Glass SOT Specs

[JEM]

I'd like to sort of open up some old discussions with a new one.

Let's say, for entertainment purposes, we were looking to design our own hull from scratch.

From experience, I've learned that you can't approach a fishing SOT the same way you approach strickly paddling craft. I'm getting more intimately involved with the tradeoffs. Unfortunately, they develop more questions.

So let me fire off a few questions and see where we can get.

Let's talk weight capacity. And by weight capacity I'm talking how much we want on board before the water starts seriously coming up the scuppers and thus making you take it with you.

So how much is desired? Give me the number NOT including the weight of the hull itself. Extra stuff like GPS, fish finder, etc I'm considering as "gear".

DO INCLUDE the approximate weight you, your gear, and whatever else you want to take on board.

For now, leave length, width, shape, and stuff out of the consideration. They all factor in, but let's just set it aside for now.

So what hauling capacity we looking for?

[Big Red 455]

Hi Matt,
450lb.
What I have been looking at is your Sabalo & widening ~ (1") & lengthening it maybe 12".
But I may end up with the Cape Fear.
Larry

[bnz]

Matt,

I really think you are going to be looking at two different kinds of paddlers on this one. There are guys like me who weigh under 200 lbs and take 50 lbs or less of gear. I'm happy with the weight capacity of my 160i (something like 300-350 lbs. http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/dontknow.gif).

Then on the other hand you have the bigger guys who also want to take their gear yet have a hard time finding a yak with more speed than your average big guy's yak. Like LJ said, looking at 450+.

Mick's Wadefish (Kadaitchi) sure is looking sweet, can't wait to hear how it performs. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[RiverRaider]

Huuuray.. for the little people http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/the_wave.gif

[Paddlin' 4 Reds]

Mornin';
Then there's the third kind of Yak'er. ...those of us that are tooo big for a lil' yak, but want to go fast, but ain't dieting for nothin' http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif

[vivian]

Are you asking paddler weight and day trip essentials or full out weight if considering a week long trip?

If day trip for average female with cooler and equipment for fishing: 180 - 200.

Week long trip in south florida where you must bring in all water: 280 - 300.

[Paddlin' 4 Reds]

Mornin';
http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif ...Paddler, ... plus Cooler,...plus Equip and <STRIKE>Beer</STRIKE>, ....water for a week, at 280-300 lbs? http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif JEM I would need a "Barge", can I get a "Hybrid Deck on that?" http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif

[RiverRaider]

about 200 lbs. Maybe 220, closer to 200

This one might be okay for for X-Fishn or Rick:

http://www.kayakpro.com/kp/nelokayaksusa/wwwhtml/contents/tour_k1ctre.htm

Doesnt actualy list the weight capacity.. I am going to guess.. ummmmm, between alot, and a whole hell of a lot!

Sorry.. not meaning to hijack your thread...

[vivian]

X-fishin, the above was for <span class="ev_code_RED">"If day trip for average female" </span> NOT for a big burly guy with cooler full of beer! Anyway, sadly I don't bring beer on my day trips so I don't qualify for extra weight of such (or for being a derelict). My cooler is for keeping fish and diet pepsi's http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/thumbsup.gif so I can continue to keep my svelte figure and still fit in my touring boat http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif Big guy touring boat:
Impex - Assateague up to 260lbs paddler weight.

[JEM]

so far we've got one vote each for:
-450
-350
-300
-220

I'd like to hear more weight desires but let me throw in another question: What sort of maximum beam is desired for easy paddling?

[RiverRaider]

25" (?)

[vivian]

I guess it depends on boat length and hull shape but I'll say: SIK: 22" for paddling with max beam at 24". For SOT: 25"-26"

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vivian:
I guess it depends on boat length and hull shape </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

true enough. But for now, let's just say that beam is in a vacuum by itself.

[Big Red 455]

Speaking for us "long armed heavy weights", I'd be just pleased as punch with a progressively widening 30" beam.

[bnz]

I'm with viv and River... 25"-26"

[sullivan504]

As long as we're talking about desires in a vacuum, I'd like to see carrying capacity like the ratings for the Tarpon 160, Hobie Adventure, or Phoenix 160... an honest 300-350 pounds. "Honest" is the tough part.

For beam, I'd be thrilled to see just under 26", allowing for an extra inch or two if the seating position is elevated. Getting that to work with the carrying capacity while maintaining a quick hull... that's about five cubic feet of water to displace, no? Unless the hull gets a lot longer, it's not a challenge I want to take on.

[JEM]

it can be done, but you end up with a somewhat flatish bottom. That makes the yak more stable but takes away a little speed and ability to handle big water. The alternative is to make it longer.

If you wanted something that would be one of the "superyaks" with higher capacity, you'd need a pretty high seating position. With that higher seating position, you loose stability.

One then gets into the argument of wet-ride vs. dry-ride. A wet ride doesn't bother me as much water staying the cockpit.

Idealy, I'd want to shoot for something where the max payload is achieve when the water just starts to meet the top of the scuppers. Also with that, the lowest seat point is at that same height.

So that leads me to the next question: What is really desired more: Performance or stability? In other words, would you be willing to sacrafice some stability for the sake of performance or some performance for the sake of stability?

[RiverRaider]

I quess its a question of:

Do you want a Fishing Yak' you can do a little Touring in, or a Touring Yak you can do a little fishing in?

It seems the two ideals maybe (?) exclusive?

I think that there are guys (Gals) out there that really need the 30" + boats for the types of fishing they do.. but there may be some that can get away 25" or 26" beam and still be okay stability wise (and yes I know that stability has more to do with beam solely)

I measuring my words carefully lest the "My Yak' is better than yours" crowd pipes in with just how well they can fish off of a 2.5" piece of PVC pipe because the secondary stability is so high. http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif

Yes you can fish a skinny boat.. but if you primary interest is fishing, not touring.. you may not want to.

Whats the magic number in terms of a split difference?

Matt and I have discussed this a little bit, and I am a proponent of "Hybrid?" or specialized hulls designed to meet adress both needs. Weight restrictions again begin to come into serious play however.

[vivian]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I measuring my words carefully lest the "My Yak' is better than yours" crowd pipes in with just how well they can fish off of a 2.5" piece of PVC pipe because the secondary stability is so high. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very true, that some can and have fished from very narrow touring hulls myself included. Do I enjoy fishing from a "strictly touring kayak"...ABSOLUTELY NOT and I refuse to compromise comfort while fishing! That is why I have what I believe is a compromise boat. But it's hull design and waterline length allows me to paddle efficiently and keep up with, NOT PASS longer touring kayaks and it's pretty stable for a touring kayak.

So for his next question:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> So that leads me to the next question: What is really desired more: Performance or stability? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I choose performance with some stability for fishing.

Let's let JEM finish his experiment after all he knows more than I and most of us about boat design. I am interested in the results.

[bnz]

Again I think we are dealing with two different crowds. I would like more of the performance side. Take for instance the Dorado, it's 25" and I found it to be plenty stable. It also has a low COG with the way its seat is configured. I guess it all depends on the design of the yak.

Still waiting on Mick to hear how the wadefish handles/performs. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[vivian]

BNZ, I was comparing the Pelican design with the QCC 400x and the hull shape and dimensions are very similar. I think the Dorado/Pelican are plenty stable and great fishing platforms.

[JEM]

Vivian,

Which QCC model do you have?

I see you have a Bell Merlin. We just need to throw a deck on that and the project would be done! http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bnz:
Again I think we are dealing with two different crowds. I would like more of the performance side. Take for instance the Dorado, it's 25" and I found it to be plenty stable. It also has a low COG with the way its seat is configured. I guess it all depends on the design of the yak.

