Why surf skis?

[tyson]

This may not be the best place to ask, but I'm not a member on any surf ski boards.

Why are boats that require a swim if your balance fails you so popular?

Why do people believe that a sit-on-top kayak is faster than than a traditional sit-in kayak?

They seem to be popular for speed, yet I see no reason that a sit-in with the same hull and a lower seat (no need for self bailing) would be anything other than more stable and easier to paddle fast.

The difference that I see is that a sit-in offers more space to carry stuff for a day trip (if you care to), should be more stable and can be rolled if a wave takes you over.

I realize that leg straps are possible, but I'm not seeing them on the fast skis.

Thanks!

Ty

[ccarlson]

I'm told that it's because they're fast and fun!

[rick stoehrer]

oh hell ya

http://www.valleyseakayaks.com/rapier20.htm

[tyson]

oh hell ya

http://www.valleyseakayaks.com/rapier20.htm

...and I'd MUCH rather have one of those or one of these than a surf ski. ...and I see no reason that a surf ski would be faster.

[rcohn]

...and I'd MUCH rather have one of those or one of these than a surf ski. ...and I see no reason that a surf ski would be faster.

This was discussed a few weeks ago on pnet I think. A racer replied, and as I recall the basic reason was safety and speed. Faster and easier to hop back on a SOT than to reenter and pump out a SINK. Try a search on pnet.

For a good laugh, read the dolphin charged my kayak thread, these people have no clue.

Ralph

[rick stoehrer]

This was discussed a few weeks ago on pnet I think. A racer replied, and as I recall the basic reason was safety and speed. Faster and easier to hop back on a SOT than to reenter and pump out a SINK. Try a search on pnet.

For a good laugh, read the dolphin charged my kayak thread, these people have no clue.

Ralph

if you DON'T COME OUT OF THE BOAT, then you don't have to pump it out. a deck allows for a roll....surf ski's not so much.

if i were to be to be inverted, i could certainly roll faster than i could scramble back upon....i suppose though that it all comes down to hull speed.

besides that rapier rudder is overhanging in the back as opposed to the rudder that ski's have that are far more functional just given their position...if valley were drop that rudder below the boat and set it up like a ski...well...that'd be cool.

[ccarlson]

oh hell ya

http://www.valleyseakayaks.com/rapier20.htm

drool.....

[Michael_Crouse]

I always thought the people who race generally don't roll. I don't mean that in a bad way, they just spend the majority of their time training and working on the forward stroke. For these folks a surf ski that weights 35lbs is probably a better choice the a racing "sea kayak" that weighs 47lbs. Part of it is also simplicity, boat? check! paddle? check? OK lets go paddle, no skirt, pump, float, etc... needed

If you like the Rapier check out the Van Dusen Mohican Unlimited K-1

[rick stoehrer]

I always thought the people who race generally don't roll. I don't mean that in a bad way, they just spend the majority of their time training and working on the forward stroke. For these folks a surf ski that weights 35lbs is probably a better choice the a racing "sea kayak" that weighs 47lbs. Part of it is also simplicity, boat? check! paddle? check? OK lets go paddle, no skirt, pump, float, etc... needed

If you like the Rapier check out the Van Dusen Mohican Unlimited K-1

th only knock i've heard pertain to it's being sea worthy? would you go on the ocean in it?

valley boat...i'd go on the ocean. paddled the 18 rapier in some little bit...friend has paddled the 20 in some fair bump...fast boat.

[Phil Allen]

I'm not adding any opinion on which is better, but for most paddlers, the surf ski allows better lower body engagement (knees centered and legs pumping like a bike) then your average sea kayak (whatever that is). So it's easier to use the big leg muscles to drive some of the hip rotation and lengthen the effective part of the forward stroke. Also, spray skirts can reduce torso rotation somewhat. Of course, as stated nicely above, that's at the cost of being able to roll the boat and keep cold water out of your lap.

