The right boat, I'm just not fat enough...

[shewhorn]

So, I thought I was going to buck the trend of buying a boat that wasn't right for me but now I'm thinking that might not be the case. When I tested different boats it was all on protected water without much wind. I never got a chance to paddle on the ocean. Last Friday I was paddling side by side with Kevin and we were talking various things and being the curious fella I am I wondered how much better his boat glides. We get going the same speed side by side and count off...1.... 2.... 3.... stop paddling. Well, I never got to see the difference because his boat went in a very straight line and mine decided to take an abrupt windward turn to the port. D'OH. Today on the way out from the Conomoy put in I was behind everyone else watching them. They all had something in common, none of them needed to hold an edge to keep going in a straight line. Me, without skeg I had the boat on a constant left edge in order to keep it going straight and not just a little edge... A LOTTA edge. Hmmmmmmm. Not only that but I had to lean forward quite a bit to get the boat to respond to my inputs AND I had to soft paddle on my right. I don't mind doing the work if that's what needs to be done but in today's conditions that kind of input strikes me as excessive (perhaps others who were at today's Essex SNG could comment on whether or not they had to do much edging to correct for wind?).

So I have a few questions. Do I need to eat more ice cream (read my trip report from Wednesday... OK, maybe DON'T read it as I tend to be a bit verbose (if you haven't already gathered from this post, LOL)... the punchline is I had ice cream after the paddle, there, I just saved you an hour of boredom LOL)? I weigh about 182ish (+/- 2.5 depending upon my consumption of Harbor Sweets). I'm thinking that this boat really wants someone a bit heavier than myself. I notice that it seems to handle better when I have it loaded up with water (of the drinking variety, not the "oops, I just filled my boat with the Atlantic" variety (I've also learned from reading the trip report forum that there's a Brad Gwynn variety as well but I won't go there, LOL)). It still goes into the wind even with additional water and I'm really not interested in lugging 200 ounces of water with me every time I go out for a paddle. The skeg does help quite a bit but I'm not sure that I want to be using a skeg all the time to make the boat do what it should do without one. It also makes me wonder if doing so will cause me to develop bad habbits.

Oh yeah... the questions. So, is this just my newbie-ousity and inexperience in handling my boat or do I need to eat lots of ice cream to make it work for me? Rephrased, should I just suck it up and hold on to this boat for at least a year and learn with it or should I just start looking for a nice used boat or maybe take advantage of some of the deals that are going on now (we're talking about the RM Tempest 170)? I'm a bit weary of the "get a different boat and solve your problem" solution and here's why... Every now and then I get "OH WOW, that's such a beautiful picture, you must have a very nice camera". If you could only see how far my eyes roll back into my head. [bIG_EGO_WARNING] No... the camera doesn't take beautiful pictures >>>>>I<<<<< take beautiful pictures, the camera doesn't know anything about photography, thank you very much. [/bIG_EGO_WARNING] On the flip side of the coin I'm a musician. I often hear "you should get a student (insert instrument here) and learn on that, it will be just fine". To that I say TOTAL BS. I can see the argument if you're talking about a child who might not stick with it, therefor the expense of a $1500 trumpet makes no sense. You should learn on a student trumpet initially as well and then start demoing as many trumpets as you can (just like boats) but to advise an adult to play a crappy student instrument for too long... I think that's silly. A good instrument with the right mouthpiece for the individual is going to help them progress MUCH faster than playing on a student instrument. Same goes for guitar. Generally the more expensive models have better actions so instead of fighting the mechanical deficiencies of a crappy instrument and developing bad technique to compensate, you're focusing on what you should be focusing on.

So, shut up, you're inexperienced (give it to me straight folks... I can take it and I do value the advice I ask for) or, like many others before you, you made a mistake and bought the wrong boat, find one that better suits you and it will make your learning and progression a lot easier?

Cheers, Joe

[Bill Gwynn]

The T170 is a pretty big boat. If I were you, I would take some time and demo other peoples boats as often as possible. Also, you kinda need to decide what type of paddling you most like to do. Are you a play boater, distance/speed, day tripper, week long camper etc. These are all factors to be considered when choosing a new boat. Many people will say that the ultimate combo is a NDK Explorer and a plastic Avocet. The Explorer is a very versatile all around great boat, the Avocet excells in rocks and surf. Of course there are many great boats from NDK, Valley, P&H, and Impex. It really comes down to personal preference and what puts the biggest smile on your face. So... paddle, demo, borrow, take your time, then decide. Getting the right boat for YOU will make a difference in your skill progression.

