I'm way behind in reading PW, so forgive me if these points have been made. Michael Daly wrote: (re: hvy vs lite construction & what is strong enough) big snip >Vacuum bagged construction to maximize fiber to resin ratio. snip So they vb to maximize fiber to resin ratio. I sometimes wonder if they aren't vb'ing to maximize the weeny to all paddlers ratio. The engrs may come up with the great new ideas, but isn't it usually the financial types that decide how to impliment them? >Construction workers don't buy the same tools that >weekend woodworkers do either, so I think your observations are valid in >the appropriate context. snip I am a construction worker and the lesson learned about tools is that products designed for professionals are designed to do the job and products designed for non-profs are designed to do some bare minimum of the job that still allows the product to be marketable. The lesson is clearly relevant beyond a narrow context, and I always buy commercial grade in everything, in less it is prohibitively expensive. I would most certainly do so in a vessel which I am hoping to save my life in extreme conditions. Michael had some good comments (as always) about where the strengthing of the kayak should occur and I'm sure I'll read more along this line, but I couldn't avoid harping on the above issues... no offense intended. Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
No, it was a Current Designs Solstic, almost new. The boat was completely replaced, "No questions asked". I don't think they know I have a picture of the incident. The Necky Arluk seam failure on the Storm Island rescue trip was an older boat that had been subjected to a fair bit of use and abuse. It didn't "break-up", but perhaps could have gotten much worse if we hadn't bailed out via the rescue. I sure wish my paddling friend would let Sea Kayaker Magazine release the incident report. It would help me put the whole episode behind myself. BTW, Necky boats have an excellent reputation on our rough BC coast. Good to hear from you Dan. Miss your informative posts and comments. BC'in Ya Doug Lloyd At 05:42 PM 1/9/00 -0800, you wrote: >Doug Lloyd wrote: >... >> 5. I have witnessed catastrophic failure of a vacuumed bagged hull - not a >> good thing. > >Are you referring to that Necky that started to break up prior to your >rescue? The reason that I ask is that Necky boats are NOT vacuum >bagged, and so if this is the incident to which you are referring it >does not serve to illustrate your point. (Necky boats are lightweight, >but without the advantages of vacuum bagging.) If you are referring to >some other boat, please give us the details. > >Dan Hagen *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Doug Lloyd wrote: > > No, it was a Current Designs Solstic, almost new. The boat was completely > replaced, "No questions asked". ... > BTW, Necky boats have an excellent reputation on our rough BC coast. ... That they do. They must have some skilled craftsmen doing the hand layups. Regarding the larger issue, I have always been of the opinion that the heavy weight of British boats is due in part to additional materials that add strength and due in part to excess resin, which mainly just adds weight. In short, they are very strong, but are unnecessarily heavy. Using "modern" methods, it is possible to produce a boat of comparable strength but of lighter weight. At the risk of stating the obvious, this does not imply that all lighter boats are of comparable strength. (I don't think that we disagree on any of the above.) I do believe, however, that some people baby their lightweight boats far more than is necessary. A good one is remarkably difficult to break. I have run my 42-pound kevlar boat into reefs, surfed it onto rocks, dropped it fully loaded onto a rock (I had some help with that!), and used it for numerous seal launchings. I almost always land by running it up onto the beach, sometimes over rocks. Other than a few places where chunks of gel coat have broken out from hard impacts (easily repaired) and lots of gel coat abrasion (also easily repaired) I have had no serious problems. (Knock on wood.) BTW, it has arches of core material glassed into the deck to add stiffness. The result is a reasonably stiff deck without excess resin. Nonetheless, if one is insecure or is an *extreme* boat abuser (for example surfing with rocks for ballast), then it is always possible to order a vacuum-bagged boat with additional layers of material, providing "peace of mind" without unnecessary weight. Happy paddling! Dan Hagen *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
