LedJube_at_aol.com wrote: > > Obviously addressed to the Gentleman for NY with a nod to the gentleman from > BC: > > How appropriate is the Khatsano or KhatsanoS for those of us that prefer > high performance (narrow and lively) and high energy paddles? Is there a > better folder for this kind of paddling? I love the idea of a folder, > dislike the thought of the cost but want another boat to play in. There will > be no fishing/photography/gunkholeing for me. I want a folder for fast-paced > day trips in well-featured conditions, Greenland skills practice and the like. The Khatsalano in either of its forms (1. Plain has smallish sponsons that you elect to inflate or not inflate, beam is 22 inches if I recall 2. the S version has bigger sponsons that you have to have inflated) would work well for Greenlandic style paddling etc. But they are expensive; around $4K but you can find them used at around $3K, 2 or 3 years old. Since the company has revolutionized its hull and deck material and the way they are mated, prices on used Feathercrafts are likely to soften a bit more. I am okay in the Khatsalano S but prefer more stability yet; so in that end of the Feathercraft family, I prefer the K-1 especially now that they have lengthened it a half a foot and given it a sharp upswept bow akin to that of the Khatsalano. The Khatsalanos in general are a lot of boat that requires the skills of Doug and kindred souls to get the most out of. I have run across several individuals who bought an Khats hoping to be faster and better paddlers but wound up have to add ballast and/or not feel comfortable in rough waters. It really is like anything in kayaking regardless of whether soft sided or hard sided: some boats require more skill level and they won't necessarily make you a better paddler. You have to make yourself a better paddler or be one to start with. I think a lot of people who eye the Khats would be better off in the K-1. The difference in top speed between the two models is something in the order of 5 per cent. Both can be rolled. The K-1 will assemble quicker than the Khats which has more frame members including a secondary buttress frame to deal with its extra length and narrowness. As for other foldables that would meet the requirement you have, it is too bad we weren't talking about this 70 years ago. A number of the folding kayak companies were making very impressive Greenland style kayaks back then. You should see the sweet one that Hans Edi Pawlata (of Pawlata roll fame) was using in the late 20s. Very long and narrow kayaks with minute cockpits and adjustable bracing devices within for good purchase/boatcontact for your knees and hips. Or even 15 years ago when Nautiraid was making a 16 ft by 19 inch Greenlander and weighing around 34 pounds. Most people couldn't paddle it and so the company then took it to 23.5 beam; now the current Greenlander, which has a 27 inch beam, is Greenlander only in name. A fellow offered one of the original Nautiraid 19 inch beam Greenlanders on rec.boats.paddle in the summer of 1999; I don't know whatever happened to it. ralph diaz -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com "Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************Received on Mon Jan 31 2000 - 10:18:36 PST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:30:19 PDT