C-Forum

Can those who have paddled both comment on the differences in the paddling style best suited to each boat, strengths & weaknesses, and the differences handling down river cruising in addition to those pesky slalom gates?

I own a Defiant and have paddled the Ignitor. I have paddled my Defiant at 6 of the last 10 slalom nationals and have used it for some general cruising. I prefer using my two Ocoees for most days on the river. The Defiant is fast and more forgiving than the Ocoee but I do enjoy the edges (eddy turns, surfing, etc) of the 'O'. The Ignitor is definitely a higher performance boat. It is THE boat for the serious dogs in the RAC class at nationals. Did you know that the Esquif Spark is cut down, Royalite Ignitor?
If you come to the Cedar River slalom race on March 13 and 14, you can paddle my Defiant. If you don't know about that race, it is a canoe friendly and fun race that I have been to 5 or 6 times since 2001. Practice on Sat., race on Sunday. My Defiant is for sale as well. I want to buy another Millbrook...
I wish I could bring a Spark for you to try, as that would be a very accurate side by side comparision.
If nothing else, I hope you can make the race. PM me for more details.
Alan

I tried a Defiant, briefly, and have owned and paddled a Big Boy for over a year. The Big Boy seems to be just a tad fishformed (wider in the bow) but I can't feel it.

I have not paddled an Ignitor or any of its fishform cousins, but before outfitting my Swedeform MR Synergy, I tried paddling it in forward and reverse, and got a rough idea of what boats like the Ignitor might feel like. When padding in normal, forward mode, the Synergy is like a huge, clumsy version of my Dagger Zealot c-1. You lean forward to lock the narrower bow into the water for speed, and you lean back to release the bow and to load the broader, flatter stern for maneuvers.

When paddling the Synergy "backwards" to make it a somewhat fishform boat, one can sit up or even a little back to engage the narrow stern for tracking, while using subtle changes of blade angle, or "perking," to pull the broader, flatter bow in the desired direction.

So I imagine in a full-out fishform boat like the Ignitor, one would lean way forward only in special circumstances where it is necessary to disengage the stern, perhaps for a spin. Otherwise, one lets the stern help with tracking and speed, while strokes control direction by dragging around the bow. The full, upturned bow helps keep the boat dryer in turbulence and over drops.

I hope this helps your considerations, and if I am wrong, someone (perhaps even Kaz) will add their thoughts.

Thanks EZ. Your descriptions make intuitive sense to me and are a great help with my thought process (although I think i will need a different kind of help when it comes to my decison process). Alan's comments help too. I need more experience in different boats; until then, I'm sure I'm over-thinking the concepts.

I tend to imagine a continuum of designs, with shorter play-oriented boats on one end and longer dedicated slalom boats on the other. Your observations help put comments I've read in other posts in context. Several posters describe an aggressive, forward paddling style working well in the Ignitor and Spark (or perhaps this is just how you win at Slalom). Does this imply that a more varied paddling style may work better for less aggressively fish-formed designs (with the Rumba being symmetrical and the Defiant being slightly swede-formed at and below the waterline)? [Your description of the Big Boy being slightly fish-formed indicates some changes from the its parent (the Defiant) other than just increased volume.]

I'm primarily a down-river paddler and I study river morphology as part of my job, although I've been known to play from time to time. In addition to recreation, I need a boat that allows me to be on western rivers at higher flows. Other than paddling style, does anyone believe the Ignitor or Spark are significantly more difficult to paddle well than the Defiant or Big Boy? Several posts have indicated that the Spark handles "big" water well. Will the Rumba / Defiant / Big Boy be easier to paddle in "big" water?

Thanks for the feedback.

I've paddled a Defiant (briefly) and a Spark (couple of hours) - my memory of both may be a fit fuzzed as that was several years ago for both boats. My general impressions - I really liked both, though the Spark took a little more getting used to. The Defiant was more "conventional" - it *felt* like the Vipers / Ocoee type boats I'm more used to. The Spark felt less edgy and had less initial stability. It was very responsive and fast. It was pretty wet punching holes and waves until I adjusted and stopped doing that (quartering, blocking, etc paid off). They were both fun boats - an adaptable boater could be happy in either.

Hello Seattle,

If you're interests are cruising down river, why are you looking at slalom designs?