At 06:02 PM 1/9/00 -0500, you wrote: >Doug Lloyd wrote: > >> 5. I have witnessed catastrophic failure of a vacuumed bagged hull - not a >> good thing. Never seen this with a Brit heavy - just extra chiropractor >> visits :-) >> > >Is there a typical failure mode or are they all different? Or are you talking about >one failure? > Yes, this was a one time deal. A patch about 4 x 8 inches just fell away from the hull, allowing water to rush in. A one time event does not suggest vacuumed bagged kayaks are intrinsically no good. If you want, I can find the picture and have it scanned for public consumption. However, for me, one time would be too many if I was out at sea in rough water. I'm not sure what the total occurrence of this type of failure is, or with any related problems that ensue from vacuum bagging where _too_ much resin has been squeezed away. The problem with dealers are they always say the same thing, "This is the first time this has ever happened". >> 6. All the guides/instructors that I know in Southern BC, who work with or >> for stores/manufactures and always custom order their boats (at reduced >> costs) usually ask for extra-heavier lay-ups. What does that tell you about >> their faith in the standard lay-up vacuumed bagged kayak? > >But how much time do they spend in their boats compared to the weekend >warriors? That factors into the decision. I've also found that guides don't >want to baby their boats and will do seal landings in conditions that I'd exit >offshore and walk. Construction workers don't buy the same tools that >weekend woodworkers do either, so I think your observations are valid in >the appropriate context. Not talking about seal landings here - just things like average surf, back deck rescue maneuvers (self and assisted, etc), and blue water touring. The people I'm thinking of in the "trade" have to deal with all the customers coming back with complaints of premature breakage (and the usual response is probably "This is the first time...") These guys and girls _know_ in order to avoid similar problems, they had better go heavier duty. A perfect example is the Gulfstream. The fellow had seen one too many with cracked back decks, etc. He ordered a heavy duty lay-up. It came in just under what the tougher hand-laid British version from P&H weighs. I rather think the vacuum bagging did save some weight in this case, and from what I saw, stiffness was addressed with judicious use of carbon fiber. I'm not a construction worker, but I always buy good tools, as they perform the job in a more efficient, accurate and _safer_ manner when I do do weekend renovations, etc. And it is the "context" that precisely gets me a bit perturbed in your note above. Advertising in North America often suggests to customers that modern light weight kayaks are quality products with the implication that strength for rough water is concomitant with that. Conversely, I also disagree with advertising aimed at getting people into the sport, suggesting light is best and that heavier duty is only needed for the few. To me, that's herding the masses into a lightweight category of boat, thereby restricting participants from expanding to harder use. I get this all the time at the club: "Oh, I don't want to do that, my boat is too flimsy", or "Sorry, rule me out of the surf workshop, my kayak isn't built for that". >> 9. All the above guides/instructors I know, also usually order the extra >> outside seams, especially over the extruded plastic seam. Even then, I have >> seen outside seam failure concurrent with inside seam failure. This can be >> a bit catastrophic in the middle of a gale during a long crossing. For my >> money, an extra outside seam of two layars done with _epoxy resin_ is the >> only way to go. > >But reinforcing may result in local stress concentration that increases the >likelyhood of failure. The key is a balanced design; adding reinforcement to an >existing design may not be a good idea. I'm a former engineer who specialized >in stress analysis techniques and I can't see a reason why inside-only seams >can't work; they don't need to be any stronger than the hull and deck they join. Yes, agreed for the most part. This is part of the reason the Brits stay with straightforward lay-ups. However, as you know, stress concentration can be broadened out such that failure from the "cure" is minimized, yet the goal of strengthening a problem area is taken care of (such as adding kevlar to the bow). BTW, the seam debate has engineers on both sides of the fence. The problem to me, anyway, is that if you have witnessed seam failure, it is very dramatic. The whole seam, once a portion lets go, can unravel like a zipper. I can post a letter from Valley Canoe defending the use of inside seams only, if you like. I disagree with VCP's letter myself, and that is my subjective right. Admittedly, I deal with the sport at a much more extreme level than most, as do some of the people I paddle with, so I've seen a bit of these types of failures over the years. Perhaps people take some of these boats beyond the manufacture's design criteria, yet, the rhetoric you get from the representative dealers suggests their boats should stand up to the most extreme abuse. I will never let myself be caught in a situation again, in a kayak at sea, without extra outside seams - done in epoxy. Everyone else is free to paddle as they wish. >> 10. Kayaks are relatively small vessels, but don't underestimate the >> stresses