Still waiting on Mick to hear how the wadefish handles/performs. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We are dealing with 2 different crowds. I have a suspician about where that middle ground lies but I don't want to skew/influence anyone's decision.

In an ideal world, I'd then take that design, build a prototype, and somehow get it passed around for testing by various people. Would be a heck of a road trip but a fun one.

[vivian]

JEM i have the 400x. The SOT that hairy is building is very appealing to me http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/thumbsup.gif

I agree, that Bell Merlin is a fabulous little solo canoe and I will be getting a soft deck for it from Cookes Custom Sewing to cut wind when crossing larger bodies of water in the winter..However, for strictly fishing I do prefer the Wenonah Vagabond.

[bnz]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Would be a heck of a road trip but a fun one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just so long as I'm on the tour stop. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Let's see, you'll have to bring a Sabalo, a Wadefish, and any other new SOT designs your thinking of. Yeah, that should work. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Santiago II]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vivian:
BNZ, I was comparing the Pelican design with the QCC 400x and the hull shape and dimensions are very similar. I think the Dorado/Pelican are plenty stable and great fishing platforms. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A few tweaks on the Pelican/Dorado and you'd have quite a boat. Venturi drains (or even better, foot operated bilge pumps), fill in the cut outs, SS screws, water tigh hatches....you might have something there.........

Sorry, day-dreaming...put me down for 325-350 max capacity.

[kfsrmn]

I weigh in at 165-170 and I would have to say 350 is a good capacity for my size. The little Epic GP was rated at 250 but that was over rated. It was starting to squat with less than 200.. When you add in safety gear, ff, battery, GPS, rods, net water, etc you can add 50-75 lbs easily. Now add some fish and you are getting close. There needs to be some margin for safety. If we are talking heavier paddlers, you need more capacity. Except for weight, the Dorados specs are good. A longer boat presents another set of problems like getting the rod tip around the bow and maneuverability. There is no question that my Dorado will out turn my Shearwater but on the other hand my Shearwater is 18 lbs lighter. I do fish from the Shearwater occasionaly but it is mostly for paddling.

[AlohaDan]

Late to the party.

I'll chime in for 350 lb capacity minimum. Your potential fish catch will weigh for ocean fishing easily 50-100 lbs, or more.

The discussion of lack of fishboxes for ocean fishing has appeared in numerous other threads. Simply running the deck from the seat back to the stern puts a nice one in the rear by eliminating the tankwell. Go for a LARGE aft hatch, starting immediately behind the seat. Remember you can get a fish in there, but rigor will set in restricting any bending you did to force it in there.

This also drops your CG of your load. Should improve stability. That will also get rid of some scupper holes or a Dorado type drain.

Also figure the weight of a removable custom sized fish bag for the yak interior space loaded with ice.

Seems to me even the South African designs have flunked out on this point.

They have provided some nice fwd hatches. I would keep fwd interior space for gear, rods, gaffs, drift socks, etc.


I'll vote for a wet seat. If your talking ocean boat eventually(without a dry suit) your going to get wet. Live with it

Don't overlook something like the Hobie Sidekick for fishing stability if you opt for a skinny boat for performance. It can also increase your capacity if you get "The Big One". Ocean performance is a must as a lot of people (25%+) are covering more than ten miles in a trip (see old survey on main thread). Sidekick is inflatable, easy to store and easy to rig. IMHO you will see more of these down stream as designers realize they don't need battleship hull widths for fishing purposes.

[hairymick]

Hi guys,

I weigh around 200 pounds and would be looking to carry an extra 100 to 150 pounds or so.

I took my wadefish for a run yesterday and while its carrying capacity is rated at, I think 157kgs, it will carry much more than that.- safely.

I think this boat might just be very close to the ideal compromise between a touring and a fishing kayak. Primary stability is adequate, Secondary Stability is - astonishing. She has a very respectable turn of speed and very quickly jumps onto the plane, catching waves.

My boat wieghs in at a shade under 24 kgs - 52 pounds? - loaded, but I have added in some extras and some re-inforcing here and there.

For bigger guys, might I very respecfully sugget a similar design, only proportionately longer and wider might suit. Something say, 17 feet long X around 28" beam could well be a very good option

My thoughts only

[JEM]

Mick is very close to what I have in mind.

[bnz]

Hey Mick, now I'm jealous. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Matt, good job! http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/thumbsup.gif

Dan, the beauty about building your own is that you can build the deck the way you want it. I really like what Mick did with his, shallow tankwell with storage underneath. All he needs now is a low profile custom crate (like on the Dorado) to fit and he's set. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[JEM]

Thanks,

But I refuse to take full credit. Mick had the vision for this craft. Many people like you all have been very vocal about what you want.

I'm fortunate enough to be able to take all of that and translate into a design.

Mick provided a very nice 1st-run report. I'm sure he'll be posting it up here shortly.

[RiverRaider]

Ok Mick... now could you start building mine? check is in the mail http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[sullivan504]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bnz:
...the beauty about building your own is that you can build the deck the way you want it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The drawback of building your own is that you must decide the way you want it. Too many possibilities can drive you crazy! When buying from stock, somebody's already taken that burden for themselves. JEM/Matt-- I applaud your continued efforts.

[vivian]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> All he needs now is a low profile custom crate (like on the Dorado) to fit and he's set. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do not flame me because of this opinion:

I think milkcrates are the worst storage solution and especially for those wanting to go offshore. They present problems for self rescue, are another object that hightens profile to wind and you can easily loose all your stuff if you flip the boat. Mind you, if you are just putzing around their fine but we are talking a "performance kayak".

Anyone have a better solution?

[bnz]

viv, no flaming necessary. I've made my opinions known on here and I'm one who likes the crate. I go offshore with mine no problems. It actually gives me something extra to attach my gear to without having to create more attach sites on my yak. I know you and Dan fish without them but I'm still a big fan of the one on the Dorado (and it's tankwell with cutout slot). I like my gear on deck is all. Can't figure out what kind of self rescue you are talking about where the crate gets in your way on a SOT. http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/dontknow.gif (And yes, I've flipped my yak, con crate, and it didn't get in my way and I didn't lose anything in it. http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/booboo.gif If you ever go out in 10-15 mph winds with chop and your kayak starts paddling slower, you might want to check and make sure you have your drain plug in. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif)

For me, it's a performance fishing kayak. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[RiverRaider]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Mind you, if you are just putzing around </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Some of us at KFS call that fishing http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Sorry...

Does the foredeck on a SIK hinder you in anyway Viv? I mean the area directly in front of you... would you be able to place a rod holder there and paddle? What SIK are you using, does it that pretty "fattness" (?) up front? Is that what they call "british"?

Thanks

[Santiago II]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vivian:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> All he needs now is a low profile custom crate (like on the Dorado) to fit and he's set. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do not flame me because of this opinion:

I think milkcrates are the worst storage solution and especially for those wanting to go offshore. They present problems for self rescue, are another object that hightens profile to wind and you can easily loose all your stuff if you flip the boat. Mind you, if you are just putzing around their fine but we are talking a "performance kayak".

Anyone have a better solution? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you narrow the beam much below 24", you start to have re-entry problems with boat and crates, you need a more angled approach to renter, and less weight on top to hold it over.

You could have a flush "TW" storage area with a top.

[hairymick]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Does the foredeck on a SIK hinder you in anyway Viv? I mean the area directly in front of you </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi River, Up until now i have fished off shore exclusively from an expedition sea kayak.

a berkley adjustable rod holder was mounted to the fore deck and the only noticable compromise for me was that I had to angle the rod forward slightly so as not to interfere with my paddlestroke.

