Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
posted to rec.boats.paddle.touring
|
|||
|
|||
17 vs 19 , Lake Huron
Drew Cutter wrote:
I'm looking to do some paddle (sea kayak) on lake Huron. For 3-5 days worth of camping. Should i buy a 17 foot (overnight kayak) or go for expedition size (19') kayak ? Expedition boats are good for one thing, expeditions. Their length and high volume tends to make for an ill-handling boat when they're paddled without a load of gear inside. They're also more prone to wind-related control issues. IMO, you should avoid buying one unless you plan to do mainly long trips. A 17' boat has considerably higher capacity than the largest backpack, so it can easily handle the gear and supplies necessary for a week or more, especially since you'll have access to fresh water and won't need to carry much (get a GOOD water filter). You'll also find it to be far more useful for general paddling. |
#2
posted to rec.boats.paddle.touring
|
|||
|
|||
Weight ballast for HV boats; Was: 17 vs 19 , Lake Huron
"Brian Nystrom" wrote in message news:vgcOg.2407$SQ1.867@trndny09... Drew Cutter wrote: I'm looking to do some paddle (sea kayak) on lake Huron. For 3-5 days worth of camping. Should i buy a 17 foot (overnight kayak) or go for expedition size (19') kayak ? Expedition boats are good for one thing, expeditions. Their length and high volume tends to make for an ill-handling boat when they're paddled without a load of gear inside. I have a 17.5 Eddyline Nighthawk, which is a high-volume expedition boat. And even though it does handle better loaded I am not dissatisfied with it's handling while empty either. I live in the SF Bay area so have used it under windy conditions, though I do have to drop the skeg down in those conditions. But I was wondering what people do to compensate for that when they don't really need any gear, such as just an exercise paddle. It would have to be something that was easy and quick to load and unload as keeping the boat loaded is impractical for lifting it on and off the car, and I don't want to spend a lot of time packing the boat with stuff I don't need other then for ballast. It would also have to be something that didn't shift around and screw up the balance. I've thought off (but have yet to try) using adhesive Velcro strips inside the front and rear compartments to hold ankle weights in place, it wouldn't be a great expense to try as I already have the weights for PT. Now that I read what I have written it sounds a little silly but... -- -Don Ever had one of those days where you just felt like: http://cosmoslair.com/BadDay.html ? (Eating the elephant outside the box, one paradigm at a time) |
#3
posted to rec.boats.paddle.touring
|
|||
|
|||
Weight ballast for HV boats; Was: 17 vs 19 , Lake Huron
Don Freeman wrote:
But I was wondering what people do to compensate for that when they don't really need any gear, such as just an exercise paddle. I carry so much junk on a day paddle (1st aid kit, lunch, odds and ends) that I have just enough ballast to make a difference. Since I keep all my basic paddling gear in a mesh bag, just throwing that in adds several pounds. A friend has glued some straps (D rings and webbing with side-release buckles) to hold down some ballast. He uses a sand filled bottle (old four liter windshield washer fluid) as ballast. He finds that in the day hatch is just right. If you don't want to carry the weight around, taking empty bottles and filling them with water at the launch makes for a reasonable ballast. It's a good idea to have something to hold them in place in the kayak so they don't shift under way. Mike |
#4
posted to rec.boats.paddle.touring
|
|||
|
|||
Weight ballast for HV boats; Was: 17 vs 19 , Lake Huron
"Michael Daly" wrote in message ... Don Freeman wrote: But I was wondering what people do to compensate for that when they don't really need any gear, such as just an exercise paddle. If you don't want to carry the weight around, taking empty bottles and filling them with water at the launch makes for a reasonable ballast. It's a good idea to have something to hold them in place in the kayak so they don't shift under way. I've got a large dry bag that would work perfectly (I bought it back before I discovered that several small bags were better then one big one), it shouldn't shift around too much but it can be easily secured (I figure right behind the rear bulkhead would be best) if it does. Thanks for the idea. -Don |
#5
posted to rec.boats.paddle.touring
|
|||
|
|||
Weight ballast for HV boats; Was: 17 vs 19 , Lake Huron
Don Freeman wrote:
"Brian Nystrom" wrote in message news:vgcOg.2407$SQ1.867@trndny09... Drew Cutter wrote: I'm looking to do some paddle (sea kayak) on lake Huron. For 3-5 days worth of camping. Should i buy a 17 foot (overnight kayak) or go for expedition size (19') kayak ? Expedition boats are good for one thing, expeditions. Their length and high volume tends to make for an ill-handling boat when they're paddled without a load of gear inside. I have a 17.5 Eddyline Nighthawk, which is a high-volume expedition boat. And even though it does handle better loaded I am not dissatisfied with it's handling while empty either. I live in the SF Bay area so have used it under windy conditions, though I do have to drop the skeg down in those conditions. Although the Nighthawk 17.5 is a boat designed for paddlers that "shop at big and tall shops" according to the Eddyline site, I wouldn't put it in the expedition boat class. It's designed as a touring boat for bigger people. If you don't have any handling problems with it when it's just carrying your day gear, enjoy it and don't worry about ballast. Since it doesn't have a day hatch, you may want to use a float bag in the stern compartment to keep your day gear positioned as close the to the rear bulkhead as possible and keep it from shifting. |