The fun of boats like a Spark (the only one I've paddled) is going into and out of lots of eddies quickly, and you're giving up some primary stability, and they want to be driven from the bow, so I wonder why you've narrowed it down to slalom-type hulls if you're not doing slalom-type river running?

Pat.
Vancouver, BC

Pat,

Great question. The simple answer: after years in tandem royalex boats and in an ABS Rival, and I'm looking for a composite hull. I want the light weight, maneuverability and speed. And I'm among the converted: fixing a composite boat is easy; they will outlast Royalex and Royalite (R-84), and are easier to work on than polyester or twintex.

I'm also trying to understand the differences in hulls without the ability to actually try them. Kaz recommended I start by considering the Defiant. The Defiant at 13'2" is long by some standards, but is both fast and maneuverable, can handle a small load, and isn't an aggressive "cab forward" design by today's standards. Discussions with Kaz suggest a Defiant or a Rumba might suit my purposes better than the standard ABS river cruisers: MR Synergy, MR Caption, Whitesell Descender, Whitsell Piranha, or Esquif Vertige-X (all plastic and heavy). The Esquif Zephyr in twintex is lighter / stiffer but at only 11'3" long; I might prefer the Spark. I want more speed than a Viper 12 (in kevlar from Clipper) will provide and I don't want quite that much edge. I'd probably upgrade to an S-glass / kevlar Rival from Kaz before moving laterally to kevlar Probe 12 (Clipper), kevlar Genesis (13'6"-Clipper has the mold), a plastic MR Outrage/X (maybe also be available in kevlar?) or a plastic Esquif Raven, Vertige or Blast.

So my questions are trying to descern the basic differences across the composite spectrum. Clipper and Class V don't quite hit the mark, so I'm looking at Millbrook: from the Inferno (too little volume for my 180 lbs.) to the Rival to the Rumba to the Defiant, and just to be thorough, on to the Ignitor. I'm asking about the latter because in 2004, Jim (from Clifton, NY) said in a long series of posts that if he were to only have one boat instead of nine, it would be a Millbrook Prowler. If I understand the designs, the Prowler is the 15' (4.6m) medium Slalom version of the 13'2" (4m) short Slalom Ignitor. Jim made a strong case for the Prowler being dry, fast, maneuverable, and able to carry a load. The best direct comparison with the Defiant seems to be the Ignitor, as the solo analog to the Prowler.

Another post from this week concerns "Tripping in a Play-boat". I guess I'm suggesting cruising in an (older) slalom design or one of its newer derivatives. That has focused me on the Defiant, Rumba, and composite Rival. (A larger Inferno, with its moderate rocker and long waterline, would be very interesting, but leads back to its parent, the Ignitor, less the huge bow rocker.)

Your point about intitial stability is well taken. I paddle higher performance flat-water hulls, so "wiggley" doesn't concern me; really hard edges do. While the Ignitor and Spark can probably be described as "bow driven", I'm trying to determine if this description extends to the Defiant and the Rumba. If I've missed another point, or missed a category of hull design along my "continuum" (aside from the true play-boats), please let me know. I'm always open to new suggestions and points of view. My friends will tell you that my analyses are famous for sometimes missing the obvious. And as I've said, I'm short on experience in a variety of boats.

Thanks in advance for your help.

John

I wouldn't say that the Defiant or Rhumba need to be "bow driven," and one thing I learned from setting up my Big Boy is that the seat position really needs to be a little farther back from the physical center point of the boat than one might think. At first, I had the seat a bit forward, as I have a cab forward paddling style when I am very actively eddying and ferrying. But the boat didn't handle quite right. I consulted the designer, Bob Connolly, and it turned out he had his seat farther back. When I did the same, the boat handled quite well.

With regard to the Ignitor and Spark, remember that while you are paddling on flatwater, the bulbous bow is hanging in the air. This will be true even when you lean forward. These boats skim onto the top of the water with a very non-sharp entry point, but that's OK.... slipping onto the water is consistent with excellent acceleration.

At my weight (~220), if I wanted a general river running boat with slalomish capabilities, I might look at that 15' Millbrook.... what is it called?? The Prowler? Described as flattish and dry even as a tandem. But for cruising with some camping gear, I think fishform designs are likely to be a nuisance, especially in windy conditions.

