Boat Building Forum

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

Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
By:ancient kayaker
Date: 5/5/2013, 10:36 am
In Response To: S&G: What would be lighter? (Sodbuster------WebKitFormBoundary6pLaVD9X7Zfw4+Pi-)

It all depends how you plan to use the boat. I paddle primarily mud-bottom lakes and gentle streams, day use only, so it's light-duty.

My solo canoe is 3 mm ply with a 6 mm bottom held together by wooden chine logs. It has no glass or epoxy coating, finishes are water-based, latex house paint and Bristol Finish varnish. Many of the joints are Titebond III, only the external underwater joints are epoxy. I feel I overbuilt it, a 4 mm ply bottom would have saved a couple of lb.

It is still in excellent shape. I don't have any problems with rocks and deadhead trees as they're easy to see and avoid. Consequently I can get away with such light construction indefinitely. The boat is so light that pebble beaches are not an issue, I just carry it into shallow water and go from there; no seal launching for me!

Glass and epoxy encapsulation are a recent development in boatbuilding and boats last fine without it. Eliminating it from a modern design that is built around it requires more changes than simply leaving of the glass and pox. The wooden chine logs BTW are not an anti-epoxy fad; unreinforced epoxy fillets are not strong enough on their own and need glass tapes as a minimum. The wood chine logs are simpler, quicker and more pleasant to use, but the S&G method cannot be used.

If you're interested in whitewater excursions, braving heavy weather at sea, or plan long trips, this isn't for you, but it's practical for many folk.

Messages In This Thread

S&G: What would be lighter?
Sodbuster------WebKitFormBoundary6pLaVD9X7Zfw4+Pi- -- 5/4/2013, 1:13 pm
Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
JohnAbercrombie -- 5/4/2013, 11:00 pm
Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
JohnAbercrombie -- 5/4/2013, 11:06 pm
Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
JohnAbercrombie -- 5/4/2013, 11:09 pm
Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
ancient kayaker -- 5/5/2013, 10:36 am
Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
Sodbuster------WebKitFormBoundary6pLaVD9X7Zfw4+Pi- -- 5/5/2013, 12:24 pm
Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
Bill Hamm -- 5/6/2013, 12:36 am
Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
Tony G -- 5/5/2013, 4:29 pm
Re: S&G: What would be lighter?
Sodbuster------WebKitFormBoundary6pLaVD9X7Zfw4+Pi- -- 5/5/2013, 5:21 pm