[shewhorn]

>The T170 is a pretty big boat.

I'm starting to realize it. It's OK, you can say it. The boat needs a diet! I'd rather be in a Formula 1 race car than a NASCAR race car any day (Formula 1 actually requires skill as well, in NASCAR the driver is merely there to make the car go straight every once in a while (uh oh... I bet I just started a fight http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/scared/scared0016.gif http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/tongue/tongue0015.gif ))

>If I were you, I would take

>some time and demo other peoples boats as often as possible.

Do I dare ask if I can try your... Anas? http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/scared/scared0018.gif (OK, you had to see that one coming).

Seriously though, the one boat I've tried so far that really made me feel like I was in a sports car (NOT a Ford or a Chevy, they don't count as real sports cars (OK... I'll the the Z06 slide but that it LOL)) is the Valley Aquanaut. I love how it behaves. Still there's so many boats to try. The one thing that I wasn't crazy about with the Aquanaut was the knee room. I think with whatever is "the right boat for me" I'm going to have to make a compromise there because one of the things I'd like is a lower deck than what the T170 has and I don't think it's possible to accomplish that without having less room for the knees.

>Also, you kinda need to decide what type of paddling you

>most like to do. Are you a play boater, distance/speed, day

>tripper, week long camper etc.

That's a good question. I guess time is the only thing that's really going to sort out those answers. Week long camper... I'd like to have the option (maybe not a whole week but 3 or 4 days might be nice) but I don't see a lot of those trips happening in the average year for me so I think that to compromise too much in that arena would be a mistake. I LOVED playing in the surf today. That was such a blast. Rocks are fun too. I haven't done a lot of distance yet. 12.15 miles (nautical) is the most I've done in a day but I love endurance sports. I love keeping metrics on my performance if for no other reason than to beat my own personal best for a given run.

>These are all factors to be

>considered when choosing a new boat. Many people will say

>that the ultimate combo is a NDK Explorer and a plastic

>Avocet. The Explorer is a very versatile all around great

>boat, the Avocet excells in rocks and surf.

I haven't paddled the Explorer yet but I'm somewhat turned off about its weight (I'm worried about what effects lifting these heavy boats up by myself is going to have on my back over time... with the back in mind if it's possible my preference would be for a lighter boat).

>Of course there

>are many great boats from NDK, Valley, P&H, and Impex. It

>really comes down to personal preference and what puts the

>biggest smile on your face. So... paddle, demo, borrow, take

>your time, then decide. Getting the right boat for YOU will

>make a difference in your skill progression.

So Ernie... what boat are you buying? http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/happy/happy0193.gif

Thanks for the advice.

Cheers, Joe

[djlewis]

Both the Explorer and the Aquanaut come in heavier and lighter models. The difference is the "layup", a general term for the material and type of construction used to build a composite boat (as well as the price ;-)). See...

http://www.seakayakinguk.com/sea_kayaks/layup.shtml

http://valleyseakayaks.com/aquanaut.htm -- lower right

--David.

[Gcosloy]

Not that I wish to discourage more commerce for the Brits but I have another point of view. As a new paddler, four seasons now, and four boats later, I have some advise: Aside from the joy of paddling out on the salty sea, trying out different boats and dreaming about the perfect boat for me is the other side of this wonderful sport. Problem is, as a novice paddler without much skill, we don't have the judgment yet to recognize and appreciate one boat from the other. Or if we do, our assesment is based upon the last technique that we still can't do properly. You know-my boat doesn't track very well, just a light breeze and it weathercocks, while that new Aquanaut drives straight like a train. Spend a solid season paddling the boat you brought to the dance, focus on building and improving your skills, then try and assess other boats. For me this exercise took three seasons but I think you're a much quicker study than I. After three seasons I can finally appreciate how wonderful my first boat really was. I still have it-Lincoln Chebeauge 14.5', almost no rocker, 2 hatches, no skeg or rudder and doesn't need one. My first year paddling this boat in moderate side winds on the Sudbury river had me blown into the shore several times, unable to control the boat and swearing that it needed a skeg. The Tempest 170 for 185lb guy is not too big, that's what the 180 is for. The Tempest is a great all round boat-does everything well, but not exceptionally. I have a rule in life which I'll share with you: As a woodworker I don't own or want a tool that's better than I am. A kayak is a tool also, most are better than our skills paddling them. Focus on being the best paddler you can in your 170. When you've outgrown it-get another boat.In the meantime have fun and try anyone's boat that's willing. You can certainly try my fleet of Chathams-but keep your grubby little hands off my Chebeauge.