The other set back was where to put solid toothy critters once caught. My solution was to club them into submission with a lump of hardwood then poke them into the cockpit down around my feet. The blood and gore was pretty gruesome though

This is what I used off shore
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c32/hairymick/Sea%20kayaking/MermaidonBigWoodyIsland.jpg

this is one of my inshore boats
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c32/hairymick/Sea%20kayaking/TOOGOOM005.jpg

[vivian]

Nice pics Hairy!

River, I used to have my rod holder in front of me on previous boats, here are two pics one is a closeup of deck arrangement. I could not troll fish with rod holder in front if going on a longer distance paddle because it did get in the way of the higher angle stroke I use. It is probably because I don't have longer arms and have to mount holder closer to cockpit.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a206/snook_/Viscayadecklayoutandsmalltrout-1.jpg

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a206/snook_/RedfishoffofTurkeyKey-1.jpg





Now I have been experimenting with the holder behind my seat and so far it has worked out great and it can be removed if going into rough conditions where I don't want anything on my deck that may effect a self rescue. I can also mount in forward for those days I am just putzing around and doing some serious fishing.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a206/snook_/84c7re2.jpg[/img] ]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a206/snook_/84c7re2.jpg ([img)

[RiverRaider]

Posted September 14, 2006 09:30 AM
I like the removable rod holder... I have been building the same thing this week... I just need to figure out how to secure it to the deck of my wifes SIK.. she doenst fish so i dont want anything permenant.. is that bungee system sufficient?

The only SIK I use regularly is her Heritage 9'5" Featherlight.. mostly for fishing in tight areas, and when i dont need to paddle any distance.. its not bulkheaded either.. so "big water" is out of the question..

Your SIK setup is nice.. everything secured to the deck right in front of you.. neat and organized. I think that type of Yak would suit me fine for the type of fishing I do: Light Tackle, 1 or 2 rods, lures only, out and back 5-6 hours top.

I would like the paddeling ease of a SIK.. but alas I am a weak swimmer, and knowing myself wont be discplined enough to practice re-entry more than 1 or 2 times a season. My Hullatosis is acting up however, and I have been droolong over SIKS for a week or two now.. against my better judgment!?

[bnz]

Mick, no wonder you are used to going fast! http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[hairymick]

Hi vivian,

Love your boat too. is it a Ecobehizig?

River, my rod holder set up is similat to Vivians. Mine is mounted to a removeable board held in place by deck bungees On my sea kayak.

A solid hit tend to pull the board around a bit but has caused no serious problems..

Hi Bill. The sea kayak is a Mermaid, built by Natureline. A true expedition boat with immense storage and load carrying capacity. Amazing rough water capabilities. The builder has paddled one from Victoria, across Bass Straight to Tasmania through some of the most dangerous waters this country has to offer.

The story can be read here
http://www.natureline.com.au/bass_strait.htm

[vivian]

River and Hairy, I got the removeable holder to stop moving around by adding a bungie to it and attaching tight to deck bungie. Adding foam to underside also helps prevent this cutting board from scratching gel coat or sliding around:

http://us.a2.yahoofs.com/users/43dcab81zbae5dfce/29a7/__sr_/9cccre2.jpg?phA7qCFBd5nNPCL4

http://us.a2.yahoofs.com/users/43dcab81zbae5dfce/29a7/__sr_/9ebare2.jpg?phA7qCFBOAnjLAGh

I tested all last winter trolling while touring coastal areas and caught some nice fish and it didn't even budge. The good thing is you can use it foreward or aft of cockpit or remove it entirely.

River: Just because it's a SIK does not guarantee the boat will be fast or efficient. Take that yellow boat in my first photo. That is a Perception Vizcaya and it is a slug compared to my QCC400x. I had to actually work to keep up with my friends in their long boats. When loaded with gear it was exhausting to paddle for any great distance. But it was sure COMFORTABLE!

The Perception boat has an upswept bow and look at it in the 2nd pic, notice the waterline of the boat? It goes from 16' to 12' in the water! My QCC and the pic that Hairy shows of the Mermaid shows a boat that hardly has any rocker so the entire boat is wateline. My QCC is 15'6 and the waterline is 14'-7 which is about as long as one of my friends boats that is a 17' sea kayak.

Just some points to ponder when looking at SIK's they all look fast but it's not always the case.....

[vivian]

Back to the subject of milkcrates. I did not mean to insult anyone with my comment. But I do believe that in my experience fishing from narrower beam boats, high profile objects on deck make the boat more unstable and they do affect performance in higher winds.

This is of no consequence with your average SOT but we are talking about redesigning and perhaps coming up with a "performance SOT" and that requires a different approach. Going out with minimal gear (weight affects efficiency) and keeping a low profile in wind.

Perhaps behind the seat keeping that shallow depression for a crate and adding dividers for plano boxes, leader spools, etc and building a flush hatch cover to protect the contents?

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vivian:
Back to the subject of milkcrates. I did not mean to insult anyone with my comment. But I do believe that in my experience fishing from narrower beam boats, high profile objects on deck make the boat more unstable and they do affect performance in higher winds.

This is of no consequence with your average SOT but we are talking about redesigning and perhaps coming up with a "performance SOT" and that requires a different approach. Going out with minimal gear (weight affects efficiency) and keeping a low profile in wind.

Perhaps behind the seat keeping that shallow depression for a crate and adding dividers for plano boxes, leader spools, etc and building a flush hatch cover to protect the contents? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok this is interesting.

So we're talking an indent for a milkcrate, then deeper indents inside that for smaller items? Or Are you talking addtional indents outside the milkcrate area?

[vivian]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So we're talking an indent for a milkcrate, then deeper indents inside that for smaller items? Or Are you talking addtional indents outside the milkcrate area? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

JEM, take the shallow indent for milkcrates and subdivide that for plano boxes, etc deep enough to accomodate them also and provide a flush mount hatch.

[CPP]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> /Dorado and you'd have quite a boat. Venturi drains </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have heard from some old man down south that the new Dorado does have venturi drains and a newer deck.

Got to vote on a 25-26 beam with a weight cap @ 350

[RiverRaider]

Mainstreams "KingFish" incorporates an indentation for both a crate and a 5 gal. bucket

If scupper placement were elswhere, It would be neat to have a small screwtype dayhatch with catbag at the bottom of it all..

[JEM]

New Question:

When someone says "hi performance", does a more rounded bottom come to mind or a flatter bottom?

When you hear "hi performance", do you think speed or rough seas ability?

[vivian]

round

both

[JEM]

I was going to wait for a few more responses but I guess I'll just come out with it.

I worked on some sketches and there's a problem. If we want something that has a little bit more rounded bottom, and stay with the 26" x 17' range, and keep the 350 payload, you'd have to allow for about 4-5" of draft.

Now if this is a "traditional" SOT where you sit above the waterline, that's a pretty high center of gravity for such a narrow yak.

In Kruger Sea Wind (decked touring canoe that measures 17' x 28" with a rounded bottom) you sit about that height. I've paddled one a few times and while it's plenty stable for paddling, It's twitchy as hell for serious fishing.

[vivian]

Whats the payload on the Dorado? Is that what is making this difficult to do? What is the max payload with a stable/performance SOT?

[JEM]

in the Dorada, you sit below the waterline. So that's a differ style than sitting above the waterline.

Max I could get without getting silly is around 320. But that is total. So you have to subtract hull weight.

[RiverRaider]

Why sit above the waterline again? What did I miss.. is it a scupper thing?

