> You're absolutely right. Given the different purposes that the original
> Greenland kayaks were designed for (versus our mostly recreational use)
> and given the technology available at the time those kayaks were truly
> amazing.

Peter,

Don't make the mistake of writing off traditional Greenland kayaks to the history books and using past-tense. Many Greenland towns have very active kayak clubs and traditional kayaks continue to be built and continue to perform under very demanding arctic conditions. You might find it interesting to hear that in Greenland modern kayaks are generally considered inferior for their needs. Rigid kayaks are said to "slap" too much in waves making them poor for stealth hunting. Efforts by manufacturers to introduce glass boats have not been too successful except among a few tour operations.

Personally, I would still give the nod of ultimate seaworthiness to the small, nimble Greenland skinboat, assuming that it was piloted by a kayaker with the required skill. In spite of this how many recreational kayakers would be willing to give up their large cockpits or wriggle into a kayak with only six or seven inches of depth and very little internal capacity?

So which is better? I agree with Lew that it all depends on what your personal needs are.

Peter, I also agree with you that it is easy to over-romanticize the past and perhaps I am guilty of that, but please consider that it also very easy to over glorify the advances of kayak design due to modern science. Don't get me wrong, there are some wonderful modern designs out there but thankfully a kayak is still "just" a kayak.

Greg Stamer