[RogerPollock]

There’s a quote that goes: “If the music’s bad, don’t blame the instrument, blame the musician.” To the greater extent, I believe this is true. When we were kids learning to play guitar, there were always those really good guys (usually older) who could pick up our junk guitar, and play through our amps, and burn like Eddie Van Halen, and afterwards, we’d hold our guitars and stare in disbelief, as if they’d been momentarily possessed, because, at that stage, we could never get them to sound like that . . . However, one could never, say, play proper Flamenco on a Fender Strat. I mean, it could be done, but it wouldn’t sound right, nor really work right, on steel strings. A Fender Strat is just not designed for that. So, there's a limit . . .

So, too with paddling . . . My first boat was a northwest-type design, similar to a Looksha, with a factory rudder, which they included for a reason – the boat was miserable without it, just horribly behaved, spun like a top with a hint of wind or current. But drop the rudder and paddle, and the boat flew. And I mean flew, faster even than the boats I have now. It was designed to do just this, not British/purist type paddling, but I persisted in paddling the boat in a way it wasn’t designed for. Could one manage without the rudder? Yes, but it was a hell of a lot of exhausting work, and who needs that? Having upgraded to boats that track much better without aids, I still wonder if, now with more experience, I could do a better job in that old boat, or if you dropped some hot-shot five star paddler in it and tossed him out in bad conditions if he’d paddle just fine, and with a smile on his face – sans rudder. Maybe I should have kept it, so I could find out . . .

I have the Tempest 165 (it’s MY plastic Avocet). I never paddled the 170. Didn’t get that far. Having just sat in it, the cockpit was much too big. I weight 205#, so I can only imagine you’re swimming in the thing. For more control, you could always try to bring the deck down to you by adding a lot of minicell under there . . . might work . . . You may find, the longer you paddle, the tighter a boat you’ll desire, and tolerate.

Boat design (and I guess marketing) is funny, and I don’t understand much of it, but a lot of manufacturers increase both length and volume at the same time (Wildy for one), when sometimes you just want more length. My Greenlander, for instance, fits the same as the Tempest, while it’s longer. Many of these manufacturers, though, are way out of whack when they say a boat is geared toward “smaller” or “bigger” paddlers. It’s all a bit subjective. According to the specs, I’m not even supposed to fit in my Tempest . . .

[Dee Hall]

>...behaves. Still there's so many boats to try. The

>one thing that I wasn't crazy about with the Aquanaut was

>the knee room. I think with whatever is "the right boat for

>me" I'm going to have to make a compromise there because one

>of the things I'd like is a lower deck than what the T170

>has and I don't think it's possible to accomplish that

>without having less room for the knees.

>

This is probably going to be true, although there are a few

boats out there with high front decks and narrower beams.

>That's a good question. I guess time is the only thing

>that's really going to sort out those answers. Week long

>camper... I'd like to have the option (maybe not a whole

>week but 3 or 4 days might be nice) but I don't see a lot of

>those trips happening in the average year for me so I think

>that to compromise too much in that arena would be a

>mistake.

That shouldn't be necessary. You might find my boat, the

Currituck, to be a tight fit (although it certainly won't be

any tighter than that Anas), but it has LOADS of space for

camping equipement. Keep in mind, some of that fit might be

the manufacturer's idea of where to put the seat which can

always be ripped out and replaced with a comfy, mini-cell

foam one.

>I haven't paddled the Explorer yet but I'm somewhat turned

>off about its weight (I'm worried about what effects lifting

>these heavy boats up by myself is going to have on my back

>over time... with the back in mind if it's possible my

>preference would be for a lighter boat).

