Smaller folk, the majority of whom are female have been under served by canoe builders.

The Curtis MayFly, Sawyer StarLite, BlackHawk KittyHawk and Shadow 12 are distant memories from an age before the public decided solo canoeing was too skill intensive, and Placid's SpitFire is rarely converted to kneeling use.

He also drew a series of smaller solo trippers, starting with the Curtis Vagabond in 82, the Swift Loon in 92, and the Placid RapidFire in 05. [Hemlock's Kestrel. 98, is a re-tooled Vag.] But DY wanted another, more efficient, tripper with less wetted area.

Now, Swift C&K, from the land of Hockey, Maple Syrup and Poutene, announces a solo tripper for the petite amongst us.

The Keewaydin 14, 28' max beam, 24" waterline width with 4 inches tumblehome at rails amidships, 2.5/1.25" differential rocker and weight around 24 lbs. Shear? tough to tell until molded, ~ 16.5/11.5/15.5"

A David Yost design, available early summer '14, the 24 lb estimate including foam core, rails and thwarts in an infused Kevlar hull.

This will be interesting to watch and maybe even try it out!

I have owned several boats and have sold all but 4 and 3 of the ones I have left have that DY on them. I would expect a DY boat to be a nice boat. Do you know what material the new 24 lb. boat is made of?

Looks like a sweet little Canoe .

Charlie... Not trying to hijack your thread, but have you ever seen the movie "Charlie Wilson's War"?

Thanks, it looks like it might work me (small guy/small load).

"Smaller folk" I thought you were going address some gnomes, trolls or hobbits.!:)

quote pswith5: ""Smaller folk" I thought you were going address some gnomes, trolls or hobbits.!:)"

Good for transporting a leprechaun and his lucky charms?

Picture of DY paddling the wood plug prototype. Thwarts and final sheer may differ.
DY is a bit tall for the boat and don't pay attention to the slouch motif nor the double blade.
Magic Paddler CEW indicated infused rails and Kevlar construction though undoubtedly there will be multiple lamination schedules and more weight in some. What I am unsure of is whether CF consruction will be offered. And I don't think I have seen infused rails on an all Kevlar boat before. Maybe he meant CF, where infused rail use is common.

Hey! I just came over from the Plus Size Pants thread.........nothing to see here.

Hahahahaha, that's pretty funny

quote pswith5: ""Smaller folk" I thought you were going address some gnomes, trolls or hobbits.!:)"

Hey, I represent that remark!

quote cinna: "Hey! I just came over from the Plus Size Pants thread.........nothing to see here."

Are you looking at my gut???

I'M WORKING ON IT!!!

Sizing solos has much more to do with height and reach and horsepower generated than the number of Christmas cookies in your belly.

Cookies play a role but at the bottom of the list.

Enjoy!

quote yellowcanoe: "Sizing solos has much more to do with height and reach and horsepower generated than the number of Christmas cookies in your belly. Cookies play a role but at the bottom of the list."

Survey says……..cookies do matter! :-)

The included literature below would seem to indicate that weight does play a fairly important role in the sizing and selection of solo canoes, at least to a few designers.

Although a diminutive paddler would benefit from a scaled down solo canoe, a short physique doesn’t necessarily mean lightweight, and being tall doesn’t necessarily equate to heavy. I'm 6' 4" and approx. 210-pounds, but I also know many paddlers that are one foot shorter, yet weigh the same as me.

It's always been my understanding that a shorter canoe will perform efficiently with a smaller lighter paddler on board, due to less wetted hull surface. That said, if I drop myself and gear into a smaller, shorter canoe, my increased weigh now widens the hull and increases the wetted hull surface. Therefore, I'm now paddling a short, fat canoe. In other words, the design advantage is negated.

This is why I'll often use my wife's Sawyer Summersong for a day tripper with little of no gear. But as a solo tripper with a week's worth of gear, I lose the design advantage. I know this because I've tried and I didn't need a GPS or a Radar gun to figure out that I had defeated the design concept intended by Sawyer's LER hull design, which was their marketing term for their scaled solo canoes in the 80's.

So yes, a paddler's physical stature is a factor, but judging by the literature I've included, the paddler's weight seems to be high on the list of priorities from what I can determine.

Hans Solo

I didn't say it didn't matter but that it matters LESS. The first priority is not how much you weigh but how tall is your torso. The second thing is how much you weigh.

Look at the waterlines at various weights of loading for example on Placid Boat Works site. We can accept that in general Archimedes is working equivalently for other mfrs of similarly shaped canoes

One inch of waterline sunk per 100 lbs approx

there is a good deal of spread in weight per inch. And look at performance weights for another representative solo

Swift Osprey 120-260 lbs

I wish more makers included performance weights. Also if you adhere to John Winters there is a ten percent fudge factor. Ergo a 290 lb er would probably not notice a performance more like a log in an Osprey.

For Wenonahs the significant deadwood from a sunk and stuck hull may make some feel the difference of a more sunk hull.