Phil

[rick stoehrer]

I'm not adding any opinion on which is better, but for most paddlers, the surf ski allows better lower body engagement (knees centered and legs pumping like a bike) then your average sea kayak (whatever that is). So it's easier to use the big leg muscles to drive some of the hip rotation and lengthen the effective part of the forward stroke. Also, spray skirts can reduce torso rotation somewhat. Of course, as stated nicely above, that's at the cost of being able to roll the boat and keep cold water out of your lap.

Phil

and of course lets not forget that i admit to being utterly biased towards sea kayaks and that i've spent MAYBE a cumulative 15 minutes on a ski in my entire life....so hardly an objective or informed opinion based on experience.

[Phil Allen]

Personally, I LIKE the ability to connect with my boat with my knees & hips in addition to my butt. And I can't imagine a ski (even a short one) being much fun in rock play. But the OP asked why some folks like Surfskis, so that's the answer he got.

Phil

[tyson]

if i were to be to be inverted, i could certainly roll faster than i could scramble back upon.

Additionally, I bet I can roll in conditions that these guys can't remount a skinny ski.

...i suppose though that it all comes down to hull speed.

I see no difference in hull speed between a ski and a sit-in. That is hull design and I see no reason it needs to be different. The Rapier20 is 20' x 17.25" and the WSBS Marauder is 21' x 17".

besides that rapier rudder is overhanging in the back as opposed to the rudder that ski's have that are far more functional just given their position...if valley were drop that rudder below the boat and set it up like a ski...well...that'd be cool.

The WSBS Marauder has an understern rudder just like the skis.

For these folks a surf ski that weights 35lbs is probably a better choice the a racing "sea kayak" that weighs 47lbs.

Check the Marauder. Its 24lbs. and that number is most likely real. When we bought our Bullitt from Doug, he guessed it woult be 48lbs the way we had it built. When we got it home, our scale said 48lbs.

Since we were planning to spend some time touring on the rocky Maine coast with it, we had it built with Kevlar and an extra layer of glass. No carbon. We are already happy we avoided the carbon because we had a friend trip backwards over it and fall on it. They caved in the top deck just ahead of the read paddler. When she got back up the popped right back into shape and we went paddling. You can see a two marks, but no repair was needed. I LOVE Kevlar!

I'm not adding any opinion on which is better, but for most paddlers, the surf ski allows better lower body engagement (knees centered and legs pumping like a bike) then your average sea kayak (whatever that is). So it's easier to use the big leg muscles to drive some of the hip rotation and lengthen the effective part of the forward stroke.

The WSBS boats have cockpits/combings/seats designed for exactly that.

and of course lets not forget that i admit to being utterly biased towards sea kayaks and that i've spent MAYBE a cumulative 15 minutes on a ski in my entire life....so hardly an objective or informed opinion based on experience.

I've spent about 4 hours on a pair of rented Epic V10 Skis. One a "Sport" and the other an "L". For a very limited context, they do offer some simplicity of operation. If all you want to do is go fast and are happy to avoid the really bumpy rides, then that's fine. My question was focused more around the pretty much arrogant attitude that seems to emanate from some of the surf ski crowd about how they are faster and superior. I see no reason for a SOT hull to be faster than a sit-in hull because the hull has nothing to do with the seating or the deck. I also disagree with the safety bit. If safety in rough conditions is really the point, then learn to roll. Rolling in rough conditions is MUCH easier than re-mounting a skinny hull (sit-on or sit-in, it doesn't matter) in those same rough conditions. Rolling is also faster and takes much less energy.

Are there any real surf ski folks who read this forum that would be willing to comment on this? I find it puzzling and unless there is something I'm missing, the surf ski zealots sound a bit ignorant as well as arrogant.

In the end, I'm always going to prefer a sit-in because they are much more versatile when it comes to playing in waves, playing in rocks or carrying gear for camping.

Cheers!

Ty

[lhunt]

the surf ski zealots sound a bit ignorant as well as arrogant.

That sounds a little extreme - glass houses and all of that. After all, here we are discussing what is basically someone else's sport, as though we know something about it. I mean, sea kayakers are never arrogant or ignorant ;-)

Surf ski "zealots" are investing in finely tuned specialized boats to address the problem of going fast in both flat water and waves. That is not the emphasis many NSPN'ers have, OK. Different boats for different folks. It is an interest they have, and they have presumably spent some time researching the options and have ended up in a surf ski. I'll bet if they want to play around the rocks or go camping they paddle something else.