faced. A fully loaded kayak undergoes incredible flexing motion. >> Next time your kayak is fully loaded, have two people pick the kayak up by >> the ends. As it is slowly lifted by said hardy individuals, look closely at >> the alignment between stern and bow. Whoa, there's a ton of flexing going >> on. Now, think about adding your weight in too, throw in some ruff, choppy >> seas, and then tell me stiff isn't important. (Baidarkas, folders, and >> plastic not withstanding). > >My xc skating skis are almost two meters long, weight barely more than a >kilogram (the pair) and can handle my body weight repeatedly pounding on >them for many seasons without failing. Fiberglass, cap construction (sorta >like a kayak hull) with honeycomb core. Their ability to deal with stress comes >in large part from their flexibility. > >It's important to distinguish two different kinds of stiffness in a kayak. Your >example is one of overall bending of the kayak, supported at the ends. In this >case, the skin of the kayak is not flexing, but is in either tension or compression. >(If held up from the ends, tension on the bottom and compression on top.) >If the skin is subjected to a local load, like hitting a rock, the skin itself flexes >and near the point of impact will be in compression in the gel coat and tension >on the inside. Away from the impact, the flex will reverse to tension in the gel coat >and compression inside. > >The thickness of the skin will have a strong influence on the stiffness where flexure >of the skin is concerned, but will be less significant where tension/compression of >the skin is involved (since the fibers carry the load). Hence, the reputedly thicker >Brit boats should show their stuff in oil canning but should show less advantage over >a vacuum-bagged kayak on overall bending. Skis and kayaks are different animals. Kayaks are more three dimensional than a flat plane of a ski. Too much flexing in a long sea kayak, to my way of thinking, must have a deleterious effect eventually. I can't completely defend my notion scientifically nor from any engineering orientation. I simply am biased in favor of a stiff kayak. Stiff is good. Stiff is fun. Stiff is wonderful. Stiff lasts, stiff survives. If its not stiffy, its iffy! If I want non-stiff performance, I'll get a folder which utilizes to advantage conformity in waves. But I paddle a hardshell kayak, and I want it hard and stiff. I don't want to paddle a jellow-jealopy. I added 10 lbs of epoxy and cloth to my hull, inside seams and new outside seams on my Nordkapp over the last two years, and it is finally a boat I have complete confidence in, in almost any condition now. Its a Nordkapp on Viarga, and I love it. I did redo the inside seams, but spread it out with 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-inch tape. It will take hours of abuse in rough, open sea conditions, taking green water over the bow or clearing right over large breaking whitecaps to the point where the hull is loosing suction, and it doesn't miss a beat. Certainly, this is all far too subjective to be of much further use to Paddlewise. And...my next boat will be wood-strip, built by myself, to my specifications and covered in epoxy so that the whole kayak is a homogeneous unit. Unless you can point me toward a one piece fiberglass kayak, that's the direction I'm taking. Sorry if I used up too much space. As always Mike, you get us re-thinking our posts. Good on you, mate! Anyway, it was blowing 50 knots today, and a 4-5 meter swell was running up island, but I had to help teach Sunday School and finish a Sea Kayaker article - its just not fair God! BC'in Ya Doug Lloyd (who wishes his body wasn't so stiff as he gets older) *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Doug Lloyd wrote: > Yes, this was a one time deal. A patch about 4 x 8 inches just fell away bizarre. I can only imagine that happening with a real bad layup, or a spot that had taken a beating. > what the total occurrence of this type of failure is, or with any related > problems that ensue from vacuum bagging where _too_ much resin has been > squeezed away. My surf ski has too little resin. It's got pinhole leaks in the weave. A friends wabash valley canoe had the same problems - cured with a coat of varnish... I'm living with the leakage of my surf ski, the leaks aren't that bad. I do expect the surf ski to fail catastrophically at some point - it's about 28 pounds and 19.5 feet long, there just isn't enough material there to expect it to take any sort of beating. I've got several vacuum bagged kevlar canoes. They're wonderful craft. When I got my british heavy I asked about getting it in kevlar. At the time there was a $900 charge for the kevlar and the weight dropped from 57 to 48 pounds. $100 a pound? no thanks. A disappointing difference for someone accustomed to 35 pound boats. I've beaten some of my canoes soundly, enough so that I'm surprised they have survived - but then they don't have seams. I think Doug is doing the right thing with his boat. If I paddled like he does I would find a seamless hardshell. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Doug Lloyd wrote: > A perfect > example is the Gulfstream. The fellow had seen one too many with cracked > back decks, etc. He ordered a heavy duty lay-up. It came in just under what > the tougher hand-laid British version from P&H weighs. I rather think the > vacuum bagging did save some weight in this case, and from what I saw, > stiffness was addressed with judicious use of carbon fiber. > IMNSHO, CD uses too light a layup in the deck on all their kayaks. I own a Solstice GTH and enjoy it. The fore deck, being arched near the cockpit and peaked forward seems ok. The rear deck, being flatish, seems just too soft. I trust it, but... It's interesting that CD's standard "expedition grade" options (last I looked) include heavier hulls and outside seams, but no beefed-up decks. > Advertising in North America often > suggests to customers that modern light weight kayaks are quality products > with the implication that strength for rough water is concomitant with > that. Conversely, I also disagree with advertising aimed at getting people > into the sport, suggesting light is best and that heavier duty is only > needed for the few. To me, that's herding the masses into a lightweight > category of boat, thereby restricting participants from expanding to harder > use. I get this all the time at the club: "Oh, I don't want to do that, my > boat is too flimsy", or "Sorry, rule me out of the surf workshop, my kayak > isn't built for that". > That point is well taken, but it's true in other sports. It also works the other way. A certain Canadian Coop based in Vancouver insists on selling xc ski equipment in Ontario that is well suited to BC's interior but not to the much-more-common resorts of the East. Hence I've seen folks in skis that are too wide to fit into the ski tracks. Caveat emptor. It's up to us to spread the word by mouth that the ads should be taken with a grain of salt. > > >> 9. All the above guides/instructors I know, also usually order the extra > >> outside seams, [...] > >But reinforcing may result in local stress concentration that increases the > >likelyhood of failure. The key is a balanced design;[...] > > Yes, agreed for the most part. This is part of the reason the Brits stay > with straightforward lay-ups. You know, the more I think about it, the simplest seam is probably the best. Cosmetically, it would be a harder sell. You've convinced me. We can probably do without the H sections and just toss the idea of trying to get a strong seam with the geometric gyrations of wrapping around the H. It's a subtle difference from an engineering point of view, but heck - simple works. > > Too much flexing in a long sea kayak, to my way > of thinking, must have a deleterious effect eventually. One big problem is fatigue, but that is a tricky one. Fatique failure isn't necessarily coupled to stiffness or lack of it. Hearing those reports of failure that I have seems to suggest that fatigue and/or prior hidden damage is a major contributing factor. Like that big chunk you saw fall off a kayak in rough conditions. > Stiff is good. Stiff is fun. Stiff is wonderful. Stiff lasts, stiff survives. If its not stiffy, its > iffy! [...] You realize you're being emotional about this, don't you? Think about this - an infinitely stiff kayak, being slammed by a wave will transmit _all_ the force to the paddler. Sorta like a car without crumple/impact zones. A kayak only needs to be stiff enough to avoid oil-canning and similar, hydrodynamic messing-up effects. Any stiffer is just cost and weight. > . And...my next boat will be wood-strip, built by > myself, to my specifications and covered in epoxy so that the whole kayak > is a homogeneous unit. Unless you can point me toward a one piece > fiberglass kayak, that's the direction I'm taking. The rambling at the end of my last post led me to think that this is a really good solution. The wood strip lets you fool with curves that a S&G won't allow. Wood is an excellent core material (rot aside). It's relatively affordable and doesn't need exotic tools or autoclaves. You can glass it any way you like and the results may end up georgeous. I've got some crazy ideas for one-piece, fiber-reinforced kayaks, but that can wait. Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
