Ultra Light (solo) Canoe

Welcome to the new Bear Mountain Builders Forum - an interactive internet service we provide to encourage communication between canoe and kayak builders
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:59 am
Location: London, Ontario, Canada

Ultra Light (solo) Canoe

Post by Doug »

Has any one made one of these, http://www.geodesicairoliteboats.com/ ?

Anyone make a Kevlar Canoe, from the book, "Building Your Kevlar Canoe" by James Morgan.

I've narrowed down my next (solo) canoe to the "Osprey" from www.greenval.com . I've bought the Osprey plans from Martin Step last year. P.S., I've had good help from M. Step in building my Kipawa four years ago.

Are there any other designs out there that I should be looking at? I have enough cedar (strips) left over from my past two projects.
"Some people hear the song in the quiet mist of a cold morning..... But for other people the song is loudest in the evening when they are sitting in front of a tent, basking in the camp fire's warmth. This is when I hear it loudest ...." BM
Rick
Posts: 727
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:23 am
Location: Bancroft, Ontario

Post by Rick »

Doug, have you test-paddled an Osprey yet - Swift has several outlets in Ontario and lakes aren't frozen so you might be able to. The Osprey will turn easily and is a good river boat, although it probably won't have the freeboard for rough whitewater. Some say they'd prefer something straighter-tracking for lakes and a Merlin or 38 Special might be better and more efficient. Depends on how you paddle - I'd probably go with a 38, since lake paddling is mostly what I do.

http://www.northwestcanoe.com/store/canoes.asp

Carrying Place canoes also has some solo designs but there isn't much info on them.

http://www.carryingplacecanoeworks.on.c ... strip.html
ScottO

Post by ScottO »

I built an Osprey about 2 years ago. I might be able to offer some insights. Rick is right, my boat will turn on a dime, given the 2.5" of rocker in the front. It doesn't track especially straight because, with just me in the boat, the bow is barely in the water. However, it paddles great with a weekend's worth of gear in it. I also found that it handles great in choppy water- very stable and easy to maneuver.

I would also say that mine isn't especially light (55#), although that is my fault for using heavier trim (large decks, gunwales, and thwarts. I think you would have to work pretty hard to turn it into an "ultralight solo."

So the Osprey could be the right boat, depending on what you want to do with it, although if I had it to do over again, I would probably build the 38 special.
User avatar
Erik, Belgium
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:31 am
Location: Gierle, Belgium
Contact:

Post by Erik, Belgium »

Brian Schulz annonced (on qajaqusa.org) last week the launching of a similar canoe as the one you referred to in your first post.

Erik, Belgium.

Image
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:59 am
Location: London, Ontario, Canada

Post by Doug »

I like the looks of the 38 Special.

I noticed that there are no stems in the construction of it.
Would that not have a weaker structural integrety?
I also noticed that it uses a "sabot".
I would imagine that it could be built to be under 45 lbs.

I do like a good tracking canoe; for our (smaller) inland lakes.
I believe that the 38 Special would track better than the Osprey. But how much of a difference would there be? The two differ only by a foot in length, the remainding measurements are farely similar.
"Some people hear the song in the quiet mist of a cold morning..... But for other people the song is loudest in the evening when they are sitting in front of a tent, basking in the camp fire's warmth. This is when I hear it loudest ...." BM
KenC
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:42 pm
Location: Oakville, ON

Post by KenC »

Doug wrote: I believe that the 38 Special would track better than the Osprey. But how much of a difference would there be? The two differ only by a foot in length, the remainding measurements are farely similar.
I haven't paddled either one, but I've considered both. The thing that strikes me about the description of the 38 Special is "No Rocker". I like a strong tracking boat, but isn't a little bit of rocker necessary for maneouverability?
User avatar
Michel vd Hoven
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 5:15 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Post by Michel vd Hoven »

If you need info on light-weight strip building, see some very helpfull posts on the Canadian Canoe Routes Forum.

