ralph diaz wrote: <SNIP>>>>>>The Puffin moves at about the speed of the Folbot Aleut, a mini folding kayak. Probably one of the mini-Nautiraids would also be in the general range of the Puffin. But on these comparisons, I am working from memory as I have not paddled an Aleut nor the small Nautiraid in years. The Puffin is at about half the weight of the Aleut (literature says 39 but it is probably closer to 34 now) and 15 pounds lighter than the small Nautiraid.<<<<<<< Are you talking about the 14' Puffin II? I paddled the 10'4" Puffin about a year ago. The owner really liked it but it was sure not my "cup of tea". The advertising said it weighed 19 lbs., My scale said 21 lbs., still a pretty impressive weight. It might be nicer on a river as tracking was minimal. It took me 52 seconds to sprint it the length of my test course. For comparison, a Nautiraid Alu 14 Expedition took 42 seconds, A 15'1" Raid I took 40 seconds, the 12'6" Miniraid took 45 seconds. The fastest fiberglass single sea kayak I've tested on this course (Seda Glider) took 34 seconds and the average of 138 fiberglass and plastic North American touring/sea and rec. designs I tested was 38 seconds. The 9'8" Stearns K-116 inflatable (~30 lbs.) took me 58 seconds and both turned slightly quicker and tracked much better than the 10'4" Puffin. Ralph, I suspect you tested the 14' Puffin II double as a single. My sprint numbers for Feathercrafts were K-1--38sec., Khatsalano S--37, K-Lite--44, Kahuna--40. That all said, unless you are pushing at top speed my sprint numbers don't mean much. Of course, if your kayak's top speed is less than the average touring speed of your paddling partners you won't keep up with them no matter how strong you are. Matt Broze, who is a lot less shaken-up than one might think (especially those who watch the extreme but isolated examples of damage featured on the news). The old Sears building (Starbucks) did not fall down as someone suggested here, but some bricks in the upper railing fell many stories and did some damage at the bottom of the building. http://www.marinerkayaks.com *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Broze" <mkayaks_at_oz.net> > > Are you talking about the 14' Puffin II? I paddled the 10'4" Puffin about a > year ago. The owner really liked it but it was sure not my "cup of tea". The > advertising said it weighed 19 lbs., My scale said 21 lbs., still a pretty > impressive weight. It might be nicer on a river as tracking was minimal. It > took me 52 seconds to sprint it the length of my test course. No, it was the smaller Puffin. I have not seen the longer one yet. Your figures for pretty much fit what I thought they might be. Remember regarding the Mini-Raid that I felt it might be in the same range but was working from memory since it was very long ago that I looked at the latter. I don't know if you paddled the Folbot Aleut. My guess, if the Puffin was 52, that the Aleut would be about 51 or 50, i.e. real close. > That all said, unless you are pushing at top speed my sprint numbers don't > mean much. Of course, if your kayak's top speed is less than the average > touring speed of your paddling partners you won't keep up with them no > matter how strong you are. The Puffin is not a boat to paddle in mixed company with people in much sleeker boats. Same with Folbot Aleut. Other boats however will do nicely. For example, while you have the K-Light at 44 sprint and the average sprint of a range of hardshells at 38, I have found that the K-Light could more than keep up in mixed company unless it were really fast mixed company. It seems to cruise well, and not just for me, but for others as well. Around here in mixed groups, the K-Lights seem to do just fine. As for the other Feathercrafts (you have them at Khats 37 seconds; K-1 38 sec.; Kahuna 40; K-Light at 44 sec), I felt that the K-1 was only a smidgen slower than the Khats and it seems to hold true in your sprint test. I felt that the Kahuna would be exactly half way between the K-1 and the K-Light. I guess I was conservative by a few seconds. It makes the Kahuna all the more attractive. ralph diaz *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
I wrote: > That all said, unless you are pushing at top speed my sprint numbers don't > mean much. Of course, if your kayak's top speed is less than the average > touring speed of your paddling partners you won't keep up with them no > matter how strong you are. Ralph responded: >>>>>The Puffin is not a boat to paddle in mixed company with people in much sleeker boats. Same with Folbot Aleut. Other boats however will do nicely. For example, while you have the K-Light at 44 sprint and the average sprint of a range of hardshells at 38, I have found that the K-Light could more than keep up in mixed company unless it were really fast mixed company. It seems to cruise well, and not just for me, but for others as well. Around here in mixed groups, the K-Lights seem to do just fine.