Sitting below the waterline is key to stability in a narrow boat... widen the boat.. decrease the "speed", unless you stretch it out even further.. even that may start a cycle of diminishing returns in terms of wetted area (no?)

its a balancing act (as you all know)

Let me ask this.. how dry does the boat need to be? obviously safety is a concern.. but what about the notion of true surfski capable of pseudo-touring boat effiency?

I hate to sound like a broken record but think about a partialy covered deck forward (increases storage volume) and a flat wash deck aft you would not some drainage forward I guess, but it could be worked out... I am just tossing thoughts out here... but does the boat need to a floating (albeit narrow) catch basin? is a bit of extra care in dressing dryly worth the performance?

[AlohaDan]

I think milkcrates are the worst storage solution and especially for those wanting to go offshore.

http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/the_wave.gif

SOT or SIK off shore you should have clean decks.

[JEM]

I justed to make sure it was clear.

[bnz]

I don't, mine works for me. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Besides, my body catches more wind than my crate does. So I guess we could say kayakers are the worse storage solution for those going offshore. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Matt, I like the rounded hull of the Dorado, but also like the planing hull on the Wadefish. If it has decent speed and easy to paddle with a decent modicum of stability, you won't hear any complaints from me. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[AlohaDan]

Max I could get without getting silly is around 320. But that is total. So you have to subtract hull weight

IIRC the Adventure is 350 lbs Capacity so if you added hull weight of 60 lbs you would have 410.

Might want to take a look at Hobie design even though wet seat is a common complaint. I don't have any trouble thou in Hawaii. If you wear some dry pants I don't see any problem in cold water either.

[vivian]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">in the Dorada, you sit below the waterline. So that's a differ style than sitting above the waterline. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree with River on why make seating above waterline? Once you start doing distance you will be eventually running into wind/waves and are going to get wet anyway. Just dress for it but don't lose performance to keep a bit drier.

As to advertised boat weight capacities: I have paddled some boats to capacity (mostly on camping trips) and they really start becoming really difficult to paddle and speed is seriously affected. Aloha have you paddled the Hobie to capacity? Just curious as to your thoughts on this since you do fish offshore and paddle/peddle a bit further than most.

[JEM]

I don't mind putting the seating anywhere. I just wanted to be sure everyone was on the same page.

I did some sketching last night and the numbers came in tune better. A lot better. I'm actually considering making it 16' instead of 17'.

Are folks hung up on that 17' goal?

I'll post sketches once things are zeroed in more. Right now it's changing to much for any sort of consistency. But we're getting closer on the lower hull part of it.

[RiverRaider]

Are there any disadvantages to going with 17'? I mean from a performance perspective,.. not in terms of weight or portage concerns? Would that extra foot (assuming its at least partly adding to the waterline measure) increase weight capacity?

I'd kill to see some sketche's even if its just rough idea!?

[vivian]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Are folks hung up on that 17' goal? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't like fishing from boats longer than 16' that's why I bought my SIK even shorter but with a longer waterline. It's difficult to turn a 17' and longer hull when you have a fish on.

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vivian:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Are folks hung up on that 17' goal? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't like fishing from boats longer than 16' that's why I bought my SIK even shorter but with a longer waterline. It's difficult to turn a 17' and longer hull when you have a fish on. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There's my main concern...when you have a fish on. I'm keeping the waterline pretty full and a lot of "flare volume" in the bow.

Ok here a sketch. Please, PLEASE PLEASE know this is just the lower hull and it will change about 50 times before it's finalized. Lots of tweaking to do.

[bnz]

Matt,

Are you thinking wood/epoxy on this one? Any rocker at all to it?

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bnz:
Matt,

Are you thinking wood/epoxy on this one? Any rocker at all to it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no, all fiberglass.

rocker: about 2" in the front and 1" in the back. But haven't got that locked in yet.

[RiverRaider]

Looks great Matt.. I like the "roundness" of the belly.. little disappointed to see no "winglets" and are you surprized that I would be? http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I think that you may very well be onto something with this project http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/thumbsup.gif

[RiverRaider]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vivian:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Are folks hung up on that 17' goal? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't like fishing from boats longer than 16' that's why I bought my SIK even shorter but with a longer waterline. It's difficult to turn a 17' and longer hull when you have a fish on. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good point.. I am also not so sure that I could fight a fish around the bow of a 17' boat with a 7' rod http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

[vivian]

Looks good, glad to see no greenland style design http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Although, paddling in the Pacific NW a couple of summers ago I came face to face with bull kelp never had seen anything like that before, it was a beautiful thing and actually tasted pretty good. I was really interested in seeing all the different kelp beds and how great it was to rest by getting in these with the kayak when you were really tired and didn't want the currents to take you back to where you started. I also noticed that every seakayak I saw had an upswept bow and stern. My guide said that one of the reasons for this was so they wouldn't get stuck in the bull kelp beds. Is this true? Seemed logical at the time.

[RiverRaider]

http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

I was hoping for a little Greenland Style action myself... makes for a pretty boat IMHO.

[DogFish]

A little bit more upsweep/rocker and flare in the bow to help minimise deck wash in rough water - especially if we're talking about a low and potentially wet cockpit.

That hull shape looks almost identical to my Kaskazi Pelican which can be a wet ride in rough water even though it has plenty of volume in the bow. My OK Prowler by comparison with it's extra bow flare throws the water aside and very little comes into the cockpit.

As we're talking about a fishing kayak design, not a touring one, then a little more rocker will provide more manouvreability and big water/surf capability.

DogFish

[JEM]

I kept trying to get more bow flare without having to do a super-shapr entry like a sea kayak. Shape like that require more boat length to get a decent waterline and speed.

So I tried an S-shape bow stem. Gets you more flare without lots of extra boat length.

What does everyone think? Please be honest and objective.

And oh, don't get hung up on looks right now. Things can be fined-tuned later.

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RiverRaider:
.. little disappointed to see no "winglets" and are you surprized that I would be? http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/thumbsup.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no but the concept is having more of an influence, in a subtle way.

[RiverRaider]

Jem,

In answer to an earlier question... I tipped the Heritage just to its tipping point.. the sponsons (winglets) were totaly submerged right up to about the middle of the side logo on the deck...

I believe they are meant to act in a manner similar to the flare on a bow in terms of adding some "bouycancy"

I like the look of a flared bow myself..

[RiverRaider]

Matt,

Does a fine entry really effect the water line length all that much? I never remember which is which with Prismatic Cofeccient.. Low = fine entry and exit.. or vice versa.. anyway, do you plan on having a rudder on the boat, a skeg? and are you leaning more to turning ease or tracking ease in regard to the design?

[AlohaDan]

In regards to River's comment on 17'.

I have no problem fighting pelagics from a 16' Adventure with a 6 &1/2 foot rod. So a 7' ought to handle a a 17' yak.

Forget more rocker. Too many Brit boats out there now.

Look at some of the surf ski, OC-1 bows. Much more vertical. Here's the V10 Sport:

http://www.epickayaks.com/products/details.aspx?nid=663&cid=2140

[hairymick]

Yep, I gotta agree with Aloha Dan on the rocker thing.

2 inches in the bow combined with 1 inch in the stern should be plenty combines with all that nice volume in the bow should provide all the lift you need.

Length of boat should not be an issue when fighting a fish IMHO. Try pointing the rod tip down into the water and fighting it under the boat/ http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RiverRaider:
Matt,

Does a fine entry really effect the water line length all that much? I never remember which is which with Prismatic Cofeccient.. Low = fine entry and exit.. or vice versa.. anyway, do you plan on having a rudder on the boat, a skeg? and are you leaning more to turning ease or tracking ease in regard to the design? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excellent write up about hydrostatics here: http://www.oneoceankayaks.com/smhydro/hydro.htm

I'm thinking a rudder would be a nice option. Skeg? Maybe. That's why I'll prototype it first.