>

There are so many great boats, and the North American layups

are much lighter than the British layups. I had the oppor-

tunity to use well over a dozen different boats that fit me

correctly this season, and I would recommend different boats

for different paddlers to try based upon their needs and

wants. For myself, the Explorer doesn't make it into the

top 5.

I hope that this is helpful,

-Dee

[Kevin B (RPS Coach)]

Joe,

The 170 is too big for you. It's equivalent to the Perception Eclipse, my first boat, and I was swimming in that one as well. As for boat control, Roger is on the mark that alot has to do with the paddler. It most likely is a combination of the high volume nature of your boat and technique. As for the Conomo trip, I definately paddled on edge from time to time; however, you should realize that you don't always need a drastic edge to compensate for the wind. On that paddle, I edged simply by shifting the weight from one butt cheek to the other with no use of the knee. For the breeze we had yesterday, it was enough.

In terms of boat buying, my advice would be to not listen to anyone's advice. People will talk your ear off on this issue and you won't be any wiser as a result. If you are really intent on finding the "best" boat, then read up on what the boats are supposed to do and choose a bunch that you want to demo based on them matching your desired characteristics. Most importantly, when you demo, try to do so on something other than flat water. It will take time. As for me, I looked at what the best paddlers in the club (of course in my opinion) were paddling, researched those boats, and tried the few I was interested.

[Gillian]

he he he you said butt cheek.

[Kevin B (RPS Coach)]

Just trying to fit in the erudite conversation we had at the end of the SNG yesterday, which included snool and snotcicles

[Gillian]

HA!!! Yeah it was getting way too technical on here, let's bring it back down to a nice base level where I feel more comfortable - thanks.

[shewhorn]

>he he he you said butt cheek.

You know... listening to Kevin paddle yesterday was a combination between hearing a cowboy and Homer Simpson (I swear he was channelling Homer with a few of those "Wooohoo"s). It now makes sense as I see the cartoon roundup is complete although I must admit I'm somewhat concerned that his "better half" is Beavis and Butthead. http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/happy/happy0035.gif http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/scared/scared0018.gif

Cheers, Joe

[Kevin B (RPS Coach)]

Actually, I do an admirable impression of Krusty the clown as well as Andy Pickman from Little Britain. To be honest, B&B is a bit, well, too lowbrow, even more me. G might disagree though

[djlewis]

>>I haven't paddled the Explorer yet but I'm somewhat turned

>>off about its weight (I'm worried about what effects lifting

>>these heavy boats up by myself is going to have on my back

>>over time... with the back in mind if it's possible my

>>preference would be for a lighter boat).

>>

>There are so many great boats, and the North American layups

>are much lighter than the British layups.

You want light and high capacity, try this one (eh, Don?)

> P&H Quest Lightweight Carbon/Kevlar Kayak...

> a special, strategically reinforced light carbon and Kevlar® layup.

> It uses less material and less resin, so it won't provide the

> rock-pounding toughness of P & H's standard fibreglass or carbon

> and Kevlar layups. In return for this sacrifice, you get a

> high-capacity touring boat that weighs in at an astonishingly light

> 40lb. or so. And with a bit of TLC, it may serve you as long or

> longer than a plastic boat.

I hoisted this -- it's truly incredible. But now the unfortunate part -- $4800. Also, I will attest to the speed of this boat -- on relatively flat water. But in 2-3-foot chop, the Aquanaut beat it.

Anyway, the point is that there are lighter and heavier layups of many of the more serious boats. For touring boats, the standard FG Explorer, for example, is at the weighty end of the spectrum, and this Quest at or near the light end. But both Explorer and Quest come in other layups.

--David.

[shewhorn]

>I hoisted this -- it's truly incredible. But now the

>unfortunate part -- $4800. Also, I will attest to the speed

>of this boat -- on relatively flat water. But in 2-3-foot

>chop, the Aquanaut beat it.

Wow... 40 pounds!!! And $4800... well that's what a decent bicycle costs (skiing, cycling, windsurfing, autocross.... why can't I enjoy a cheap sport like running http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/rolleye/rolleye0010.gif , not enough excitement and variety I guess ). In all seriousness though it sounds like they've intentionally compromised structural integrity to get that weight down. I don't want a $4800 boat that I really need to baby. If I'm worried about breaking it all the time well... I think that would ruin the fun. It seems like there's a lot of boats in the 50 to 55 pound range which are "reasonably priced" that don't compromise on structural integrity. Perhaps they aren't as bullet proof as an RM boat (of course there are tradeoffs with the durability of RM, most notably oil canning and dents due to heat) but the advantages (repairability, no oil canning or dents... you don't have to worry about them melting in the sun on a 90 degree day, etc.) outweigh a little extra durability in terms of crash resistance.