<<<<< I couldn't agree more with Ralph, one of the reasons I added the above addendum to my list of sprint times was so someone wouldn't misinterpret the sprint times as a way of rating anything meaningful about a kayak other than its potential top speed for a strong paddler putting all he can into it for less than a minute. In the real world the K-Light's shorter waterline length helps it paddle easier at normal cruising speeds. This is because there is less wetted surface (and therefore less friction) with a shorter kayak like the K-Light (other things being equal). The K-Light is plenty long for a smaller or weaker paddler and its less wetted surface can be a big plus in keeping up with paddlers cruising in bigger kayaks. For those interested, there is a more detailed discussion of this point in the FAQ's of www.marinerkayaks.com. The K-Light will travel rather easily at up to 4 knots and that is faster than most folks travel when cruising. I thought the K-Light was a wonderful little kayak and was quite concerned when I heard it was going to be discontinued with the introduction of the longer Kahuna. Now that I've paddled the Kahuna I can see why Feathercraft made this decision. It would just confuse folks and complicate the marketplace to have both. They are very similar and there will be very few paddlers for whom the K-Light would be the better kayak. I suspect the Kahuna will make an even bigger dent into Feathercraft's K-1 sales than the K-Light did though. Ralph added: >>>>>As for the other Feathercrafts (you have them at Khats 37 seconds; K-1 38 sec.; Kahuna 40; K-Light at 44 sec), I felt that the K-1 was only a smidgen slower than the Khats and it seems to hold true in your sprint test. <<<<<<SNIP> Again, our top speed observations might be confusing to someone who thinks they relate directly to paddling ease. I think the Khats slips through the water with considerable more ease than the K-1 due to among other things its narrowness and lower wetted surface. However, its finer ends combined with a similar waterline length to the K-1 mean that in a sprint the Khats effective waterline length is less and therefore its top speed isn't as much faster as it could have been (with some sacrifice to its cruising ease) if it were longer or had fuller ends. The Khats is one of the few folding kayaks I have found that has the same great glide between strokes as a good hard-shell kayak. Matt Broze http://www.marinerkayaks.com *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Broze" <mkayaks_at_oz.net> > Again, our top speed observations might be confusing to someone who thinks > they relate directly to paddling ease. I think the Khats slips through the > water with considerable more ease than the K-1 due to among other things its > narrowness and lower wetted surface. However, its finer ends combined with a > similar waterline length to the K-1 mean that in a sprint the Khats > effective waterline length is less and therefore its top speed isn't as much > faster as it could have been (with some sacrifice to its cruising ease) if > it were longer or had fuller ends. The Khats is one of the few folding > kayaks I have found that has the same great glide between strokes as a good > hard-shell kayak. The only boat that I ever felt would glide what seemed forever between strokes was the Klepper Aerius 2000 in its early form. I was the first person (other than one guy in the factory) to paddle its prototype back in 1993 in Bavaria and I couldn't believe what was happening in so much glide between strokes. I tested it in different directions to make certain that it wasn't wind or anything else effecting this. I would have chaulked it up to too much bratwurst and beer consumed in copious amounts before paddling but when the boat later went into production, I kept getting feedback from users about the phenomenon. That boat had an extremely tight skin to frame fit, painfully so for anyone assembling the thing. The only way to compare it would be the feel of a perfectly waxed XC ski when you got the wax just right. 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 - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Broze" <mkayaks_at_oz.net> > I couldn't agree more with Ralph, one of the reasons I added the above > addendum to my list of sprint times was so someone wouldn't misinterpret the > sprint times as a way of rating anything meaningful about a kayak other than > its potential top speed for a strong paddler putting all he can into it for > less than a minute. In the real world the K-Light's shorter waterline length > helps it paddle easier at normal cruising speeds. This is because there is > less wetted surface (and therefore less friction) with a shorter kayak like > the K-Light (other things being equal). The K-Light is plenty long for a > smaller or weaker paddler and its less wetted surface can be a big plus in > keeping up with paddlers cruising in bigger kayaks. For those interested, > there is a more detailed discussion of this point in the FAQ's of > www.marinerkayaks.com. I got an early lesson in this, which also points to something else...matching boat to paddler size. I had just started my newsletter and was testing the Nautiraid Mini-Raid. I had just met Randy Henriksen, now a prominent kayak dealer in the Big Apple. He wasn't in the business yet but he and his wife, Wendy, had bought 2 Nautiraid Raid 1's, a fuller size foldable model. Since I had not been in a single Raid, I invited them for a paddle along the Palisades across from Northern Manhattan. We paddled about 4 miles with me in the Mini-Raid and Wendy and Randy in the larger Nautiraid singles. She is a small paddler, about 5 ft tall and very slight. She kept lagging behind us even though we weren't racing, just cruising. For the trip back I switched boats with her (I wanted to see the Raid 1) and she got in the Mini-Raid. Well, what a difference! Randy and I constantly would fall behind Wendy if he and I were talking and weren't concentrating on our paddling. 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 - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