That surf skis are faster doesn't seem to be arguable, given the Blackburn Challenge results. Remember, most of the surf ski paddlers in the Blackburn (and there were many), did not capsize on Saturday. Therefore, for them, anything that reduces their speed, even if it helps in case of a capsize, is wasted.

Whether there is a fast racing sit-in that is as fast as the surf skis of course I can't answer. But it does seem that the surf skis are becoming more and more popular and winning by bigger and bigger margins. And your fast racing sit-in, to meet the other of your criteria, also must be rollable and re-enterable if the roll fails.

Of course, if we have a Blackburn with rough weather I expect the sea kayaks will do better relative to the surf skis than we normally do (those of us who aren't helping the surf skiers back into their boats). But I'll bet the elite, really strong surf ski racers will stay up anyway.

By the way, when I saw one of the skis capsize on Saturday, I swear he was back into his boat almost as fast as rolling.

Anyway, it's a free world. To each his own. Live and let live. All the world's a cliche.

Lisa

[rick stoehrer]

i think zealots in general sound ignorant and arrogant and and certainly aren't confined to surf ski's....but opinions will vary.

[tyson]

That surf skis are faster doesn't seem to be arguable, given the Blackburn Challenge results.

That proves only that they are fast, not that they are faster. Though I'm not a racer in the paddling world, I have been in the auto racing world. I've seen where a car that was capable of winning in the hands of a top driver completely over rode the class. ...and not because it was superior. It over ran the class because the manufacturer offered considerable awards for winning races in their cars. A top driver will win at least sometimes even if the car is a little slower. ...thus all the top drivers went to this car. Now look at the race results; all the winning cars are this sponsored car that isn't necessarily the best. Now, everyone who wants to be fast of course goes out and buys the car that is winning and everyone assumes that it is a dominant car due to its performance when its not.

I suspect that someone built a particularly fast surf ski that was in the 21 foot long class when all the fastest kayaks were only 17 feet long to comply with classing rules. Note that an Epic surf skis are 21 feet long while their racing kayaks are only 17 feet. Now in contexts where the 17 foot rule doesn't apply the surf skis are cleaning up. I'd not be surprised that a 21 foot surf ski is faster than a 17 foot K1. But is a 21 foot surf ski faster than a 21 foot K1? We don't know because the top paddlers have gone to surf skis and Epic doesn't make a 21 foot K1.

Remember, most of the surf ski paddlers in the Blackburn (and there were many), did not capsize on Saturday. Therefore, for them, anything that reduces their speed, even if it helps in case of a capsize, is wasted.

Saturday was utterly flat by open water standards.

You and Rick have pointed out that its their sport and kayakers are not except from the zealot label. You are correct.

However, what I was challenging is their claims of surf skis being inherently faster and safer. I'm looking for a solid explanation of why and/or objective data. I've not been able to find any.

Blackburn results don't prove that they are faster as explained above in the car example. It only proves that the faster paddlers are on 'skis. I didn't see any Rapier20's or Marauders there. The only "HP Kayak" was 16 minutes behind the fastest ski (plus those skis took a detour) but that was Doug's _TOURING_ model! The EFT is over 2 feet shorter at the water line and 17% wider! Its hull shape has been tuned for more stability. Additionally, I have no idea how strong a paddler was in the EFT. For me to show up with a Rapier20 would be pointless because I couldn't out paddle the top ski paddlers even if they where in a rec boat.

Safer is an empty claim if it only applies to flat water as the "risk"' of a roll or re-entry failure is about nill on flat water. IMHO the safety card only comes into play where the conditions make safety a concern. If we aren't talking about at least a small craft advisory context, we aren't talking about safety concerns where skilled paddlers are involved.

I know that NSPN isn't about the surf ski sport, but people do cross over and I've seen in the archives that some NSPN'ers are also surf ski folks so I was hoping to learn who is ignorant about the speed/safety claims; me or those making the claims.