I'd like to see this nudge a little more toward thet racking side than manuverable side. But it's too early to commit 100%.

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hairymick:
Yep, I gotta agree with Aloha Dan on the rocker thing.

2 inches in the bow combined with 1 inch in the stern should be plenty combines with all that nice volume in the bow should provide all the lift you need.

Length of boat should not be an issue when fighting a fish IMHO. Try pointing the rod tip down into the water and fighting it under the boat/ http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm liking the S shaped front more and more. It took a LITTLE volume out of the lower bow stem area but it quickly flares about 2-3" above a flat water line. I'm thinking this will help with speed (less plow) and still keep the bow popping over waves.

[vivian]

My kayak was designed by John Winters who likes the plumb bow and stern design. Although I don't go offshore I have been in rough conditions in coastal bay/seas with max 3' waves/chop (shallow waters down here). The plumb bow and stern design (plus other factors) favored by Winters doesn't make for a wet ride at all unless I've got waves coming from the beam. Dogfish in NZ may have a totally different experience with plumb bows like the Dorado/Pelican but he may be in much rougher waters where he fishes than I am down here in tropical paradise http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif.

S-Curve bow...can you give example of boats with this shape?

[vivian]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Length of boat should not be an issue when fighting a fish IMHO. Try pointing the rod tip down into the water and fighting it under the boat/ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It has nothing to do with bringing rod around the bow. I just don't like hard tracking boats for fishing but I do like them for touring.

[JEM]

one thing to keep in mind that a smooth rounded bottom is going to turn easier than something with hard chines.

This one is mostly rounded with a little bit of a flatter mid area. No, it's NOT a flat bottom, but not super rounded like a touring canoe. We need that to get decent displacement numbers.

[AlohaDan]

Vivian

Let's distinguish here bewteen open ocean and your mangroves. One size doesn't fit all.

A pelagic is big enough you don't have to worry about turning.

You keep your rod pointed fwd and the fish, if it turns, will turn you.

[vivian]

Dan I totally understand your point. I guess we can't have a coastal boat to log in the miles that can also be used for offshore. What do you have in mind JEM?

[JEM]

whatever has the most demand.

and figuring that out is easier said than done. I knew we'd get to this point where it's one direction or the other.

[RiverRaider]

Hmmm... I'm a little confused myself (at baseline) but anyway... I thought the point of the exercise was to develop a (gulp... I hate using the "F" word) fast Kayak?

We had a debate veeeeery recently over what characterized "performance" some said Mangrove... I have had the pleasure of fishing in that environment only a handful of times out of a kayak, and it seems to me that the "performance" measures there include:

Initial Stability
Easy manuverability
stealth

Mangrove \ Back Country fishing reminded me alot of fresh water bass fishing.. which is why I enjoyed it so much.. and again, the performance characteristics are different in that environment.

Now "offshore" performance measures are different to me, a note here, I have never been offshore in a kayak, but I can tell you what I am looking for in an inshore boat, and I think they match up well, they include:

Rough water prowess (higher secondary stability)
Efficiancy ("speed" I guess?!)
Tracking

It seems to me that there are no shortage of excellent boats which perform highly in the areas of initial stability, ease of manuverability, primary stability.. and weight capacity.

I thought we were trying to fill the void where there were not a ton of viable choices.. fishing that involves extended paddeling, through open or "open enough" water where conditions can get tricky.. a kayak that performs well there.. but also has enough primary stability to fish effectivley.. with enough reserve secondary to do get there and back in less than ideal conditions.

Back quickly to my assumption regarding offshore and inshore performance characteristics.. 5 miles on a small bay, and five miles off the coast both equal 5 miles, the differnces presumably are lilihood of very heavy sea's offshore (more on this in a sec) and the increased liklihood that an offsohre kayak is going to be laucnched through the surf... once there, distance is distance.. and people who cover it want to do so efficiently.. so with the exception of the surf launch ability.. the performance parameters appear to be similar if not identical.. and this by default makes the boat appeal to a wider range of paddlers.. not as narrow an audience than with the mangrove type boats, small lake type fisherman.

In short, which this post was not.. speed and tracking over turning and initial stability.


***** PS ********

2 quick but maybe important things, first, I assume that by easy turning" we are primarily talking about turning the boat while stopped, or nearly stopped, such as casting, turning the boat around, casting in a different area, turning around in a tight space after a drift.

Last thing:

Vivian you mentioned shallow waters, waves, rough conditions etc... it seems that these "waves" and "rough" conditions can be much different that what I would conside rough conditions off shore.. and no this wont turn into a "I paddle bigger water than you contest"

Is one style hull or performance characteristic more suitable for inshore shallow "rough" water tThan another? I am assuing that "rough" off shore water means large waves, with defined troughs etc.. where as my rather limited kayak experince has suggested to me that rough water in shallow inland waters is different.. its smaller wave adter smaller wave, unrelenting, with a second or two between.. also what I experinced earlier this afternoon continuos smaller waves.. very quicly spaced, joined with turbulance, confused and rebounding seas and nasty "chop"

earlier today I think, and maybe I am wrong, I would have traded 5-6 seconds of breathing room between waves, for a foot or two of wave height in a heartbeat

[hairymick]

hi River,

The two are not interchangable. All other things being equal, the chop will be pretty much the same off shore or in semi-sheltered bays.

What is different is that in the open ocean, the chop is on top of the existing swell. if the weather is deteriorating it is a fair bet that the swell will be increasing with it.

What I mean by this is say you have a 1.5 to 2 metre swell running and calm sees - no problem except the launch through the surf.

Take those same swells, lets just assume they are from the South East, and add to the equation 20 knots or so of south Easterly breeze. this would normally cause a chop of about a metre or so in open water. These chops will be going in the same direction as the swells so you could add a metre to the total wave height, bearing in mind that the wind will also be building the swell.

If the current is moderately strong and going in the opposite direction to the wind and waves, you have the potential for overfalling seas. (a little like standing waves in a white water environment)

Chop in shallow water like bays & estuaries is just that - chop. it can be a pain, even difficult to padle in but in my humble opion is nowhere near as dangerous as open water conditions.

What might make a very good open water boat would probably be quite a good inshore boat. but what would make a very good inshore boat does not necessarily make a very good offshore one.

[RiverRaider]

That makes perfect sense... I have been off shore in 30'+ boats in conditions that I could simply not imagine in a kayak.

What I experienced yesterday were wind driven waves coupled with really nasty currents, in shallow water (10-20') with a lot of reflection thrown in at times.

it was a bit like being in a giant washing machine.. very churned up water seemingly coming at me from 2 directions at once...

Anyway..

A boat with offshore prowess would suit me just fine 90% of the time

[bnz]

River, sounds like you are talking about paddling across a sound that goes from 50' to 10' in nothing flat and northeast winds at 20 mph, not to mention the outgoing tide and incoming rain showers. Now talk about your washing machine effect. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

And no, efficiency doesn't always equal speed, just means less effort to paddle.

[lconn4]

In the roughest conditions I've come back from, either shallow water (50+ mph downwind run, Rockport, Texas, or microburst of about the same near Sarasota) or deep water near edge of Gulfstream with biggest confused waters I've ever seen...I'll take the quick cutting quarter horse over the thoroughbred in a life or death race.

Those long ocean going sea kayaks are long because the're carrying a lot of stuff...lighten your load and less can be more.