CEW will be back but for now is sliding somewhere in Ontario.

Hmmmm.....strange thing, I don't see anything in the enclosed spec sheets stating anything about torso length, although I agree it's a factor. Per the spec sheets, paddler weight and overall load weight seem to top the list of priorities. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but my argument is based on the information at hand, which is quite clear.

YC, your previous reply stated paddler weight is on the bottom of the list, now you state it's the second consideration. So which is it? The specs above seem to indicate it's a rather high priority.

For the average canoe paddler/consumer, the spec sheets above have more relevance than delving into a physics text book. Other than a test paddle, the weight guidelines can be a good start for narrowing down the potential choices for the would-be canoe buyer/paddler.

Having worked in outdoor retail and computer sales and service for many years, I can tell you the average consumer doesn't want to hear a lot of technical mumbo-jumbo, (that's reserved for "Tech Weenies" like us). They want to hear what works best for them, what's the most fun, and what will it cost.

Hans Solo

quote HansSolo: "
Hmmmm.....strange thing, I don't see anything in the enclosed spec sheets stating anything about torso length, although I agree it's a factor. Per the spec sheets, paddler weight and overall load weight seem to top the list of priorities. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but my argument is based on the information at hand, which is quite clear.

YC, your previous reply stated paddler weight is on the bottom of the list, now you state it's the second consideration. So which is it? The specs above seem to indicate it's a rather high priority.

For the average canoe paddler/consumer, the spec sheets above have more relevance than delving into a physics text book. Other than a test paddle, the weight guidelines can be a good start for narrowing down the potential choices for the would-be canoe buyer/paddler.

Having worked in outdoor retail and computer sales and service for many years, I can tell you the average consumer doesn't want to hear a lot of technical mumbo-jumbo, (that's reserved for "Tech Weenies" like us). They want to hear what works best for them, what's the most fun, and what will it cost.

Hans Solo"

Excellent post, the above posts show how little I know about the dynamics of canoes, I will stick to giving fishing advice :-)

I like the ones that are sorta pointed on the ends

Yeah, I would guess that the posts from Hans Solo and yellowcanoe both illustrate why I (5'7", 145 lbs.) prefer the Bell Magic to the SRQ 16 as a solo. Beyond that I think a lot of the subtleties of canoe characteristics are lost on me due to my lack of paddling skill and expertise. Kind of like when my father asked his golf partner why he was still using X golf ball instead of the new SuperX ball that all the pros were using, and he replied " because the pro told me I'm not good enough to get any advantage from it". :)

quote HansSolo: "Having worked in outdoor retail and computer sales and service for many years, I can tell you the average consumer doesn't want to hear a lot of technical mumbo-jumbo, (that's reserved for "Tech Weenies" like us). They want to hear what works best for them, what's the most fun, and what will it cost. Hans Solo"

I am not a tech weenie but I am always looking to learn more about the sport that I love.

All this tech info is very interesting for me to learn about.

I want to have the knowledge to be able to make choices for myself and not have to rely 100% on the salesperson's point of view when I am looking to purchase new gear.

quote HansSolo: "
Hmmmm.....strange thing, I don't see anything in the enclosed spec sheets stating anything about torso length, although I agree it's a factor. Per the spec sheets, paddler weight and overall load weight seem to top the list of priorities.
Hans Solo"

I agree that torso length should be a factor. I would think that Hans Solo could paddle a wider canoe more easily as his height would allow a better paddle angle to clear the gunwale and maintain an efficient paddle angle, whereas my shorter height would mean that I would have a harder time achieving a proper angle for my paddle.

When I recently shopped for my solo I started with researching reviews on several models of boats that fit my criteria. I then looked at personal weight/max load specs as well as the maximum width and speed/hull ratio. In doing so I was able to find and purchase a canoe on the internet that was perfect for me. This research and info was especially important because all the water was frozen when I bought it so I couldn't test it out before hand.

quote maxxbhp: "I like the ones that are sorta pointed on the ends"

:-)

quote boonie: "Yeah, I would guess that the posts from Hans Solo and yellowcanoe both illustrate why I (5'7", 145 lbs.) prefer the Bell Magic to the SRQ 16 as a solo. Beyond that I think a lot of the subtleties of canoe characteristics are lost on me due to my lack of paddling skill and expertise. Kind of like when my father asked his golf partner why he was still using X golf ball instead of the new SuperX ball that all the pros were using, and he replied " because the pro told me I'm not good enough to get any advantage from it". :)"

Don't sell yourself short boonie, you don't have to be Steve McQeen to drive a sports car! :-) Half the fun is learning the nuances of the canoe and what it can or can't do for you.

Hans Solo

But, Hans...I am short. And so are my arms and legs. :). But I am interested in learning.

It looks like a great canoe, but I think I'll stick with my SR Tranquility at 31 lbs. Its definitely the best solo canoe I've used or owned, and I've owned, Old Towne Pack, and rented a prism many times. Its almost indestructible too.