Canadian Canoe Routes

Page 1 of 2

Author:  Alex1 [ October 17th, 2013, 1:10 am ]
Post subject:  V-bottem

I acquired a solo canoe with a v-bottem. I'm used to a shallow arch tandem
I find the solo quite twitchy. Is this me or the boat? It seems to want to lie on one plane or the other. Sitting is where I really notice it....and I like to sit. Is this the nature of the beast or me?

Author:  Canoeheadted [ October 17th, 2013, 2:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

Nature of the beast.
You'll get used to it and learn to appreciate it.
Gunnel thigh pads and a footbrace would help though.

Author:  RHaslam [ October 17th, 2013, 7:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

What make/model?

Author:  pknoerr [ October 17th, 2013, 9:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

Hmm, I too would like to know the make and model of the solo canoe. I think more has to do with comparing stability of a tandem to a solo than the hull shape. Alot has to do with how deep the vee is. I own both shallow vee hulls (Mad Rivers and an old Blackhawk) as well as shallow arch (Bell Canoes). All are within an inch of eachother in width but vary in length based on their usage. The Blackhawk has the deepest vee and has the least primary and secondary stability. The Mad Rivers all have relatively shallow vees, and I've yet to paddle a Mad River I would consider tippy. I find all shallow vees to have excellent stability in both calm water as well as mixed wave and high wave/windy conditions. Deep V hulls (like some of the race hulls) are a whole different animal. These have less tendency to sit flat in flatwater static circumstances but firm up better when in motion.


Author:  ezwater [ October 17th, 2013, 5:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

I've owned a 13' Mad River Compatriot and a 14' 6" MR Guide Solo.

The Compatriot is an early MR effort and had a deep V bottom. It was a bit twitchy on center, but firmed up OK (for such a small solo) when leaned. But the Compatriot would have been better if rounded into a shallow arch. It would have been faster, and firmer on center.

Parenthetically, the Mad River Courier at about 14' had fairly deep V, not as much as the Compatriot, but maybe more than the Explorer. It was popular around 1980 for whitewater, though obviously not optimum for that.

The MR Guide Solo has a shallow V bottom, so shallow that even MR sometimes describes it as shallow arch. It sits nicely on center and has decent secondary stability, though the paddler may trip on its relatively sharp chines. The flattish panels of the Guide's shallow V bottom allow the most astounding flying ferry crossings, like riding an airplane wing. Only my slalom boat (see avatar) can match the Guide Solo for flying ferries. One needn't keep the bow pointed mostly upstream, but can charge out of an eddy at 45 degrees and lift the upstream edge. The boat will fly across the current with very little downstream slippage. By comparison, my roundish MR Synergy, if it gets sideways, will be washed downstream.

Those interested in V bottom should study Steve Killings' Freedom Tripper 17. In spite of having a somewhat V-d bottom, it is a fast cruiser, and maneuverable.

I think that a fully V bottomed design may be an exaggerated mistake. It's trivially easy to design a 16+ canoe, shallow arch, that cruises faster and runs whitewater better than the venerable MR Explorer. But Steve Killing's strategy, carefully putting in just a modest amount of V, does make sense.

Author:  Alex1 [ October 17th, 2013, 5:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

Scott sunset is the boat

Author:  littleredcanoe [ October 17th, 2013, 6:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

I think it is the psychological transition from tandem to solo. Yes there is one!

Time on the water will make you feel more comfortable. Its a gen purpose rec solo. ... ype=Canoes

A review ... 5&start=15

note the last post. If things don't get better comfort wise lower the seat.

When you did your twitchy sit test, was there anything else in the boat? Solos firm up a LOT with fifty or sixty lbs of gear. Sitting in an empty solo is the most unstable of all possible situations particularly if the seat is high.

Author:  Alex1 [ October 17th, 2013, 9:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

I've put a # of hours in it. It's quite stable even when empty. I lean a few degrees, moreso when kneeling. I like the height of the seat....I suppose if I sat on the floor :-)
I've paddled in wind and waves, rather bouncy empty, but quite doable. I was wondering if another boat, such as a Keewaydin 15 would be more suited to me which I suspect it might. In the meantime I was wondering about others experience with V-bottems

Author:  littleredcanoe [ October 18th, 2013, 7:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

Sorry, I thought you said it was twitchy. V bottoms and hard chines (which your boat does not have) have a bumpier transition.