I've read where the faster yaks make it in before the bad stuff, I'm talking about the stuff you can't outrun. http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif

[JEM]

I'm thinking I want to go for a little more toward the speed end.

But don't write this one off as not being able to turn. The shape is not going to have anything real sharp for current to grab a strong hold of so it should also slide reasonably well when asked to.

[RiverRaider]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bnz:
River, sounds like you are talking about paddling across a sound that goes from 50' to 10' in nothing flat and northeast winds at 20 mph, not to mention the outgoing tide and incoming rain showers. Now talk about your washing machine effect. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

And no, efficiency doesn't always equal speed, just means less effort to paddle. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Winds were from the South... I paddle upper upper Narraganset Bay... Sometimes I think its like a big funnel with all the wind and water being rammed up to the tip!

I was suprized to see that local Bouys were measuring the wind at only about 10-15 mph... this particulear area has gusts and sustained winds well in excess of what is typicaly measured.. its a phenmonom which I have not fully fiqured out..


I probably just thought it was rough... I am a Newbie.. at least now I know the Yak' and I can at least handle what we did yesterday... I am not ashamed to tell ya' that at a couple of points yesterday the pucker factor was 10+

[kfsrmn]

I have to disagree with not being able to get the rod tip past the bow. There are some situations where it is necessary like a tight area with no room to manuever a long boat or at anchor. I usually control my boat with the rod tip but there have been times when it was not possible. I usually fish with 7' rods which work great on 16' boats but I really have to watch what I am doing on the 18' boat. It would not be a problem in open water.

[kfsrmn]

JEM, I have fished from hard and soft chine touring yaks and soft is easier. You are right about grab on the hull.

[RiverRaider]

I thought this was neat.. the cockpit is a "cocoon" all sealed but very open (I would have opened it up even more) self rescue might not be as easy as a SOT, but the seating position is low and there would be the option of a full sprayskirt

Just throwing some things around to keep the creative vibe going is all... I like alot of the Viking stuff.. the trolling motor yaks are funky.. pretty cool if your into that type of thing.

[RiverRaider]

Heres a better pic, Capt' Jimbo style http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/cookoo.gif

http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Santiago II]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JEM:
I'm thinking I want to go for a little more toward the speed end.

But don't write this one off as not being able to turn. The shape is not going to have anything real sharp for current to grab a strong hold of so it should also slide reasonably well when asked to. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can turn my Skua and Dorado very well, even though they both are great in the speed department. Rounder hulls are better.

[RiverRaider]

how does the Dorado track without rudder input?

[hairymick]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I thought this was neat.. the cockpit is a "cocoon" all sealed but very open (I would have opened it up even more) self rescue might not be as easy as a SOT, but the seating position is low and there would be the option of a full sprayskirt </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi River, that boat is a predator on with vikings version of a sik cockpit.

The Predator SOTS are becoming very popular down here and everybody who has one loves it. I am told performance is on a par with many top echelon plasic sea kayaks but there seems to be a problem with the rudder control lines running back through the centre hatch. they get in the way or something.

I have heard nothing about the SIK version but have seen it up close and personally, the coccoon type cockpit they have come up with doesn't appeal to me. By all reports though, the predators are a fine hull with very good speed & manouverability. Build quality is also excellent by the way.

If I were in the market for a plastic boat, a Predator SOT would be a real contender.

[AlohaDan]

Santiago

Looking at two sources of lowering CG for performance.

1.How does your Skua handle water in the seat well?

If the seat is below the water line can a venturi in the foot well pull it up hill?

What happens when you stop moving?

2. I looked at my Adventure. Assuming a 100 lb payload aft, eliminating the tankwell and using a large hatch for a "fish hatch", drops the cg of the 100 payload 4". Figure that would be compaable in most yaks, it ought to let a designer (JEM) have some leeway elsewhere.

It's amazing to me marketing input keeps up the original tankwell design for divers when the market has inceased enough to specialize more for fishing applications.

[RiverRaider]

I have heard nothing about the SIK version but have seen it up close and personally, the coccoon type cockpit they have come up with doesn't appeal to me. By all reports though, the predators are a fine hull with very good speed & manouverability. Build quality is also excellent by the way.

Mick, I assume that there are no scuppers in that cockpit (cocoon cockpit) If you see one around.. take a peek for me would ya'

[hairymick]

Nah mate, no scuppers.

[hairymick]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's amazing to me marketing input keeps up the original tankwell design for divers when the market has inceased enough to specialize more for fishing applications </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, I agree. The wadefish is the first boat I have ever had with a tankwell and apart from somewhere to stick stuff that one would normally keep blow decks, or somewhere to poke a tackle box, I find it pretty much useless.

A properly designed and insulated hatch immediately behind the paddler and his/her flushmounts would be more appropriate to a fishing kayak - particularly in warmer climates.IMHO

I dont think I would go to the trouble of building a tankwell into another boat

[bnz]

We need x-fishn to chime in here. You can have an insulated fishbox fore or aft in the yak which will add very little weight to it. I just don't think he's gotten that far with his design yet to to see how easy it is. Mick, did you get your bait tank in behind your seat?

[Paddlin' 4 Reds]

Mornin';
I've made my tankwell,(Dorado Style). Looks good, not to sure how practical it is. I agree with the Aft cooler hatch(I'll look). Been making Cedar Strips, joy joy

[kfsrmn]

I have not had to use the rudder on the Dorado yet and have had it out in winds up to 20mph. I am thinking about taking it off to reduce weight. I am looking at the possibility of insulating the fishwell as it pretty much useless right now. It is too hot. The temp gauge on the ff is reading 87+ and it is just in front of the fishwell. The large cockpit hatch is great though. A cooler chest in the tankwell is more practicle but raises the CG. I would like to find one 10" tall. I think a boat with a built in rear cooler and a large cockpit hatch would be better and would eliminate the need for the tankwell.
When I had the Freedom, which had no tankwell, I used the rear hatch for fish and used a camping pad and duct tape to insulate it. I would use minicell to make bulkheads and a liner if I had to do it again. I had plenty of room up front for tackle and gear.
I am looking at doing the same thing on the Shearwater. I made a rectanular hatch for the tunnel and can get several of the flat blue trim Plano watertite tackle boxes in there. They are color coded. I could insulate the rear hatch area and the battery and xducer could go up in the front hatch.

[RiverRaider]

Best of both worlds.. remove it to clean it.. remove it for access to a large well.. Insulate it.. make the opening a propersize.. this too is from Viking's website and is just an idea that I thought is neat.. Kind of the opposite of what WS had for the original 2 hatch Tarpon... I'm starting to annoy even myself by harping on the same things over and over.. but a key element to a succesful new design, IMHO is to offer as much versatility and pseudo-customization as possible.

Why arent my Pics going up properly?

Anyhow... Ironoc thing about having a Tankwell. in my Pelican Outcast.. the only thing I ever used the tankwell for was stowing my transposrt wheels (they dont break down) I used the large front hatch all the time... it's big and easy on easy off.. now with the Heritage.. I almost never use the 10" hatches (too fussy to get on and off.. too small) and am thinking of a way to rig up s alow profile crate or something? Now I kind of wish I had one? Go figure?

[Santiago II]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RiverRaider:
how does the Dorado track without rudder input? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Personally, I almost never use the rudder. certainly don't need it for touring. Only occasionally for drifting and landing. I use a high-angle paddle technique and it tracks very well

[AlohaDan]

bnz

In addition to eliminating the tankwell and putting in a large hatch (look at the head of a bull mahi mahi in the 60-70lb region or midsection of a 80-90 lb ahi) I would add a customized fish bag (at least hopefully for JEM's design a minimum of 6' long)to fit the space rather than permanently insulating the compartment.

