results of a little experment I did this morning: I paddled 1 mile course using two different paddles, a Lindyl (sp?) that is 218cm. long with a 44cm x 20.5cm blade and a Whetstone that is 220 cm with a 44x17 blade. Lindyl Whetstone cadence 70 spm 80 spm avg sp 4.6 mph 5.3 mph max sp 5.9 6.1 I used a GPS for measurements. Til now I've always thought I was going faster with the the bigger bladeand use it 99% of the time. I guess I'll change. Has anyone else experienced this? And, what kind of cadence do any of you racers achieve and maintain during a race? Paul on Puget Sound *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Good work, but your Experimental Design could be improved. BRC Bradford R. Crain Dept. of Mathematical Sciences Portland State Univ. 724 SW Harrison St. 334 Neuberger Hall Portland, Or. 97201 e-mail: brad_at_mth.pdx.edu phone: 503.725.3127 fax: 503.725.3661 >>> Paul Grant <paragrant_at_webtv.net> 07/15/02 03:14PM >>> results of a little experment I did this morning: I paddled 1 mile course using two different paddles, a Lindyl (sp?) that is 218cm. long with a 44cm x 20.5cm blade and a Whetstone that is 220 cm with a 44x17 blade. Lindyl Whetstone cadence 70 spm 80 spm avg sp 4.6 mph 5.3 mph max sp 5.9 6.1 I used a GPS for measurements. Til now I've always thought I was going faster with the the bigger bladeand use it 99% of the time. I guess I'll change. Has anyone else experienced this? And, what kind of cadence do any of you racers achieve and maintain during a race? *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Interesting results, you should also try that with a skinny native paddle. Also consider that a kayak sprint racer has a different requirement than a long distance or touring kayaker, it is not appropriate to compare what is successful with a racer and assume it will work well for recreational touring. (It is like comparing the fuel economy and top speed of a drag racer with Honda Civic, both do their job well, but they are designed to maximize VERYdifferent results). The paddle has to be optimized for each condition for it to work well, though that is not to say that touring paddles do not have a lot of room for improvement. Peter >>> Paul Grant <paragrant_at_webtv.net> 07/15/02 03:14PM >>> I paddled 1 mile course using two different paddles, a Lindyl (sp?) that is 218cm. long with a 44cm x 20.5cm blade and a Whetstone that is 220 cm with a 44x17 blade. Lindyl Whetstone cadence 70 spm 80 spm avg sp 4.6 mph 5.3 mph max sp 5.9 6.1 *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Paul Grant paragrant_at_webtv.net wrote: <SNIP>>>>>>> I paddled 1 mile course using two different paddles, a Lindyl (sp?) that is 218cm. long with a 44cm x 20.5cm blade and a Whetstone that is 220 cm with a 44x17 blade. Lindyl Whetstone cadence 70 spm 80 spm avg sp 4.6 mph 5.3 mph max sp 5.9 6.1<<<<<<<<<<<< I think the reason for the difference in speed is pretty clear 7/8=.875, 4.6/5.3=.868. It looks like each stroke was moving the kayak just about the same distance (which would be expected for paddles of about the same length. For some reason you took more strokes with the Whetstone though. Was it lighter or had lighter weight blades even if the same weight? Possibly with the shorter blade you were not having to bury it as deep (takes time) to completely submerge the blade or possibly you were using some energy to push the throat area of the longer blade forward in the water due to the pivot point being below the surface and that slowed the stroke rate. Does anyone have any other ideas of why the stroke rate might have been higher with the Whetstone paddle than the Lendahl. 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/ ***************************************************************************
Matt put into words my impression when I read this posting, why was the stroke rate different, and what impact did it have? John Blackburn Matt Broze wrote: > Paul Grant paragrant_at_webtv.net wrote: > <SNIP>>>>>>> I paddled 1 mile course using two different paddles, a Lindyl > (sp?) that > is 218cm. long > with a 44cm x 20.5cm blade and a Whetstone that is 220 cm with a 44x17 > blade. > Lindyl Whetstone > > cadence 70 spm 80 spm > avg sp 4.6 mph 5.3 mph > max sp 5.9 6.1<<<<<<<<<<<< > > I think the reason for the difference in speed is pretty clear 7/8=.875, > 4.6/5.3=.868. It looks like each stroke was moving the kayak just about the > same distance (which would be expected for paddles of about the same length. > For some reason you took more strokes with the Whetstone though. Was it > lighter or had lighter weight blades even if the same weight? Possibly with > the shorter blade you were not having to bury it as deep (takes time) to > completely submerge the blade or possibly you were using some energy to push > the throat area of the longer blade forward in the water due to the pivot > point being below the surface and that slowed the stroke rate. Does anyone > have any other ideas of why the stroke rate might have been higher with the > Whetstone paddle than the Lendahl. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