...and I do intend to rent that V10 again, just for the fun and experience.

Thanks!

Ty

[binks]

Ty,

I'm a surfskier now, but was an avid seakayaker and member of NSPN for several years. For full disclosure, I run www.nesurfski.net and I currently have four skis and no seakayaks.

Why surfski? For me, the ski was initially a new challenge to overcome the inherent instability, and master it enough to maybe get this log on the ocean.

But, with the dedicated effort paid off, after the hours of frustration are spent, then the nervousness wears away and... you make your first downwind run. The first wave is big enough to generate speed with a few big strokes, and the ski drops-in - the acceleration is astonishing, this isn't a kayak, its a freakin racing car! With this speed and another six big strokes you catch the wave in front and slide over its crest, more speed. The next wave is easier to catch, more speed, and now you're running from surf session to surf session. The venturi drains that you've only heard 'slurp', 'slurp', during hours of flatwater practice now roar. The bow bounces and ski feels light. The GPS starts reading 10knts regularly and your realize that this is what a surfski is built to do - and its a blast and that why I do it.

This of course progresses. Surf sites become as an important resource as NOAA as they give good info on swell direction. The waves you look for get bigger and bigger. You start getting better at keeping on bigger, faster waves. You realize edging is better for steering than the rudder - which kills speed when used. Timing your paddle strokes becomes reflexly tuned to the skis' pitch. The GPS max speed starts creeping up, 12, 13, 14knts. You read waves more and better, patterns appear and you plan heading on a wave by wave basis. You look forward to Hurricane season.

So this being the purpose of a surski, being aligned to board-surfing, outriggers and paddle boards, betrays its heritage and perhaps the differences in philosophy to sea-kayaking. There's a short history of surfskis on nesurfski.net

So forgive me, but given what I've just described, your comment on surfskis being 'fine if you avoid the really bumpy stuff' demonstrates your ignorance. But you're not alone - after crossing the Blackburn finish line I was once asked by an NSPNer, in arrogant tone, if I was 'happy just going in a straight line?'. I was pretty sure she'd never done a good downwinder. No, surfskis are not for camping, nor fishing, no picnics, no birdwatching - all things I thoroughly enjoyed in a seakayak. (But rock gardening becomes 'cutting-in' to look for refracted stuff). You enjoy the feel of water more as the skis instability, while there for speed, eventually offers not nervousness, but information - its even a nice boat to paddle on a flat Summer day, you just can't take a sandwich. Its different, not better, nor worse - just a different way to enjoy paddle and boat.

The racing of skis is what you see, but the hull design and speed-heads that paddle it are inevitably going to end up racing each other. The 21ft 17" skis you see in the Blackburn are all long-distance, offshore boats, which is one of several types of ski. These are primarily South African boats (or descendants of) and designed to handle big ocean swell. The important design feature is the high volume bow - often not shared by many high-performance kayaks. The volume is there to stop the bow burying in waves of course - a miserable event amidst a good run. Other than that, the ski hull has similar features to other fast boats - long waterline, narrow beam, low wetted surface, volume behind the seat to stop squatting...

The open cockpit is the other major difference of course. It comes from the skis' historical beginnings in the Australian surf-zone - where few spraydecks would be trusted. The open cockpit prevents ANY swamping - flip the ski over and its dry. The cockpit design now is primarily for racing - low seat (or, bucket), lower footwells, no impediment to leg drive or rotation (hence no leg straps). Off course the ski was developed in warmer climes, so insulation wasn't an issue. In terms of safety, the inability to roll isn't an issue. The remount does take more effort and time, but can be done quicker and with less effort by some more than others - as is the same for rolling, and I've performed/seen plenty of blown rolls. Not sure if you've ever tried to roll a high-performance kayak, but given the choice I'd rather be remounting a ski in 6-8ft than trying to roll a Thunderbolt. Trying to roll with a wing-paddle is also an 'interesting' experience - and why the wing? The power and stability its grip offers.

The simplicity of surfskiing is also an attraction - one trip from rooftop to water, ski on shoulder, paddle in hand, done, i'm paddlin'.