on 3/1/01 4:53 PM, Matt Broze at mkayaks_at_oz.net wrote: snip > took 40 seconds, the 12'6" Miniraid took 45 seconds. The fastest fiberglass > single sea kayak I've tested on this course (Seda Glider) took 34 seconds > and the average of 138 fiberglass and plastic North American touring/sea and > rec. designs I tested was 38 seconds. The 9'8" Stearns K-116 inflatable (~30 snip Matt, Can you explain a little about why the Seda Glider is faster than the other sea kayaks you have tested? Some day I'd like to build another skin boat just for use in local races. I'm wonder about the shape, width, and length. Narrow and rounded hulls are faster but how do I decide on the length? How much rocker? Which would be faster, a modified Baidarka design or a modified Greenland design? I know you could write a couple books answering these questions, and you don't have time for that, but maybe a few comments to cover some basics for us. I've always been interested in the speed question on Baidarka vs. Greenland design. Certain Baidarka fanatics claim these Aleut boats have an advantage. They quote Captain Cook and other mariners in the 1700's and 1800's who wrote about the speed of the Aleuts. I have a feeling the speed had as much to do with the physical strength and endurance of the Aleuts as it did with the design of the Baidarka. Imagine the result of many generations (over several thousand years) who's existence depended on a life at sea in the Baidarka. I believe George Dyson wrote an article for one of the science journals (does anyone have this information? I think it was Scientific American) in which he describes the bone structure of the Aleut. The muscle attachment locations on certain bones in the upper body were larger than normal which was an indication of larger upper body muscles. Well, Matt, if you could at least comment on the Seda Glider. Comments from anyone else on any of the above would be welcome. Okay, back to doing my taxes. Rex *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Rex Roberton wrote: > I believe George Dyson wrote an article for one of > the science journals (does anyone have this information? I think it was > Scientific American) in which he describes the bone structure of the Aleut. > The muscle attachment locations on certain bones in the upper body were > larger than normal which was an indication of larger upper body muscles. Hi Rex, the George Dyson article is in the April 2000 issue of Scientific Amercian, however I don't think it is on-line on the web, and you are correct - the article has a picture showing the upper-arm bones of an Aluet hunter and of a Russian non-kayaking male. The comment below the picture states that the Aluetian's arm bone is both larger and densier than the Russian's and that this so-called "rugosity" indicated that the Aluetian had more muscle attachment points and therefore a greater muscle mass. Bottom line - the comment attributed the strenth and stamina of the typical Aluetian as responsible for their speed in a kayak. Stating that some were capable of paddling at eight knots (or faster)for long distances. But did the kayaking develope the muscles or were the kayaks designed to match the strenth of the people who built and used them? the article is about 8 pages long and worth a trip to the library to read - as it discusses more than Aluetian humerus bone mass. Discussing culture, use and design (three part keels etc)of the baidarka. Regards, David *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
I'm sure the Baidarka would be faster, rounder bottoms and fuller volume ends underwater would be the major reasons. The Glider's heritage is racing. The design, like all Seda's sea kayaks, is based on Olympic flatwater racing kayaks. Olympic kayaks are optimized for top speeds and strong paddlers. There is a side benefit when using this racing heritage for shorter sea kayaks because they are the ones most likely to be paddled up against their hull speed by the average kayaker. Before designing your racing Baidarka download the design software and drag prediction spreadsheet from our website and watch what happens to the drag numbers as you alter certain parameters in the design. We integrated the programs so this is very easy to do. You will want to also design the optimum for the speed range you are going to be racing the kayak at. Basically for a fast kayak you want to keep the wetted surface low (the software will help you do this) while making the kayak long enough and full enough ended that it doesn't get trapped by its own waves (hull speed) until you are pushing it to slightly faster speeds than you are likely to be racing it at. The resulting optimums will be different for paddlers of varying strengths and endurances. I'd guess you'd want a very narrow kayak with a waterline length in the of about 17 to 18 feet long and a rounded bottom with a little rocker especially at the bow. Racing kayaks usually have a prismatic coefficient in the range of .62 to .64. Call me or stop by (or e-mail me your designs) and I'll critique them for you before you build. I remember some very "creative" articles George Dyson did for The New York Times and Sea Kayaker Magazine about bifed bows and whale oils. Later after some (reality) testing with Greg Barton paddling (as maybe an example of an average Eskimo) he changed his ideas some and there was a video being made for the Discover Channel or National Geographic. (It may have been National Geo. or Discover magazine that had the later article). I think I have that program on tape. George pretty much disproved his earlier hypothesis with the tests (as I had predicted), but creative genius that he is, he quickly came up with some new theories. I videotaped the testing myself as well and supplied the Glider used for comparisons with the Baidarkas in the tests. Matt Broze http://www.marinerkayaks.