Re: [Paddlewise] [PaddleWise] Skin on Frame Boats...the dead and the un-dead!

In a message dated 9/22/2004 6:38:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
pac_at_premier1.net writes:


> as I wrote, it uses less materials and is generally weighs about half as 
> much
> as production hard shells, it takes much less labor to build by hand, it 
> cost
> very little in materials, and it allows some flex in the hull which can have
> advantages in rough water.  BTW I meant to write that SOF does NOT lend it
> self to production very well because of the amount of hand labor involved.
> 

I thought this would get to the opinion stage of what is better for what ever 
reasons. One can build a boat in glass, wood strip or plywood and decide 
their way is right for themselves and others, but the superior thing is overboard. 
I know SOF only paddlers, more skilled AND better looking than I, that agree 
with you. But it is still an opinion. Hardshell only paddlers have as many and 
varied reasons for creating a case of superiority for their chosen craft.

> 
> >How does an SOF PERFORM better than a hard-shell by virtue of its
> construction process?
> 
> Become of the flex of the skin and frame, there are conditions that it is 
> more
> controllable.  A SOF hull feels "alive" around you, like the flex of a ski
> boot, or the suspension on a car.  A hard shell feels "dead".  My 
> obersvation
> after doing side by side comparison in the same conditions.

As a dedicated paddler to both hardshells and SOF I can argue that the 
undulating, snaky, slinky ride of an SOF has its detractors for that very reason. 
They or we have no control issues in rough water because of the hardshell, in 
fact turning on the top of swells or waves is easier as the hull doesn't try to 
conform to it. Yours or my observations are still opinions, not facts.


> 
> >Could I replicate an outstanding SOF design in glass and make it perform as
> well?
> 
> IT has been tried and they most definitely DO NOT perform the same.  The 
> flex
> makes a big difference.

Great point from both you and Matt. 

> 
> >If I then added bulkheads and hatches, (to reduce foldable volume), could I
> then argue it was safer?


I meant floodable volume, sorry.

> 
> I have done this on a SOF, you have to get creative with the bulkhead to 
> still
> allow flex in the skin/hull but still have it water tight.  the only bad 
> thing
> beside the extra work, was the extra weight (about 5 lb.).  But is still 
> acted
> like an SOF, not a "dead" hard shell.

"Dead" is so dramatic, or is that undramatic? I notice when waves grow, how 
un-dead people become due to their twitchiness in hardshells. You can observe 
it in the waist and foredeck, or minimal range in side to side movement. Lots 
of folks come alive in that environment, though, and seek it out as often as 
possible.That is a specific example of how hardshells are the un-dead. So, can 
we stop with the superiority thing?

Rob G
***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************