I'm sorry you perceive the "surfski crowd" to be "arrogant" and "igonorant", but that is far from my experience. In fact, quite the opposite has been true - welcoming, enthusiastic and focused on their sport. You seem pretty bent out of shape about it, but I think that you'll find your first impressions were quite wrong.

[rcohn]

However, what I was challenging is their claims of surf skis being inherently faster and safer. I'm looking for a solid explanation of why and/or objective data. I've not been able to find any.

Safer is an empty claim if it only applies to flat water as the "risk"' of a roll or re-entry failure is about nill on flat water. IMHO the safety card only comes into play where the conditions make safety a concern. If we aren't talking about at least a small craft advisory context, we aren't talking about safety concerns where skilled paddlers are involved.

You wanted to know why racers choose surfskis. Personally I have no opinion on this subject. However, I did read a thread on this topic, which I can't locate, where the racers replied that there is no speed advantage it was a matter of safety and speed of recovery. His answer was rather detailed and this quick synopsis does not do it justice and I don’t think he was talking about flat water. I don't believe that it matters whether skis are objectively safer, just whether the racers believe that they are safer. If a skilled paddler goes for a swim (very unlikely on flat water) it does seem clear that an SOT will recover faster, just hop on top and start paddling with minimal loss of time in a race.

Instead of arguing with a bunch of non-racers, why don’t you visit a board where some serious racers can provide a more definitive answer?

Ralph

[spuglisi]

Ty,

I'm a surfskier now, but was an avid seakayaker and member of NSPN for several years. For full disclosure, I run www.nesurfski.net and I currently have four skis and no seakayaks.

Binks,

Thanks for taking the time to write that post. I don't know the first thing about surfskis but it sounds like a blast . Personally I don't care if someone is paddling a canoe, rec boat, sea kayak or a ski. If they're out on the water with a paddle in their hands I understand, on a basic level, why they're out there. I don't think it's necessary to try and compare apples to oranges.

[tyson]

Why surfski?

[...]

You look forward to Hurricane season.

Wow! That was an amazing bit of writing! ...and pretty much exactly what I was looking for. You paint a picture of a seriously fun sport.

May I ask you to confirm that my understanding on a few things is correct? Most importantly and objectively, it is possible to build a sit-in that runs with the skis. However...

Surf skis are not just a boat. They are a sport and more importantly a culture with a history. This specific form of boating evolved in a context where sit-on's were preferred. Now when people join the surf ski sport, they join the community as well and expect to use a ski, not a kayak. There is the advantage of not frigg'n with a spray skirt, just jump on and go. In this context there is little demand for a kayak with all the features that a surf ski uses to achieve its performance. ...thus there are no kayaks on the market that are as good at this sport as the surf skis on the market.

Does that seem correct?

So forgive me, but given what I've just described, your comment on surfskis being 'fine if you avoid the really bumpy stuff' demonstrates your ignorance.

Thank you!

The open cockpit is the other major difference of course. It comes from the skis' historical beginnings in the Australian surf-zone - where few spraydecks would be trusted.

Would a small combing like that of a greenland kayak or a small opening (I think its called) "ocean cockpit" with a modern spray skirt hold up in these conditions? I'll preemptively agree that a small cockpit is difficult to get back in to and less convenient than a self draining SOT seat. But I am still curious about the specific question.

Not sure if you've ever tried to roll a high-performance kayak, but given the choice I'd rather be remounting a ski in 6-8ft than trying to roll a Thunderbolt.

The only experience I have with a really fast hull is (ironically) a few hours in a couple of rented V10's, a Sport and an L. I am reasonably competent at rolling our WSBS Bullitt, the tandem touring sibling to a Thunderbolt. Thus far it is my experience that higher performance hulls are very easy to roll but may desire a sculling brace at the finish while regaining my balance.

Trying to roll with a wing-paddle is also an 'interesting' experience - and why the wing? The power and stability its grip offers.