My own topic on CCR: "How to build a 40lb Osprey" got about 60 replies, and some are very interesting/usefull. Also John Winters (designer of Osprey, Winisk, Kipawa, etc) joins on this forum.

http://www.myccr.com/SectionForums/view ... hp?t=10546

There also is a topic Building your own kevlar canoe:

http://www.myccr.com/SectionForums/viewtopic.php?t=9982

Michel, The Netherlands
Rick
Posts: 727
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:23 am
Location: Bancroft, Ontario

Post by Rick »

Doug,
I believe that the 38 Special would track better than the Osprey. But how much of a difference would there be? The two differ only by a foot in length...
Half that amount can create quite a difference in canoe performance and tracking ability, according to canoe designers - with no rocker in the 38, it should track straight well. The 38 and Merlin have been very well received and had great reviews further west, in the Quetico and the Boundary Waters areas. Here, the Osprey seems to have caught on. The best thing would be to take a day off to test-paddle an Osprey, and if it tends to wander off course too much and needs constant course correction, then maybe the 38 will suit your style more closely.

They're both good boats, and both will have good reviews. At www.myccr.com I believe there are reviews of the Osprey in the Gear review section. There may also be some for both boats at www.paddling.net but I haven't been there in a while.
User avatar
Bryan Hansel
Posts: 678
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Grand Marais, MN
Contact:

Post by Bryan Hansel »

It may also be the case that the 38 Special or the Merlin will be slightly more efficient than the Osprey. You will spend less time and effort on corrective strokes, but if you do any river paddling, I'd lean towards the Osprey. Someone built a Merlin with rocker, which is something that I'd think about doing. I think I'd add 1.5" to 2" to the front and .75" to 1" in the back.

I bought the plans for a Carrying Place Soul Mate and a friend of mine started building it. He probably is finished now, but I haven't seen it since the first layer of glass. It seemed to have a ton of volume compared to most solo canoes that I've been in.

My favorite solo is a Bell Wildfire, so I’d probably build the Osprey, but I also paddle a Magic when I go to the BWCA. So, maybe a Merlin with rocker would do good.

Bryan
TK

Kevlar Canoe

Post by TK »

I bought the Book "Fool proof method of making a kevlar canoe and tried it. He had three designs and I chose the tripper canoe. I coujld not get the design to work as the stations did not fit where there were suppose to so I did not want to invest the money in the kevlar. I am finally making the kevlar canoe after making two cedar strips. I am using a cedar strip as the mold. At this point I have the kevlar canoe laid up but do not have the gunwales or anything else done to it. After going through all the rig-a-morole I would make a cedar strip, leave it on the strong back put on a releasing agent lay up the kevlar and end up with two canoes.

If you want more info email me, I am in the members list.

TGK
User avatar
Erik, Belgium
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 5:31 am
Location: Gierle, Belgium
Contact:

Post by Erik, Belgium »

I built the 38special without stems, but with the sabot. The strength isn't really on issue IMO. Stems are much more work, but also more beautiful. Pictures of the 38SPL building process, including the sabot, can be found here: http://users.pandora.be/kano-kayak/38special.htm
I own a Bell Magic as well, and compared to that one, the 38SPL is quite manouvrable ! 2 weeks ago I paddled the 38SPL on a small river (20 feet wide only !), shallow and a lot of sharp turns in it. Although not the most preferred environment for the 38SPL, it was fun to do. See pic. BTW, this was my daughter's (10 yr) first river paddling trip (she's in the red kayak).

Erik, Belgium.

Image
Tommy
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 2:59 pm

Post by Tommy »

The Dacron boats are light. But be sure you are not comparing apples to oranges. Geodisic Aerolites' home page mentioned above boasts an 8 lb canoe. But it has only a 150 lb capacity. Looking at their other designs I can see that even their larger solos have insufficient capacity for my body weight let alone gear for a trip. Their sturdier 14-16 foot canoes they recommend for tripping have 450-500 lb capacity and they weigh 30+ lbs. You can build a solo cedarstripper for just a few pounds more using lightweight building techniques. I have a 15' Huron that weighs 45 lbs and from what I learned building it (my first boat) I am sure I could get that weight down to 40 lbs or less. This canoe has seen its fair share of rough treatment. I know someone who built a Bob's Special at 35 lbs for tandem tripping and an Osprey for solo tripping at a similar weight.

