Boat Building Forum

Find advice on all aspects of building your own kayak, canoe or any lightweight boats

Disagree!
By:Robert N Pruden
Date: 10/3/2007, 6:43 pm
In Response To: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built (john faas)

A S&G can be built to have a lot of flex in the hull and that hull can be coated for excellent abrasion resistance. That is how I built mine. I've paddled over 1200-kms on a river trip (10.5 days), run through gravel beds, hit rocks and logs, and paddled through lots of class 2-3 rapids with no damage to my kayak. Mine is a Waters Dancing 17'ter with a 24.5" beam with two hatches for storing lots of gear and food. My keels are reinforced with brass and ash strips, the cockpit lined with Kevlar and the hull coated with graphite/cabosil. I had to do that reinforcing because I also love to paddle on the river while there is ice. The edges of ice pans are quite sharp and very hard, a condition that chews through glass in short order.

Any S&G kayak can be built strongly enough to endure severe conditions (more weight) or lightly enough to have lower weight. Chosen construction methods depend solely on the intent of the builder. Same idea goes for strip-built kayaks. I know one man who paddled most of the West Coast of North America in a stripper with no problems. Build your boat with strong materials if you plan on banging it up. Build it with lighter materials if you know you won't bang it up. The universe of building boats is wide open to new possibilities for building methods/materials.

On a final note, I am notorious for banging my kayaks up. In fact, I even managed to smash one of them into 11-pieces. I've gouged others and ground keels down to the wood. I have NEVER managed to split a seam, not even on teh one that broke into 11-pieces. Seams should be filled with thickened epoxy and glassed for strength since they are the obvious location for structural weakness. Built properly, your kayak should break somewhere else if you find that you must go out and bang it up.

Robert N Pruden

Messages In This Thread

S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
john faas -- 10/3/2007, 1:58 pm
makes no sense
LeeG -- 10/9/2007, 8:20 am
Re: makes no sense
HenkA -- 10/9/2007, 10:47 pm
Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Paul G. Jacobson -- 10/11/2007, 1:01 pm
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Bryan Hansel -- 10/11/2007, 7:18 pm
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Bill Hamm -- 10/11/2007, 8:00 pm
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass *LINK* *Pic*
Dan Caouette (CSFW) -- 10/12/2007, 8:02 am
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Bill Hamm -- 10/12/2007, 8:17 am
I'd like a side of ribs with a glass of resin
Paul G. Jacobson -- 10/12/2007, 11:05 am
Re: I'd like a side of ribs with a glass of resin
Bill Hamm -- 10/12/2007, 3:52 pm
Re: I'd like a side of ribs with a glass of resin
Mike Savage -- 10/12/2007, 2:04 pm
Re: I'd like a side of ribs with a glass of resin
Dan Caouette (CSFW) -- 10/12/2007, 11:25 am
Re: I'd like a side of ribs with a glass of resin
Paul G. Jacobson -- 10/12/2007, 11:57 am
Re: I'd like a side of ribs with a glass of resin
Dan Caouette (CSFW) -- 10/12/2007, 12:18 pm
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Dan Caouette (CSFW) -- 10/12/2007, 10:36 am
fix up your Pal
Paul G. Jacobson -- 10/12/2007, 11:47 am
Re: fix up your Pal
Dan Caouette (CSFW) -- 10/12/2007, 12:16 pm
Re: fix up your Pal
Bill Hamm -- 10/12/2007, 3:46 pm
Re: fix up your Pal
Dan Caouette (CSFW) -- 10/14/2007, 8:19 am
Re: fix up your Pal
Paul G. Jacobson -- 10/12/2007, 1:04 pm
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
TOM RAYMOND -- 10/11/2007, 6:00 pm
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Bill Hamm -- 10/11/2007, 5:02 pm
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
John Monroe -- 10/13/2007, 6:38 am
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Bill Hamm -- 10/13/2007, 7:17 am
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Paul G. Jacobson -- 10/11/2007, 6:48 pm
Re: Yes, I'd trust a boat with NO inside glass
Bill Hamm -- 10/11/2007, 7:58 pm
Re: makes no sense
Bryan Hansel -- 10/10/2007, 12:32 pm
Re: makes no sense
Robert N Pruden -- 10/10/2007, 8:12 pm
Re: makes no sense
TOM RAYMOND -- 10/11/2007, 11:41 am
Re: makes no sense
Bill Hamm -- 10/11/2007, 2:51 am
re. ten pounds less
LeeG -- 10/10/2007, 12:55 pm
Re: makes no sense
Bill Hamm -- 10/10/2007, 1:38 am
Re: makes no sense
HenkA -- 10/10/2007, 10:39 pm
Re: makes no sense
Bill Hamm -- 10/11/2007, 2:48 am
Re: makes no sense
HenkA -- 10/11/2007, 3:46 pm
Re: makes no sense
Bill Hamm -- 10/11/2007, 2:49 am
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
HenkA -- 10/4/2007, 8:25 pm
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
HenkA -- 10/4/2007, 10:44 pm
Re: S&G: (Link to thread: Which gives stronger boa *LINK*
HenkA -- 10/4/2007, 10:34 pm
Re: S&G: (Link to thread: try again *LINK*
HenkA -- 10/4/2007, 10:55 pm
Two links to tests of strip & S&G
Glen Smith -- 10/4/2007, 8:54 pm
Re: Two links to tests of strip & S&G
Robert N Pruden -- 10/4/2007, 9:58 pm
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
Bill Hamm -- 10/4/2007, 1:30 am
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
vk1nf -- 10/3/2007, 9:44 pm
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
Aaron -- 10/3/2007, 8:41 pm
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
Scott Baxter -- 10/3/2007, 7:49 pm
Disagree!
Robert N Pruden -- 10/3/2007, 6:43 pm
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
Charlie -- 10/3/2007, 5:39 pm
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
Paul G. Jacobson -- 10/3/2007, 2:44 pm
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
Robert N Pruden -- 10/3/2007, 6:49 pm
durability not the issue. Think "ability" instead
Paul G. Jacobson -- 10/4/2007, 9:12 am
Re: durability not the issue. Think "ability" inst
Robert N Pruden -- 10/4/2007, 6:30 pm
Only one job? You'll go mad!!! *NM*
TOM RAYMOND -- 10/4/2007, 6:47 pm
Robert is gonna start writing his books
Robert N Pruden -- 10/4/2007, 7:06 pm
Re: Robert is gonna start writing his books
Ken Sutheland -- 10/6/2007, 6:24 pm
Re: S&G: S & G less durable than strip-built
Bryan Hansel -- 10/3/2007, 2:17 pm