I've only paddled with a wing twice. Once on a recent trip the the Isles of Shoals in conditions that had the CG all but requiring us to accept a ride and the Blackburn. On the 'Shoals trip I was really impressed with how the wing worked well with a "proper" forward stroke and improved my form. I'm not sure that I'm really a strong enough paddler to go faster with a wing, but I figured that the better form would result in better endurance and so rented a wing for the Blackburn. I'm pretty sure that there is a spot forming amongst my gear for one.

...and even with my rather limited wing experience, yes I have done a couple of rolls with one. ...in our tandem Bullitt. Both rolls were done to cool off. The first during the paddle to the Blackburn start line. We had over dressed a bit since the forecast was for wind and seas. The second was also done to see if we could pull the roll after our version of a sprint to the finish. I found the wing to work extremely well with a greenland like sweep/layback roll and a sculling finish. Yes, I brace and scull with the wing. Learned it on the 'Shoals trip while chatting with the Coast Guard in near "Small Boat Warning" conditions. 25-27 knot winds and 3-5 foot seas that were steep, short length and rough as a cobb, sometimes breaking.

You seem pretty bent out of shape about it, but I think that you'll find your first impressions were quite wrong.

Its less that I'm bent out of shape and more that I had minor knee surgery this morning and so am laid up on the couch with little more to do than create a raucous on the message boards. ...for that I apologize.

I'm also an engineer by nature and so get distressed by popular claims that don't seem to be backed up by the physics involved. If I have understood you correctly, its not the physics that makes the speed claims true, but perhaps history, culture and resulting market demand.

Your response was of exceptional quality. I really did enjoy reading it. Thank you!

Cheers!

Ty

[tyson]

Personally I don't care if someone is paddling a canoe, rec boat, sea kayak or a ski. If they're out on the water with a paddle in their hands I understand, on a basic level, why they're out there. I don't think it's necessary to try and compare apples to oranges.

You may have missed my point and that may be my fault. I wasn't questioning the sport. I was trying to learn if there is anything inherit in the physics of a surf ski that makes them faster or safer.

I think that on the speed question, there in nothing in the physics but there is something in the history, culture and market forces.

On the issue of safety I think that there is still room for discussion. A reasonably skilled roller knows that a roll is easy and points out that surf ski pilots in mild conditions have difficult re-mounting. A skilled surf ski pilot knows that he can remount his surf ski in rough conditions and points out that people miss rolls in mild conditions. That one may be a matter of personal preference and where your skills are for most cases. There is still the question of the security of a spray skirt in the REALLY big stuff.

Cheers!

Ty

[spuglisi]

I think that on the speed question, there in nothing in the physics but there is something in the history, culture and market forces.

Your point is well taken but my guess (pure speculation on my part) is that to some extent the shape of a sea kayaks hull is dictated by the need to accommodate the paddlers feet and knees below deck. I don't really have a clue if this is enough to effect hull speed...but maybe it is

[binks]

The hull shape of the ski is probably no faster than an equivalent kayak, such as a KayakPro Vampire, Thunderbolt, Rapier... on flat water. The ski may even be slower on flat because of its rocker.

The surfski industry has gone through an evolution with the growth of the sport. The 'stable' skis (such as the Epics you tried, the Fenn XT, Huki S1R) have appeared to try and make the sport more accessible to beginners. The high end skis have been developed with claims of more stability without compromised speed (there is no speed without stability) - but the differences in models are small and consequently the makers hype their boat as the next 'magic' answer. This hype is maybe what you've heard. The advent of Computer-Assisted Design has made better skis, but the differences in models pales to insignificance when compared to the hours of training and natural ability of the engine.

Regardless of the waterline shape, the fast kayaks tend to have less bow volume (compare the front of a Fenn to the Mohican or Thunderbolt). So, the skis are preferred for ocean racing as the bow lifts over oncoming waves and stay high when surfing. In comparison, the fast kayaks loose speed, tending to smack into oncoming waves and bury the bow during surfing. So skis are faster in waves, and the bigger the waves, the faster they go. You're comment on rougher conditions closing the gap between kayaks and skis is wrong - with a decent driver, a ski will open the gap on an equivalent kayak and comparable paddler because the ski will use the water's energy more effectively.

