on a little information (or misinformation) you
have gathered.
>
>Assumptions:
>
>(1) The boat should be usable in rough conditions without its rudder.

I agree
>
>(2) Leaning the boat a little causes it to turn away from the lean
>because the low side is longer on the water than the high side, causing
>lift aft.  Thus lean can be used to steer in open water.

No, this would cause lift sideways unless the hull is also asymetrical (then
the widest part will lift more). If the maximum width is behind center you
will be right then.
>
>(3) Leaning the boat a lot increases rocker and shortens the waterline,
>making the boat easier to turn with the paddle, but decreases tracking
>ability.

Yes and it also angles the stern keel allowing it to slide easier.
>
>(4) Increasing base rocker makes the boat more maneuverable with the
>paddle, but decreases tracking ability.

Maybe if all other things are equal, but since they rarely are and so many
other factors are involved here I wouldn't make this a general assumption.
>
>Based on the foregoing, it seems to me that a sea kayak should have
>little if any base rocker; otherwise it will be difficult to paddle in
>windy conditions without a rudder.

You're way off base here. Much depends where the rocker is. Also a more
manueverable kayak is often easier to keep on course because you can use
that manueverability to more easily compensate for the kayaks less
desireable tendencies.

>It should also be designed so that
>at high lean, it has abundant rocker and a shorter waterline.  This will
>permit maneuvering in tight quarters.

Unfortunately you might not want a big wide kayak like this and even if you
do it is now harder to lean it to take advantage of this ability.

>The rudder is only used to help a
>bit in windy conditions and when surfing.

If it is needed at all then.
>
>If the foregoing is true, why would anyone choose say a Seawards Vision
>over a Seawards Navigator for sea kayaking?  These boats are identical
>except for rocker.

Yes that is the difference. The Navigator was critizied in its Sea Kayker
review because it was so hard to turn, turning into strong winds was nearly
impossible. The Vision was Seawards answer (but to my tastes it was an
improvement but not nearly enough).

>Similarly, why do many people like the Looksha IV?
>Without its rudder, it is hard to paddle in strong wind.

I'd guess they like its sporty manueverability. If by hard to handleyou mean
its tendency to weathercock in sidewinds you can either choose to use the
rudder then or learn the skills let you use that kayaks extra
manueverability to help make the necessary corrections. A long list of
weatherhelm compensating skills is in Manuals/Paddling Skills at
www.marinerkayaks.com.

Matt Broze
http://www.marinerkayaks.com




***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List
Submissions:     paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net
Subscriptions:   paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************
Received on Wed Sep 29 1999 - 23:53:23 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:30:14 PDT