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Rex Roberton [mailto:rexrob_at_mac.com] > Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 11:10 AM > To: Matt Broze; Paddlewise > Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Foldable Kayak Mail List Announcement > (PakboatPuffin branch) > > > on 3/1/01 4:53 PM, Matt Broze at mkayaks_at_oz.net wrote: > > snip > > took 40 seconds, the 12'6" Miniraid took 45 seconds. The > fastest fiberglass > > single sea kayak I've tested on this course (Seda Glider) took > 34 seconds > > and the average of 138 fiberglass and plastic North American > touring/sea and > > rec. designs I tested was 38 seconds. The 9'8" Stearns K-116 > inflatable (~30 > snip > > Matt, > > Can you explain a little about why the Seda Glider is faster than > the other > sea kayaks you have tested? > > Some day I'd like to build another skin boat just for use in local races. > I'm wonder about the shape, width, and length. Narrow and > rounded hulls are > faster but how do I decide on the length? How much rocker? > Which would be > faster, a modified Baidarka design or a modified Greenland design? > > I know you could write a couple books answering these questions, and you > don't have time for that, but maybe a few comments to cover some > basics for > us. > > I've always been interested in the speed question on Baidarka vs. > Greenland > design. Certain Baidarka fanatics claim these Aleut boats have an > advantage. They quote Captain Cook and other mariners in the 1700's and > 1800's who wrote about the speed of the Aleuts. I have a feeling > the speed > had as much to do with the physical strength and endurance of the > Aleuts as > it did with the design of the Baidarka. Imagine the result of many > generations (over several thousand years) who's existence > depended on a life > at sea in the Baidarka. I believe George Dyson wrote an article > for one of > the science journals (does anyone have this information? I think it was > Scientific American) in which he describes the bone structure of > the Aleut. > The muscle attachment locations on certain bones in the upper body were > larger than normal which was an indication of larger upper body muscles. > > Well, Matt, if you could at least comment on the Seda Glider. > Comments from > anyone else on any of the above would be welcome. > > Okay, back to doing my taxes. > > Rex > *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
I don't see anything inherently faster in a "baidarka" than a "greenland" design. The terms are too general. It is like saying kayaks are faster than canoes and then expecting a Keowee to beat an Olympic sprint canoe. It is the design of the specific example that matters, not the arbitrarily determined style of design they fall into. While "baidarkas" tend to have fuller ends than "greenland" designs, there is no universal law forcing that to be the case. If you want a "greenland" boat with a rounder bottom, just design and build it that way. The design of the hull is under the control of the designer, what is above the waterline is just styling. Many different styles can be attached to the same efficient below-water hull shape. Most of this styling will have little or no effect on the flat-water speed of the boat, beyond the differences in weight and windage you might get. If you want a fast kayak, work on a good hull shape and then feel free to style it as you see fit. The boat shape above the waterline will effect handling in rough water, but the modeling software does not try to predict this. At 2:47 PM -0800 3/3/01, Matt Broze wrote: >I'm sure the Baidarka would be faster, rounder bottoms and fuller volume >ends underwater would be the major reasons. -- Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 (860) 659-8847 *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Even when most of the Baidarka photographs in the net show flatwater szenerie, I believe that the first criteria in designing a modern greenland kayak or a baidarka should be their seaworthyness. Consequently the main criteria for speed in sea conditions is the ability of the design to stand the test of surf, currents, overfalls, strong winds etc. (The flatwater-fans will find some very fine and super fast original flatwater eskimo designs for their job if they study the rich scale of eskimo designs.) Just do a circ around the Faroe Islands and you know wether the design meets the criteria of speed under real conditions or not. Yes, I would be very interested to know more about the behavior of the baidarka under such conditions, but remember that Baidarkas and Greenlanders were designed for different purposes and for different sea conditions by different cultures. (The original Greenlander hadn't been designed to transport heavy bag - or heavy camping equipment e.g.) So I agree, that it is very difficult to compare these designs. On the other hand, I have never seen an original Greenland kayak with a "rounder" bottom. Try to make the bottom of an Angmagssalik round, you will have to add some inches to the width in order to regain the same (small) initial stability and so on and so on. It won't still be a Greenlander in the end of the day and - more important - it won't behave like a Greenlander in the wave. Modern designers are free to design kayaks as they like, and these designs may be excellent. But in respect to those who applied their designs for an eternal patent times ago, I feel a modern design shouldn't be called Greenlander or Baidarka if their nature is changed. And finally: what is the real sense in comparing the flatwater speed of Greenland "styled" boats with Baidarka "styled"..., with the same modern hull under water? George *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:20 PDT