The skis' open cockpit is low volume so even completely 'flooded' there is little water to cope with. What doesn't come out when the ski is flipped upright is sucked out by the drains - leaving the ski dry and consequently light and ready to go again. I'd hazard a guess that an open cockpit may also be a lighter structure than an equivalent closed cockpit boat (maybe).

The open cockpit means no spray skirt interfering with rotation - look at how loose and floppy sprayskirts on sprint boats are, they're no good for ocean. The racing forward stroke also demands the legs to be straight forward, with no hooking the knees underneath braces. So no need for decking over the cockpit there either.

The Mohican that was mentioned is a mix of kayak and ski - basically a ski hull with a partially covered deck. This 'ski' isn't raced on the ocean very much at all as it has a reputation for swamping in waves and the drains are overwhelmed by the volume of water that the partially-covered cockpit can retain. However, its undoubtedly a fast boat on flatwater and hence that's where we see it raced.

Some of the fast kayaks also have tiller steering (Vampire, Mohican). Moving the tiller requires moving the feet laterally and thus shifting weight. This weight shift is undesirable in rough conditions - hence the simple (and thus light) pedal steering system of skis is preferred by ocean racers.

You say that the REALLY big stuff requires the security of a spray skirt - but surfskiers will say the opposite. Skis are raced in VERY big waves in South Africa, Australia, W. Coast of USA, Hawaii, and New Zealand. Here a sprayskirt carries a risk of failure unless it is tight enough (where upon it hinders movement). Failure of a sprayskirt in big water means a full cockpit and a boat that won't move - an unpleasant situation in 15ft breakers. To put this in context, skis are raced through surfzones in SA, Oz that are big enough to break the ski - nevermind pop a spray deck. Check out www.surfski.info, you should be able to see photos of skis being put through their paces in their natural environment. Don't let the 17" beam fool you, skis are designed for, and used, with big water. In races such as the Molokai, high-end paddlers clock 20knts on big ocean swell.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say - more ocean racers choose surfskis because they are designed for ocean and meet the paddler's needs for unhindered stroke, strong leg drive, good wave handling and quick recovery. They're also a lot of fun.

[Phil Allen]

Binks-

Clearly skis love the big water long period swells with sustained surfing possible. How much can they use the energy of the more typical short period chop we get around here? Just curious.

Thanks.

Phil

[tyson]

Some of the fast kayaks also have tiller steering (Vampire, Mohican). Moving the tiller requires moving the feet laterally and thus shifting weight. This weight shift is undesirable in rough conditions - hence the simple (and thus light) pedal steering system of skis is preferred by ocean racers.

I have in my possession but haven't yet installed an Onno "Gas peddle" steering system for our Bullitt because I have not liked the tiller. I didn't have a chance to install it before the Blackburn.

You say that the REALLY big stuff requires the security of a spray skirt

You mis-understood me on that one. I was putting the security of the spray skit into question. ...casting doubt on its security in really big waves.

In races such as the Molokai, high-end paddlers clock 20knts on big ocean swell.

Wow!

The proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say - more ocean racers choose surfskis because they are designed for ocean and meet the paddler's needs for unhindered stroke, strong leg drive, good wave handling and quick recovery. They're also a lot of fun.

In considering the total of your comments, I think that my thinking about sit-on vs. sit-in was constrained by thoughts of the Blackburn and typical east coast conditions.

Before reading your posts I had not understood that surf skis are built for a sport that is actually quite different from just paddling fast. I think of surf as a noun and it refers to breaking waves that you play in and get rolled in. In my "surf" context, a quick roll is preferable to a re-mount. You have painted a different picture where "surf" is a verb and is about a paddling strategy using the waves in a quest for ultimate speed. The waves can be very large, fast and are often not breaking and I expect that for the breaking stuff you normally stay ahead of the break.

I see your point about the problems and restrictions of effective spray skirts and how that makes a sit-on-top desirable.

I've got to say that the picture you attached is quite impressive.

Thank you for engaging me on this. I believe that I am now less ignorant.

Cheers!

Ty