At 10:01 PM 7/19/02 -0700, John Blackburn wrote: >Matt put into words my impression when I read this posting, why was the stroke >rate different, and what impact did it have? Last spring I gave an extended tryout to a Whetstone T-2, which is apparently the paddle Paul used. Now, I'm not a scientific type, and rely on gut feelings and subjectivity. But, bottom line, the Whetstone seemed happier at a higher stroke rate than a Whetstone T-1, which has a lower aspect ratio but is similar in length in weight. The higher aspect ratio blade just did not seem to have the bite that the lower one had. The T-2 seemed to respond better to a low-angle Greenland style stroke, but was not as happy at a relaxed pace. I remember one time that I was wallowing along at a relaxed stroke, and said to myself, "Let's get this over with," and picked up the stroke rate. I quickly discovered that the blade could support a stroke rate higher than what I was comfortable with with either the T-1, or a wooden Grey Owl that had virtually the same blade shape, but almost a pound more weight. Yet, on another occasion, paddling into a strong wind on a small lake -- probably 25 mph -- it seemed like I was churning up a froth with it without getting much of anywhere. The higher aspect ratio T-2 was definitely the paddle I would choose if I did most of my paddling at a high speed/stroke rate. Yet, the T-1 seemed to suit me better for all-around use. Why? I don't know. I suspect the aspect ratio of the blade has something to do with it. Yet, the Gray Owl, again, virtually the same blade shape, made a good all-around paddle for a couple of years, and definitely had better bite and acceleration than the T-2, although not as condusive to a high stroke rate. I wound up keeping the lower aspect ratio blade T-1, and sending the T-2 back, although there have been times paddling on flat water and wanting to do it at speed that I wished I'd kept the T-2. It's definitely easier for me to maintain a high stroke rate for a longer distance with the T-2 than it is with the T-1. Go figure. -- Wes --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wes Boyd's Kayak Place http://www2.dmci.net/wesboyd/kayak.htm Kayaks for Big Guys (And Gals) | Trip Reports | Places To Go | Boats & Gear --------------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
(Moderator's Note: Content unaltered. Excessive quoting (i.e. headers/footers/sig lines/comments from previous posts, etc.) have been removed. Please edit quoted material and list footers when replying to posts.) I find the biggest difference between the paddles (despite the shape) is in the with of the blades rather than the total lenght. Consedering that we supply the same amount of power, the shorter paddle (Lindyl) is espected to give a higher cadence than the longer (Whetstone), but in this case, the thinner blade of the Whetstone will slide easyer through the water that the wider Lindyl, creating the oposite effect. In other words, shorter lenght = more spm, but narrower blade = less drag which gives more extra power to increment the spm. Weight and shape and flexion should also be considered, anyway. Fernando Lopez Arbarello *** KAYAK ARGENTINA *** http://home.earthlink.net/~kayakargentina -----Original Message----- From: Matt Broze Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Paddle blade size Paul Grant paragrant_at_webtv.net wrote: <SNIP>>>>>>> I paddled 1 mile course using two different paddles Lindyl Whetstone cadence 70 spm 80 spm avg sp 4.6 mph 5.3 mph max sp 5.9 6.1<<<<<<<<<<<< I think the reason for the difference in speed is pretty clear 7/8=.875, 4.6/5.3=.868. It looks like each stroke was moving the kayak just about the same distance (which would be expected for paddles of about the same length. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Fernando Lopez Arbarello [mailto:kayakargentina_at_earthlink.net] wrote: >>>>>>>I find the biggest difference between the paddles (despite the shape) is in the with of the blades rather than the total lenght. Consedering that we supply the same amount of power, the shorter paddle (Lindyl) is espected to give a higher cadence than the longer (Whetstone), but in this case, the thinner blade of the Whetstone will slide easyer through the water that the wider Lindyl, creating the oposite effect. In other words, shorter lenght = more spm, but narrower blade = less drag which gives more extra power to increment the spm. Weight and shape and flexion should also be considered, anyway.<<<<<,, Oops! I read the 17 and 20.5 as blade lengths (in inches) when they were really blade widths in cm. Please ignore the last part of my previous post about depth of blade in the water. Still, I don't see how the narrower blade can be both slipping more (to give a higher cadence) and still be moving the kayak just as far through the water with each stroke (which from the ratios seems to be the case). Slipping more and extra distance shouldn't go together). I'd guess the paddler was paddling harder when using the higher stroke rate. Was anything done (like heart rate or oxygen uptake measurements) to control for the possibility the paddler was using more energy with one paddle than the other. This now seems the most likely possibility for such a large speed difference (unless the paddler was in full race mode and was putting all he had into the stroke with both paddles for the total distance). Paddling all out would serve to even out the effort expended on each run (it would control this possible variable by using all that was available with each run. At least if the paddler was rested between runs going all out should equalize the energy expenditure. More details please, Paul. If the Lendahl was heavier or had a more flexible shaft that may account for some of the difference. 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/ ***************************************************************************
Matt said: >Still, I don't see how the narrower blade > can be both slipping more (to give a higher cadence) and still be moving the > kayak just as far through the water with each stroke (which from the ratios > seems to be the case). Slipping more and extra distance shouldn't go > together). I'd guess the paddler was paddling harder when using the higher > stroke rate. I don't think it is possible to conduct this test with any sort of accuracy. IMHO, it is impossible to do two runs starting with the same amount of energy when the 2nd run is done after the first. In addition, the wind and sea conditions aren't identical either. This introduces too many variables for the test to have any degree of accuracy. Unless you are trying to decide on a paddle for a race (and one trial wouldn't be definitive anyway), I think we need to go back to Wes' way of choosing a paddle and go with what "feels" best. Just my 2 cents, Steve Holtzman *************************************************************************** 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: owner-paddlewise_at_paddlewise.net [mailto:owner-paddlewise_at_paddlewise.net]On Behalf Of Matt Broze .... Still, I don't see how the narrower blade can be both slipping more (to give a higher cadence) and still be moving the kayak just as far through the water with each stroke (which from the ratios seems to be the case). Slipping more and extra distance shouldn't go together).... ------------------------------ Well, the narrower blade is usually less responsive when you try to change the momentum. You will loose performance in sprints and probably while maneuvering in surf. But whith a propper design you should be able to achieve the same final speed than with a wider blade, or even more. There have been discussions here when people commented they could have similar speeds with greenland paddles than with regular. My point is that in this case, as both paddles have almost the same lenght, the slipping might give the extra energy to allow the increment in spm, but this is only a posibility, not a conclusion, and as we both say, there are more variables like weight, shape of the blades, and fexion. All these providing that the paddler was supplying the same amount of power to both paddles. Fernando Lopez Arbarello *** KAYAK ARGENTINA *** http://home.earthlink.net/~kayakargentina *************************************************************************** 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 - 16:33:30 PDT