Regarding the NDK in carbon/kevlar. It doesn't seem like a lot of people are going for that option. If I'm not mistaken most folks go for a carbon/kevlar option more for durability than anything else. My understanding is that the standard glass NDK Explorers are somewhat "over engineered" and are strong as is (accounting for their unusually high weight for a glass boat). Is this why there aren't more of the carbon/kevlar Explorers out there or is it some other reason?

Cheers, Joe

[jonsprag1]

I've owned and paddled a T-170 for the past three seasons---I'm 5'11.5" and 175 lbs---and feel very secure in the boat due to the adjustable thigh braces, back rest and hip pads---fits me like a glove but some people my size feel it is too large for them---you might try the T--165 if you find the 170 too large for you or you might consider adding the plastic shims to the hip pads to make the seat smaller ---would beat the cost of a new boat. ps I do find my RM 170 slower than FG, Kev and particularly my friend Jims kitbuilt fiberglass and mahogany boat(17 feet long and 39 lbs) While it can be aggravating to be holding up the rear all the time there are solutions---like just paddling with other RM boats---also RM does have one advantage---you worry less about scratching it so it is much easier to land and launch the the more expensive kayaks---besides if you want to go fast get a motorboat.

[ccarlson]

It seems that, at least in the recent past, NDK had not mastered the art of CK layups. I know of only one person who ordered one and the boat had to be returned to the dealer due to quality problems. My standard FG Explorer weighs in at 56lb. NDK Elite layups are maybe 6-10 lb lighter but they definitely are a less robust layup. Rumor has it that NDK is improving the layups to get less weight without compromising durability. The boats are on the heavy side. But, trust me on this, one does NOT need to baby them ;-)

[shewhorn]

>I've owned and paddled a T-170 for the past three

>seasons---I'm 5'11.5" and 175 lbs---and feel very secure in

>the boat due to the adjustable thigh braces, back rest and

>hip pads---fits me like a glove but some people my size feel

>it is too large for them---you might try the T--165 if you

>find the 170 too large for you or you might consider adding

>the plastic shims to the hip pads to make the seat smaller

>---would beat the cost of a new boat.

The fit of the boat is one of the things that attracted me to it. I have excellent hip contact with the adjustable braces and decent thigh brace contact as well. The fit of the boat is not what I have a problem with, it's windage. I have no gripes with the way the boat handles. I'm not saying it couldn't be better but overall I'm not bothered, so long as there isn't wind. After observing what others are doing in their boats to maintain a straight course vs. what I'm having to do was the catalyst for this post. Kevin's description of how much edge he was putting into his boat really illustrated this for me. A simple minor shift of weight without knee vs. what I was doing... bringing it right up to the edge of secondary stability, leaning forward as far as possible, and often having to put some muscle into my sweep strokes. I didn't see anyone else putting that much effort into keeping their boats going straight. I'm perfectly willing to entertain the very real possibility that it's my lack of skill at this very very early point in my paddling career but based on observation I don't think this is the case. Of course... you mention that you yourself are 175 which is even lighter than me so that suggests something different (that it's me and not the boat).

I suppose I could run a little test by putting a couple of full water bladders or sand bags in the boat to bring the weight to the 205 to 210 pound mark. WS claims max weight for the T170 is 325 pounds.

Cheers, Joe

[shewhorn]

>My standard FG Explorer weighs in at 56lb.

I thought they were a bit heavier than that? I don't notice much of a difference between lifting Kevin's boat and my boat but there's an obvious difference lifting David's boat (I believe he has the Kevlar Aquanaut) and Brian's (Wells) boat (FG Capella 163 IIRC). When lifting those boats I feel like someone has turned on an anti gravity unit. I feel like I could put them on my finger tip and spin them like a basketball. LOL

FWIW WS claims that the weight of the T170 RM is 61.5 pounds but I've heard a lot of folks say it's more realistically 65.