At 01:12 AM 1/10/00 EST, you wrote: >Plastic! Plastic! Plastic! > >How many times do I have to say it? > >Duane Strosaker >Not needing to worry about his >plastic kayak falling apart >in Southern California! Duane, Down boy! Yes, you do have a point. Rotomoldeding truly makes for a one-piece kayak. Doug L *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Mike, et al: (Lots of snips) Mike said: >IMNSHO, CD uses too light a layup in the deck on all their kayaks. I own a >Solstice GTH and enjoy it. The fore deck, being arched near the cockpit and >peaked forward seems ok. The rear deck, being flatish, seems just too soft. >I trust it, but... > >It's interesting that CD's standard "expedition grade" options (last I looked) >include heavier hulls and outside seams, but no beefed-up decks. I think that is the biggest beef people have with the CD kayaks, and an area often overlooked. I've seen the shallow arched decks fail to. Nothing is immune if you underbuild - but then people want lightweight. When I'm in the CD retail connected store, watching customers get qualified for a possible sale, the number one question is "how light is it?" >> Advertising in North America often >> suggests to customers that modern light weight kayaks are quality products >> with the implication that strength for rough water is concomitant with >> that. Conversely, I also disagree with advertising aimed at getting people >> into the sport, suggesting light is best and that heavier duty is only >> needed for the few [...] >> > >That point is well taken, but it's true in other sports. It also works the other >way. A certain Canadian Coop based in Vancouver insists on selling xc >ski equipment in Ontario that is well suited to BC's interior but not to the >much-more-common resorts of the East. Hence I've seen folks in skis that >are too wide to fit into the ski tracks. Caveat emptor. It's up to us to >spread the word by mouth that the ads should be taken with a grain of salt. I have sort of a similar problem with mountain bikes. Some of th bikes from California a great out in the Moab Desert - wide trails, technical at times, but not too severe. Here in the heavy, steep rainforest trails of the Pacific Northwest, replete with logs and roots galore, some of these American frames break with regularity. Our Canadian bikes are heavy and ugly, but man, do they shine in the rough. >> >> >> 9. All the above guides/instructors I know, also usually order the extra >> >> outside seams, [...] >> >But reinforcing may result in local stress concentration that increases the >> >likelyhood of failure. The key is a balanced design;[...] >> >> Yes, agreed for the most part. This is part of the reason the Brits stay >> with straightforward lay-ups. > >You know, the more I think about it, the simplest seam is probably the best. >Cosmetically, it would be a harder sell. You've convinced me. We can >probably do without the H sections and just toss the idea of trying to get a >strong seam with the geometric gyrations of wrapping around the H. >It's a subtle difference from an engineering point of view, but heck - simple >works. People like the H section seems. They are sexy, and technical looking. I've seen guys salivate over them in the retail CD store. Add a magenta gelcoat color with the slick black extrusions, and you have a sale!!! > >> Stiff is good. Stiff is fun. Stiff is wonderful. Stiff lasts, stiff survives. If its not stiffy, its >> iffy! [...] > >You realize you're being emotional about this, don't you? I think I called it subjective. >Think about this - an infinitely stiff kayak, being slammed by a wave will transmit _all_ >the force to the paddler. Sorta like a car without crumple/impact zones. > >A kayak only needs to be stiff enough to avoid oil-canning and similar, hydrodynamic >messing-up effects. Any stiffer is just cost and weight. > I'm not going to argue with an engineer, especially one who has actually done stress tests. And I did cotton on to your earlier post about compression and tension. Do try to remember Mike, I'm the guy who surfs and storm paddles with rocks in his head, er, I mean kayak. Also, most of the Brit boat dealers talk up the stiff hyperbole too. Lets just say that I'd rather have stiffer than more flexible. Where the best compromise between the two extremes is, I don't know. I do know that my boat is very stiff now, and it feels wonderful. >> . And...my next boat will be wood-strip, built by >> myself, to my specifications and covered in epoxy so that the whole kayak >> is a homogeneous unit. Unless you can point me toward a one piece >> fiberglass kayak, that's the direction I'm taking. > >The rambling at the end of my last post led me to think that this is a really good solution. >The wood strip lets you fool with curves that a S&G won't allow. Wood is an excellent >core material (rot aside). It's relatively affordable and doesn't need exotic tools or autoclaves. >You can glass it any way you like and the results may end up georgeous. > >I've got some crazy ideas for one-piece, fiber-reinforced kayaks, but that can wait. I'm just a working stiff (can't get away from that word!). If I did have unlimited funds, I'd order a 70 lb Nordkapp in Kevlar and Carbon Fiber. I'd have them leave off about an inch along the seam line, of both the deck and hull, so that an 2 inch outside seam could be run along without being applied to the gelcoat. It would be an expensive boat. BC'in Ya Doug Lloyd *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