The bag keeps your fish cold aided by the deck keeping the sun off the bag. Pack it with some ice sprinkled liberally with salt. Ahi & tuna species in particular need to get their temp dropped quickly after being bled (sashimi). Think about saving that fish on a two hour return trip. Not only do you want to save the meat there might be weight $$ involved in a tournament.

A small net stuck inside the bag will hold your water and drinks. No need for a seperate cooler.

AND the bag provides a cooler for your fish when driving home (assuming you pack some more ice in from the nearest gas station upon landing). I paid $150 for a fish bag for driving trips, so the marginal cost of customizing one for the yak would be worth it.

The bag will wash up pretty easy so you also save the trouble of cleaning up the inside of your yak.

Incidentally a guy here tried the top forward mounted bags bought by some at KFS . And bitched like hell about his boat performance (Prowler)when the wind came up. Open ocean is no place for this solution which definitely raises the CG of the load.

[kfsrmn]

A custom fish bag in the Dorado's fishwell might just be the answer. It would keep the weight down and would be a lot easier than insulating the well. Now where to get one or how to make one? I used a trash compactor bag in the insulated area of the Freedom to keep it from getting crudded up. I carry one on the Dorado but have not bee able to use the well.

[vivian]

Been out of town and come back to find good thought process on the design of this fishing kayak. Agree with the rear hatch instead of tankwell that can be used as an insulated fish box.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> What might make a very good open water boat would probably be quite a good inshore boat. but what would make a very good inshore boat does not necessarily make a very good offshore one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well to a point...if a very long 18' plus boat is what JEM comes up with that will handle offshore work then it won't be very maneuverable for coast cruising and getting in and out of creeks that connect larger bays. Actually, it may be overkill so maybe have two versions?

[JEM]

The prototype will be just a bit under 16'.

In the process of redrawing. Didn't like what I had.

[bnz]

That's a good all around length in my book. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[CPP]

16', A good all around length and a fish bag opens up so many other possibilities.

[vivian]

16' works for me but some want a boat with alot of weight carry capacity. I am really interested in what you are going to come up with!

Aft Hatch: After a few more moments of thought on this and reading that Dan wanted to put a 80lb plus fish in there ...a central hatch (here we go) like the one on the Dorado may be the answer. Think about this, most fishing kayaks are so loaded in the stern with gear and coolers, the trim of the boat is severely affected. In rough water or long distance paddling the boat must be trimmed to take advantage of conditions but generally the boat should be trimmed level with heaviest gear towards the center. Knowing full well how badly a boat paddles with too much weight forward or back I know an aft hatch will present a problem.

Also, in a skinnier kayak even an SOT, catching and putting away a fish aft of the seat in not so pleasant conditions is difficult even if you could sit side straddle.

I guess that Kaskazi must have done some extensive thought process on the design of their fishing kayaks to finally decide on best placement for fish box. However, it should be insulated.

[JEM]

Getting the capacity will not be an issue if seating below the water line is not an issue.

The prototype I'll build will be a fiberglass lower hull with a temporary plywood sit-inside kayak deck. Plywood deck will be glassed inside and out so it'll be very strong and light. I'll still work on the top sides design for fiberglass but won't start constructing until I know I like what I have on the bottom half.

I'll stuff float bags inside and that should allow for some abusive testing.

Getting closer on the final rev of the lower hull. Adding the extra flare I have in my mind's eye for the bow and some for the stern is tricky to do. I can do it easy enough but getting it to where it doesn't look silly is proving to be a challenge.

[JEM]

http://www.jemwatercraft.com/images/prodimages/Kayak/SOT/A.JPG

http://www.jemwatercraft.com/images/prodimages/Kayak/SOT/B.JPG

[RiverRaider]

Pretty cool Matt…

Based on a lot of the discussions (Posts) I am a bit surprised to see such a fine entry (not a complaint… just an observation.

Would it be possible to get a few cross section pics? Or maybe a 3 Dimensional 3\4 shot?

Great work

[JEM]

The super sharp entry is a bit of an illusion. If I added depth to the surface it wouldn't look so sharp.

Still putting the final touches on. Might fatten the bow volume a little

[JEM]

Improved the bow. Hard to see its volume. I can see it in my software but it doesn't translate to pictures very easily. Trust me, it's awesome! http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.jemwatercraft.com/images/prodimages/Kayak/SOT/KFS-Project/d.JPG

[AlohaDan]

most fishing kayaks are so loaded in the stern with gear and coolers, the trim of the boat is severely affected. In rough water or long distance paddling the boat must be trimmed to take advantage of conditions but generally the boat should be trimmed level with heaviest gear towards the center. Knowing full well how badly a boat paddles with too much weight forward or back I know an aft hatch will present a problem.

Nobody denies the problems of existing yaks. However, the point is Vivian by eliminating the tankwell you don't have all that gear back there. The milk carton you abhor is gone.

You have to put gear someplace else. Where it's handy to get to- like small stuff right in front and other more fwd. Rods, gaffs, tackle boxes, fish finders, etc.

You can't put the fish amidships. The seat structure is there and the space will be too thin. Matt's already got it below the water line.

So a large fish has to go fwd or aft.

Your only going to deal with it at sea once or twice, hence IMHO aft for the fish, fwd for the gear which your accessing many more times (comparatively).

Wrestling this baby around in a Hobie was not easy, but somehow I got it half in the tankwell, the rest hanging over the rudder. I was turned sideway the whole operation. As long as your butt is on the opposite side of the center line to your legs no problema.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/2408/40lbmahi0lf.jpg

BTW I had to immediate go in to save this fish from cooking. Why I am coming on strong on the tankwell elimination, subbing with a fish bag inside.


JEM if you design the hatch right you will encourage the stowing of the fish tail first. That does keep the heavier porion of the catch closer to amidships.

I have seen pics of East Coast Cobia longer than this mahi, but you probably catch them larger than this medium 40lb off places like South Carolina from what I have read.

[RiverRaider]

http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Nice fish AD, you need to tow along a seperate Yak' to haul fish around the size of that one...

Or maybe a nice butcher table so you can just steak it up right there... http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

For a fish like that.. you need a Bag that can be sealed well enough to keep the sharks from smelling blood, a couple of floats, and a length of rope.. oh, and a little extra time to paddle it back home.. I'm only half kidding...

Stop debating the tank vs hatch thing.. its solved http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
http://kfs.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/ga/ul/8341045172/026w200.jpg

[JEM]

I got the bow volume issue resolved, I think. It now has a little bit more than the Wadefish fish but with much more flare toward the top.

I also dropped the stern down an inch to under 10". Mick mention the Wadefish weather cocked just a bit. I believe that had to do with stern shape more so than stern height.

So I sharpened the exit a little to give the stern a little more "grab" in the water. I don't feel this will effect turning much as the bow underside is still somewhat rounded.

Good news regarding displacement. At an honest 4" waterline, my calcs show about 410 displacement. So back out hull weight and then you have your weight capacity on board.

And for the question "How much will it weigh?", I honestly don't know yet. If I had to guess, I'd say some where in the 50-60 range. That's a REALLY conservative number. If this goes into production one day, the shop I partner up with will have to determine that.

Getting much closer to a final revision. Still some line transitions that I'm trying to clean up.

[StruggleMonkey]

Can we start talking about the deck and cockpit soon?!

[JEM]

oh yea. Fire away ideas. I can tell you though, I won't start constructing anything with it until the lower hull is proven out.