Search this site for "lightweight" or "ultralight" and the CCR forum mentioned in a previous post.
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:59 am
Location: London, Ontario, Canada

Post by Doug »

Thanks to all, the re-discovering of "CCR" & "paddle net" has been fantastic.

Would a kevlar canoe cost about the same as a cedar equivalent?
"Some people hear the song in the quiet mist of a cold morning..... But for other people the song is loudest in the evening when they are sitting in front of a tent, basking in the camp fire's warmth. This is when I hear it loudest ...." BM
User avatar
Bryan Hansel
Posts: 678
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Grand Marais, MN
Contact:

Post by Bryan Hansel »

Kevlar runs around $15.00 per yard, so for a 15' boat you are looking at $75 for the Kevlar alone. Morgon, I believe, also uses S-Glass over the Kevlar, which will run you about $10 per yard, so you are adding in about $50 there. So, you will end up spending about $125 on Kevlar and glass.
A stripper on the other hand will run you about $5 per yard, but you need to do the inside and outside, so you will spend $50 on glass, but for wood you can range anywhere from $50 to $300 depending on the quality of the wood and if you buy it already ripped. If you do all the work yourself, and get good wood, you will probably spend $100. So, for glass and wood you will spend $150.
The gunwales, seats, thwarts, yoke, etc... will run you the same on each boat. The strongback and forms will cost you the same, but with Morgans method you have to build a plug, which will run $50 or $75. This is a total guess. Which boosts the kevlar boat to $175 or $200.

So, really, a Kevlar boat built with Morgan's methods will run you $25 to $50 more. After emailing with a canoe designer who I purchased a plan from, he thought that you could end up with a wood boat that would weigh about the same, but would look much better. He wasn't too hip on Morgan's methods and thought that you would end up with a canoe that wouldn't look that great on the outside.

Typically, Kevlar canoes are produced with a female mold, and gel coat is sprayed onto the mold before any of the kevlar is laid into that mold. This layer of gel coat is what creates the nice smooth look you see on commercial canoes. I'm not sure that you will get a nice fair surface like that from Morgan's methods.

But, I still think it would be fun to build a canoe his way. Just to see. But what I'd really like to see is a canoe built out of veneer and then covered with Kevlar. My guess is that a 14' canoe would weigh about 25 to 30 pounds and would be super stiff. Painted on the outside with the wood on the inside would look fantastic.

Bryan
Bayport_Bob
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:03 pm

Post by Bayport_Bob »

The kevlar mentioned by Moran is 8.9 oz/sq yd. which is considerably more expensive than standard 5 oz listed by many suppliers. In fact, the only place I've found it is at Raka and it's a +45/-45, 8.9 oz stitched biaxial that runs $30/yd (64" wide) for 5 yards or more. Also the s-glass is layed in 3 sections with overlapping down the keel and is 30" wide, so 15 yards is needed for a 15' boat ( ~ $ 115)

I would estimate at a minimum it would cost just over $265 for a single layer of kevlar & the s-glass on a 15' hull. Part of the strength in this layup is due to the fiber orientation in the laminate - the s-glass lays at 0/90 degree, and the kevlar at -45/+45 along wtih the heavy s-glass thickness down the keel

A good resource for building composite canoes and kayaks is "Boat Builders Manual - Building Fiberglass Canoes and Kayaks for Whitewater" . I believe it's out of print (the 5th edition was in 1982), but a person could probably snag a copy by searching abebooks.com

The reason I mention the book is that the processes and layups they use & recommend are still fairly applicable today. A cruising hull would have an s-glass/s-glass/kevlar/kevlar layup starting from the outside of the hull. An "ultra light" or racing hull would have glass/kevlar/kevlar with some sort of structure ribbing required.

The cruiser layup schedule would run ~$120 for the s-glass (2 layers) and ~$170 for 2 layers of 5 oz kevlar, or $290 for the fabric on a 15' hulll. The sources for my prices are Raka, Fiberglass Supply, & JR Sweet. Also as a side note, 500 series kevlar is recommended for hand layup because the weave is slightly less compact than the other 5 oz series available (ex. 281 & 285).

Just my opinion & everybody's got one. - Bob
Post Reply