>From Doug, <snipped, everywhere> When I'm in the CD retail connected store, watching customers get qualified for a possible sale, the number one question is "how light is it?" I'm just a working stiff (can't get away from that word!). If I did have unlimited funds, I'd order a 70 lb Nordkapp in Kevlar and Carbon Fiber. I'd have them leave off about an inch along the seam line, of both the deck and hull, so that an 2 inch outside seam could be run along without being applied to the gelcoat. It would be an expensive boat. BC'in Ya Doug Lloyd *************************************************************************** i listened to lots of folks before buying a kayak. one of the older fellows had the view of Brit heavy being best. nothing was better than his Nordkapp, that's the one he always paddled. now just 3 years later his boat is for sale. he tells all the great things about it to all the new folks looking for boats... however, he traded it for a much lighter boat that is easier to haul between car and water. light boats can be suitable for the conditions that the vast majority of paddlers encounter... might not fair so well in a hurricane. when in a storm, prepare for a storm. when bird watching, bring binoculars and maybe a camera. having said that. if someone is tired of their 70 lb Nordkapp and wants to see it cheap, let me know first. thanks. bye bye bliven *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
In a message dated 1/9/00 10:15:27 PM Pacific Standard Time, Strosaker_at_aol.com writes: > Plastic! Plastic! Plastic! > How many times do I have to say it? > > Duane Strosaker > Not needing to worry about his plastic kayak falling apart in Southern California! Until you truly believe it, Duane. (^: Those who make or sell only plastic KNOW they are vastly superior when talking them up to others. The rest of us know that you choose the tool for the job. Poly boats may have better impact resistance when relatively new and are definitely cheaper, but they have their drawbacks as well. Points in fact: 1. In the shop, I have repaired more holes in plastic boats than glass boats. Most are from impact with rocks, a lot are from dragging the boats. One was 4-inches square, caused by a light bulb (melted). Another was in the chine area of a relatively-new Sea Lion, beneath the seat, caused by side-surfing about 8 feet into a rock off the coast of Sta. Rosa Island -- 8 inches long, gapping 1-1/2 inches at the center, edges curled inward an inch -- ugly. 2. There is a beautiful plastic Brit poly (like the one you just sold) snorkeling in or about one of the caves on Sta. Cruz Island, accompanied by a poly SOT. Both were killed by a large sneaker wave. Six to eight inches of the bow was snapped off the SK when it went over the falls of the wave and met up with a rather permanent part of the island, making it impossible to recover the boat. 3. A common acquaintance (James) had a relatively new Sea Lion fold on him in surf that a good glass boat wouldn't worry about. He was taking a spanking in dumpers around 8 feet or so when the boat folded, oil-canning in at the deck enough to pin his legs, pressing down hard enough to really get his attention. The deck popped back out before he would have needed to wet exit (had his roll failed), but it makes you wonder whether another 6 inches on the wave might have dislocated his knees or broken a leg. )^: Yuk! 4. We have dropped at least three glass boats off the top arms of our trailer (about 7 feet) directly onto the pavement, scoring one easily-repaired broken seam (inside-glass only / no longer carried by us) and a few scratches, but no real damage. I have a friend who had her glass boat part company with the rack at highway speeds, tumble and skid to a stop on the road, then paddle ten miles the same day, having sustained only slight scratching. Composites aren't my choice for island caving or serious rock gardens either, but it is silly to think that a well-constructed composite boat cannot take a lot of abuse. Plastic is plastic, is plastic -- period. It is heavier, less rigid, slower and getting slower with every drag or skid over the rocks, subject to temporary or permanent damage from heat and deformation, and -- yes, has a little better impact resistance. And yes -- it is also much cheaper. Keep paddling and stirring the waters (ocean and Paddlewise) Harold *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Mike McNally wrote: > I'm way behind in reading PW, so forgive me if these points have been made. > > Michael Daly wrote: (re: hvy vs lite construction & what is strong enough) > big snip > >Vacuum bagged construction to maximize fiber to resin ratio. > snip > > So they vb to maximize fiber to resin ratio. I sometimes wonder if they > aren't vb'ing to maximize the weeny to all paddlers ratio. The engrs may > come up with the great new ideas, but isn't it usually the financial types > that decide how to impliment them? > Well, the resin is pretty expensive, so minimizing it is in the interests of the manufacturer. It also helps, so I've been lead to understand, to fewer problems with air pockets and subsequent delamination etc. Therefore, fewer rejects and returns. Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:07 PDT