My kayak has a v bottom.

Author:  pknoerr [ October 18th, 2013, 9:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

Alex, I have never seen or paddled a Scott Sunset. Though I do recall commenting on the photo on the website showing a poorly trimmed canoe that must paddle horribly. Unfortunately, Scott doesn't have a photo of the hull shape anywhere either. So I can't hlep you. Maybe a photo of the hull to down along the shallow vee so we can see how deep the vee is, would help. Reading a little more into your later postings, alot of solo canoes with seats situated for kneeling are set too high for many paddlers when sitting. I'm very comfortable testing the fringe limits of hull balance (especially on my knees), but must admit that I can feel the lower stability due to the higher center of gravity when sitting on my seats/kneeling thwarts which I have placed for optimal kneeling. So maybe just the combination of comparing your experience paddling a tandem to paddling the Sunset, as well as experiencing the higher center of gravity while sitting.


Author:  pknoerr [ October 18th, 2013, 9:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

EZ, I share your accolades for the Mad River Guide. It's a neat hull that makes a beginning solo canoeist feel comfortable, but offers some wonderful features that I've yet to experience in other similar sized canoes. You mention the relatively sharp chines, that allow this relatively big whitewater solo to carve like a playboat on green glassy waves. The shallow vee allows the paddler to lean onto either the left of right flat plane and flat spin while wave blocking when peeling out or catching eddies. I've never felt that I wanted a shallow arch hull on the Guide when paddling whitewater. I too love jet ferrying with the Guide. It's quite exhilarating to feel the speed of the hull slicing smoothly on a ferry. I have several friends that belittle the Guide's flat water capability, but that big boy charges around like a barrel pony in whitewater often outperforming whitewater canoes playboats with soft chines. I've long said, if I ever mess up my Guide major league, I'm cutting 2-3 feet out of the middle and paddling it as a playboat!


Author:  Charlie Wilson [ October 19th, 2013, 4:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

I got to thinking. Scott acquired Bluewater a few years back. Bluewater had earlier acquired a Sawyer Autumn Mist mold. The 'Mist is 14.8 X31. If one took the tumblehome out of a Mist plug as Ted Bell has done with a couple tandems, there might be the Sunset? That would save ~ $100/ hull by coming out of a one piece mold, if making it more difficult to paddle due to lack of tumblehome. Tough to tell w/o looking at the bottom shape, but DY was drawing Gothic Arch hulls back in the 80's, and the Sunset reflects Sawyers flatish shear line?. His more recent elliptical bottom shapes, compare Curtis with Bell/Placid/Swift bottoms, are more stable.

If Scott were to have splashed the 'Mist, it would be pretty easy to add Vee while adding Bondo to the upper sidewalls by glueing a rope down the keel line, then fairing it in with Bondo as Jim Henry is reputed to have done to Vee the TW-Special; Phil Sigglekow the Starship.

All conjectural based on rare external dimensions, may not have happened that way at all. It will be interesting to see where the molds end up.

Author:  Alex1 [ October 20th, 2013, 3:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

Charlie, that seems to be the size. I thnk it was specced at 31.5"
Doesn't have tumble home;straight sides. The v is quite pronounced, at least to my eye. I paddled a Mist a # of years ago and
My memory of it was that it tracked harder and didn't turn as well as
the Sunset.... But that memories old. I don't recall it being as twitchy.... Maybe it was?

Author:  pknoerr [ October 20th, 2013, 2:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

Charlie: I suppose that could happen, but why? Why would someone add vee to a hull that had moderate success with a shallow arch hull. Seems alot of things would have to collide for the Sunset to be a Autumn Mist with the tumbehome removed and the vee added. This is alot like the situation with NASCAR trying to call the cars they race, the Fusion, Impala and Camry. By the time you take out the tumblehome and add the vee it's some bastard canoe that holds nothing but dimensional similarity.


Author:  CLofchik [ October 20th, 2013, 2:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: V-bottem

Scott was selling the Sunset before they acquired Bluewater, and seeing as how Bluewater is still making more Mists than Scott is Sunset's I don't think the two are related at all, other than now being owned by the same conglomerate.

There was an Algonquin outfitter with rental Sunset's, and that has to be the only place I've seen one.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group