Cheers, Joe

[EEL]

> My standard FG Explorer

>weighs in at 56lb.

Some swear at the "heavy" NDK boats and others swear by them, but 56# for a 17+ FG kayak is not really much heavier if any than similar boats from other manufacturers. I suspect the "too heavy" chain around their neck is due to there being some out there that are really much heavier, but I wonder how common they are. Nor are they alone on this. My AA seems to weigh a ton compared to my Avocet, but should weigh less according to specs.

Ed Lawson

[shewhorn]

Are you saying that the tollerances from boat to boat (same make/model) can vary by a few pounds?

Cheers, Joe

[Kevin B (RPS Coach)]

>>My standard FG Explorer weighs in at 56lb.

>

>I thought they were a bit heavier than that? I don't notice

>much of a difference between lifting Kevin's boat and my

These difference people talk about between boat weights seem to me to be irrelvant. A difference of 5 lbs shouldn't matter that much for getting on top of a car. If you can't do it yourself, get a Hulavator or as a passerby for help is you've gone solo.

[ccarlson]

Yes, boat-to-boat weight differences can be significant. For example, my previous Explorer weighed 68 lb. That is why I don't have it anymore. Now, that was one tough boat... the difference in the hull was pretty evident. But, my body isn't as tough as it once was so that 12 extra pounds had to go ;-) The heavier boat was an older model and it seems later ones are closer to design spec weight.

[jonsprag1]

My experience with the 170 is similar to yours---although I'm a pretty experienced paddler, there has been at least one occasion where I had some difficulty with windage----I was paddling in the Stonington area in July. It was a fairly windy day---15-25 knots with 3-4 foot seas on the open ocean and 2-3 foot seas in amongst the islands but aside from taking a long time when paddling directly into the wind, things were manageable---until we were headed back to our campsite on Russ from Hells Half Acre after being out on Merchants Row for most of the afternoon---trying to paddle from McClathery's to Wheat---turned around about 2/3 of the way there got tired going directly into the 23 knot breeze and making very slow headway. As we were coming around the lee of Camp Island, we were stuck by a front moving through---breezes increased from 20---to between 25 and 30 knots----the route we were taking required us to turn directly into the wind as soon as we left the lee of Camp to head directly to Russ---a distance of less about 1/4 mile. My friend Jim had no problem but for the life of me I couldn't get my 170 to head directly into the wind---the breeze kept catching the bow and stalling any turn to windward----sort of like a sailboat in irons--didn't have any trouble going downwind or even crosswind but couldn't head up---kept doing a forward sweep on my downwind side followed by a reverse sweep and or stern rudder stroke on my upwind side and the turn stalled every time---tried it with the skeg partway down(my normal positon), all the way down and all the way up. I eventually paddled crosswind to the lee of Russ and then was able to turn into the breeze and return to our campsite. Later I determined that the correct paddling technique for turning into a heavy breeze is to put the skeg up then do a forward sweep on the downwind side followed by a bow draw on the upwind side and a forward stroke---repeat the process as often as required---I've since been out in heavy winds and have tried that method---works like a charm. I also suspect that because the T-170 has higher sides (re-more freeboard) than some other models of kayaks, it is more likly to catch the wind in this type of situation. I also learned from reading an article in Sea Kayaker(August edition) that one should avoid using a stern rudder or a reverse sweep in this kind of situation because this increases lateral resistance aft and causes the bow to head down wind---also a reverse sweep held long enough to turn the boat significantly slows it down---more so than the bow rudder followed by a forward stroke on the same side---My problem on the day in question was a combination of boat design and paddler lack of knowledge---now I know enough to overcome the boat's tendencies---at least until the next time.

[Bill Gwynn]

Most manufactures quote boat weight without the hatch covers and outfitting. My AA came in at 52lbs with the hatch covers on, and outfitting done, it is the standard glass layup. My Avocet is a pro-lite layup and wieghs a little less than my AA, i would guess 48 or 49lbs. Personally, I wouldn't recommend the "lite" layups. They are definetly more resistant to puncture, but they are more flexible and tend to resonate impact damage to a larger area resulting alot of spider cracks in the gelcoat. In a serious impact, the result is large soft spots, rather than a more localized damage with a standard layup. My 2 cents.