[bnz]

Since we can't have a tankwell or custom low profile crate, I would like pull out trays around the front of the cockpit for stowing tackle and gear. I'm also guessing we'll have to put in a place for a baitwell too (for those left coasters who need such things for macks, squid and such). http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

[JEM]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bnz:
Since we can't have a tankwell or custom low profile crate.... http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

why can't we?

[RiverRaider]

Deck Design Ideas:

We are not likely to do anything here that someone else has not done or is not doing. I don’t want to whole sale just rip something off… but here are some ideas in general.

Rear Tankwell:

A’la Perception Bimini

http://www.peterglenn.com/pglenn/assets/product_images/..._kayak_81-348_lg.gif (http://www.peterglenn.com/pglenn/assets/product_images/perception/perc_kayak_81-348_lg.gif)

Like that the Tank Well does not extend all the way back… note the round in square mold… 5-gallon bucket or crate

Rear Tankwell Option:

Al’a Viking

http://www.vikingkayak.com.au/images/topaz2.jpg

Should have an access hatch so the whole cover need not be removed

Center Rib:

A’la OK Prowler


http://glacierbaysports.com/cart/images/ok_Prowler13_Titanium_Top.jpg

Functional with lots of mounting options… not sure how to integrate this with internal storage and access.

Storage Bow:

A’la Dorado

Do we need a pic here? Might conflict with above?

Integration:
http://www.atlantiskayaks.com/images/GPS_2.jpg

Gets expensive and limiting... but neat I think

Off the Wall?!:

Internal Hydration system... good idea if its practical...

http://www.octopuskayaks.com/images/hmkwpoortapr02.jpg

[RiverRaider]

******* Insert Chirping Cricket Sound Effect Here*********

[vivian]

River, let the man work! http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif

[RiverRaider]

Matt can work thats fine... what about the rest of you slackers!?
http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif


Were supposed to be discussing deck and cockpit features... I dont care if its been done 100 times before... fresh perspectives are always a good thing...

okay... lets see...

Neoprene hatch covers or rubber? I like the flush mounted covers over neoprene.. looks nice and neat that way http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[vivian]

OK! Hatches: NO neoprene please!!

I do like the flush hatches that Current Design and QCC use on their boats.

http://www.qcckayaks.com/kayaks/hatches.asp

The gasket is pretty watertight if you get the buckles snug enough but you can't be very rough with the hatch cover that contains the gasket or it will become unglued. I especially like the low profile on deck and they are tethered to prevent loss at sea. The larger sizes available are great for putting bulky camping gear or larger fish into the hold.

The Valley hatches are the most watertight but a pain to install if you are on the water.

http://www.atlantickayaktours.com/Pages/retail/parts-repair/Hatch-Covers.shtml

[JEM]

The lower hull is pretty much a done deal. I'll get some pictures up but don't want to get too specific and have someone snatch my design shape out from under me.

Deck: This is general shape point of veiw. Should the deck just be flat or pehaps a little rounded to help shed water? Completely flat would reduce windage and allow for mounting anything just about anywhere. But would give you a sharp edge. That edge will stick out as a wear spot and will catch a little more wind if you're leaned over.

[RiverRaider]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vivian:
OK! Hatches: NO neoprene please!!

I do like the flush hatches that Current Design and QCC use on their boats.

http://www.qcckayaks.com/kayaks/hatches.asp

The gasket is pretty watertight if you get the buckles snug enough but you can't be very rough with the hatch cover that contains the gasket or it will become unglued. I especially like the low profile on deck and they are tethered to prevent loss at sea. The larger sizes available are great for putting bulky camping gear or larger fish into the hold.

The Valley hatches are the most watertight but a pain to install if you are on the water.

http://www.atlantickayaktours.com/Pages/retail/parts-repair/Hatch-Covers.shtml </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Those QCC hatches are sweet.. the valley type hatches are a PITA on or off the water.. but they are very tight.

[RiverRaider]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JEM:
The lower hull is pretty much a done deal. I'll get some pictures up but don't want to get too specific and have someone snatch my design shape out from under me.

Deck: This is general shape point of veiw. Should the deck just be flat or pehaps a little rounded to help shed water? Completely flat would reduce windage and allow for mounting anything just about anywhere. But would give you a sharp edge. That edge will stick out as a wear spot and will catch a little more wind if you're leaned over. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are we resigning ourselfs to having a wet boat? what kind of cokpit depth\ freeboard are we talking about?

[AlohaDan]

I'd have some rounding.

BTW checkout Apalach's photos of the Revolution hatches.

http://kfs.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5086057385/m/9801014272

[DogFish]

If this design is for a fishing orientated kayak then conventional hatch systems would be a liability to access while on the water.

Forget the straps, buckles and tether stays. What's required is a system that can be opened and closed quickly and operated single-handed.

That QCC Kayaks hatch fitted with friction hinges and compression latches might just do the trick for providing easy access to a rear fish/equipment hold.

DogFish

[RiverRaider]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AlohaDan:
I'd have some rounding.

BTW checkout Apalach's photos of the Revolution hatches.

http://kfs.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5086057385/m/9801014272 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


That large flip up hatch... looks like a toilet seat...

The small round flip ups are very cool.. and would allow (it appears) easy open and close operation.. Old Town's new hatchs are similar.. and looks just as functional and convienient..

Down side.. Up goes the price.

[Santiago II]

The most important thing with hatches is that they be watertight. A lot of hatches out there aren't.

[Paddlin' 4 Reds]

Mornin';
....if you find a hatch that doesn't leak.....I bet the hull does. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[DogFish]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Santiago II:
The most important thing with hatches is that they be watertight. A lot of hatches out there aren't. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> And another aspect to also consider is that no hatch is watertight when it is open, as will often be the case whilst loading caught fish or retrieving tackle and other gear out on the water. http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/scratch_chin.gif

Good justification for utilising an internal waterproof fish storage bag or hold that is sealed at the hatch opening. Worst case you get a couple of gallons in the bag rather than have it get into the hull proper. Mixed with the ice in the bag it should result in a great cold slurry for keeping those fish nice and fresh. http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

DogFish

[Paddlin' 4 Reds]

Mornin';
Hey!......what the *&^%. Help a guy out here. I've got a Yak to build, and you guys just up and quit the "Great Inputs". Writers Block? ....or What? ....and no don't ask....no new Pics. OK this weekend. Maybe. Been makin' "Strips". Did use a cool PVC Pipe/EndCap setup to keep them nice,neat & sorted ..... Spalted Maple, Mahogany, Eastern Red Cedar, Red Oak, Walnut.... I've been a busy "Lil Beaver". http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif SawDust is over knee deep http://kfs.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

[bnz]

http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/pics.gif http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/pics.gif http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/pics.gif


http://www.kayakfishingstuff.com/images/maps/rofl.gif

[Paddlin' 4 Reds]

Mornin';
.....hasn't been alot of progress "forward". I have had to go "backwards". I've actually cut all new panels and restitched. Then I took it apart again "resanded" some spots on the edges, and restiched. Found out I'm not as accurate as a CNC Machine. All hasn't been lost, I hadn't originally planned on making it a "Hybrid" (Stich-N-Glue" hull with a Cedar "Strip" Deck). So it's taking some time to acquire the needed lumber. Remembering back to a previous post about measuring fish. I have made 02 "Decorative Strips". I Laminated Eastern Red Cedar & Spalted Maple "Stripes" on the two edges. With 1" alternating blocks of Red Oak and Walnut. Making in essence a "Strip" Yard Stick. After it's all glassed and Varnished into the hull, I'll just but a grease pencil mark on the appropriate Size Limits for the target species (as there is not numbers on the stripes), these marks will wipe right off after the trip.