#6
posted to rec.boats.paddle.touring
|
|||
|
|||
Weight ballast for HV boats; Was: 17 vs 19 , Lake Huron
"Brian Nystrom" wrote in message news:zDwOg.1536$gN1.752@trndny08... Don Freeman wrote: "Brian Nystrom" wrote in message news:vgcOg.2407$SQ1.867@trndny09... Drew Cutter wrote: I'm looking to do some paddle (sea kayak) on lake Huron. For 3-5 days worth of camping. Should i buy a 17 foot (overnight kayak) or go for expedition size (19') kayak ? Expedition boats are good for one thing, expeditions. Their length and high volume tends to make for an ill-handling boat when they're paddled without a load of gear inside. I have a 17.5 Eddyline Nighthawk, which is a high-volume expedition boat. And even though it does handle better loaded I am not dissatisfied with it's handling while empty either. I live in the SF Bay area so have used it under windy conditions, though I do have to drop the skeg down in those conditions. Although the Nighthawk 17.5 is a boat designed for paddlers that "shop at big and tall shops" according to the Eddyline site, I wouldn't put it in the expedition boat class. How would you defined expedition class then? I can easily pack enough gear for two (probably more) weeks of kayaking/camping. It is well constructed for the long haul, and it can handle pretty much all conditions that a sea kayak is meant to handle. I am curious as to what other criteria are involved? As far as the "Big and Tall" part, all I can say is that I am not tall G. -- -Don Ever had one of those days where you just felt like: http://cosmoslair.com/BadDay.html ? (Eating the elephant outside the box, one paradigm at a time) |
#7
posted to rec.boats.paddle.touring
|
|||
|
|||
Weight ballast for HV boats; Was: 17 vs 19 , Lake Huron
Don Freeman wrote:
"Brian Nystrom" wrote in message news:zDwOg.1536$gN1.752@trndny08... Don Freeman wrote: "Brian Nystrom" wrote in message news:vgcOg.2407$SQ1.867@trndny09... Drew Cutter wrote: I'm looking to do some paddle (sea kayak) on lake Huron. For 3-5 days worth of camping. Should i buy a 17 foot (overnight kayak) or go for expedition size (19') kayak ? Expedition boats are good for one thing, expeditions. Their length and high volume tends to make for an ill-handling boat when they're paddled without a load of gear inside. I have a 17.5 Eddyline Nighthawk, which is a high-volume expedition boat. And even though it does handle better loaded I am not dissatisfied with it's handling while empty either. I live in the SF Bay area so have used it under windy conditions, though I do have to drop the skeg down in those conditions. Although the Nighthawk 17.5 is a boat designed for paddlers that "shop at big and tall shops" according to the Eddyline site, I wouldn't put it in the expedition boat class. How would you defined expedition class then? I can easily pack enough gear for two (probably more) weeks of kayaking/camping. It is well constructed for the long haul, and it can handle pretty much all conditions that a sea kayak is meant to handle. I am curious as to what other criteria are involved? Please don't take my comments the wrong way, I wasn't insinuating that it's not a very capable boat or besmirching Eddline's stellar reputation for quality. Expedition boats are real battleships, typically over 18' long with very high volume. They're meant for extended voyages with a heavy gear load. OTOH, many major expeditions have been done with much smaller boats, like the VCP Nordkapp and the NDK Explorer, so defining the category is somewhat arbitrary. I guess that any boat that one uses on an expedition is technically an "expedition boat", but Drew asked if he should get a 19' boat or a 17' boat, so he's apparently thinking in the same terms I am. As far as the "Big and Tall" part, all I can say is that I am not tall G. Then I would assume that you probably don't need ballast, either. ;-) |
#8
posted to rec.boats.paddle.touring
|
|||
|
|||
Weight ballast for HV boats; Was: 17 vs 19 , Lake Huron
"Brian Nystrom" wrote in message news:V_EOg.23$ht6.21@trndny06... Please don't take my comments the wrong way, Oh not at all, I was wondering if there was some sort of objective definition but you stated it well with the "arbitray" qualification. When I first researched the boat it was defined by one site as an expedition boat (I believe it was Eddyline's) and it carrys more gear then some of the 19 footers that I looked at. Though one definition states that expedition boats should be slender (which the 17' Nighthawk isn't) for more efficient (and less tiring on long trips) paddling. The longest I've been out on it was 5 days of boat-in-only camping and had pretty much all the comforts I needed and a lot more food, but I certainly wasn't paddling for 5 days straight either. Then I would assume that you probably don't need ballast, either. ;-) Hah! The way I've been going lately I may start needing more floatation. Maybe I should have been paddling for all those 5 days. -- -Don Ever had one of those days where you just felt like: http://cosmoslair.com/BadDay.html ? (Eating the elephant outside the box, one paradigm at a time) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
17 vs 19 , Lake Huron | Touring | |||
Mr Long.. read this one | Cruising | |||
Puts Lake Superior to shame | ASA | |||
Bad News for Lake Erie: From the Toledo Blade | General | |||
The 4th and boating.Lake Oroville. | General |