So, it's late and I will keep this short for now. The Defiant does NOT require the bow driven attention, etc. of the more fish shaped designs like the Ignitor. Though I have not paddled Kaz's Rival, I have paddled plastic Rivals often enough to know how they perform. The Defiant is more interesting and has better performance, for sure. I would urge you to go Defiant over rival. The Inferno was a bit "tender" when I paddled it down the slalom course in Wausau this past summer (was not an official run!). With your stated needs in mind, I don't think you need the slalom or 'just catching every eddy' performance of the Ignitor. I have paddled the Rumba and like it alot. It is not only shorter but narrower than the Defiant. You may already know this but Kaz joins 2 slightly chopped Defiant sterns together. I am 190lbs (sometimes less) and the Rumba carries my weight easily. The Defiant would be drier on big water, I think. Regarding Jim advocating the Prowler... that is the boat I will probably buy if I can sell the Defiant. With 8 or 9 boats, I need to make some room and maintain some harmony. I would mostly paddle it tandem but would get a triple saddle. They are fun to paddle solo, which I have done at several slalom nationals.
You did not mention my invitation to paddle the Defiant next weekend!?!? You don't have to race and there will be plenty of time to use it on Sat. while I do some tandem runs. It will be much easier to pontificate about boats in person! Seriously, you can't be that far away from the Cedar... We are driving over from Western Montana. A one boat demo days delivered to your neighborhood.
So much for short...
Alan

John,

Great answer. Sounds like you've done your homework! I'm sure it will pay off in finding you a great boat!

Pat.

As the owner of several boats I have concluded... that they are all great! My recommendation is that if you are only going to get one you should go ahead and get it, and paddle it a LOT. Once you really learn how a boat handles you can get a lot out of any of the designs you described.

I was the one who recommended the Prowler because I can use it many ways. I think it may have been the top medal winning boat at OC Nationals last year (5 by my family and 3 others when it was loaned out to others). That is versatile!

That said, it is a lot of boat. It is VERY maneuverable for a 15' boat... but there is a reason fewer people paddle boats that length. I am also not looking forward to Alan getting one... he appears to be just a little faster than me these days. I am going to have to step it up to get ahead of him.

While the Prowler is the boat I would take if I were limited to one, I do have about 10 others. The Spark gets the most use. One of the posts categorized it as a boat for slalom, but I find it is also very versatile. The most fun I have had on NY's Beaver Creek (Taylorville section- Class IV creeky stuff, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzgvHrPZkso&NR=1 to get a feel for it, even if it is only a video of kayakers) or the Deerfield's Dryway has been in the Spark.

Summary- take the plunge, get a boat, have a lot of fun in it and then work on getting another... and another. Good luck.

Jim,

I always appreciate your insight. With respect to your last recommendation, I hope that's what I'm doing. I may get to paddle Alan's boat next weekend; that may lead me from a Rival to a Defiant. The only other boat still on my short list is the Rumba, although the Ignitor still intrigues me.

You comment that your Spark currently gets most of your time. Why did you choose a Spark over an Ignitor? If I understand correctly, the Spark doesn't quite have as much bow rocker as the Ignitor, is 1.5 feet shorter, a little narrower and is made from Royalite (R-84). With less volume, it is more weight limited. With a smooth camo-skin, it weighs in at 35 lbs., so it is also heavier that the Ignitor.

In a PM, Eddy suggests that for him, the Spark and Ignitor are both focused, single objective hulls. You comment that the Spark is fairly versatile for you. Since I hate to leave the extreme of my continuum evaluation unfinished, how different are the Spark and Ignitor for you?

Thanks. John

"Single objective" is not a good way to describe a slalom boat. A slalom boat must (ideally) be fast in a straight line, turn well, and be dry in whitewater. The only thing that it doesn't necessarily require is initial or final stability. So, some slalom boats require more attention and/or work best if they are being pushed, not drifted. In other words, they must be paddled hard - their primary design consideration.

That said, some slalom boats are easier to paddle than others. I find that the Spark is probably the easiest (fast) boat I've ever paddled. Reasonable primary stability and the ability to resist squirrelly water without bobbling.

I don't have a great reason for why I chose a Spark. I have never been in an Ignitor- at just over 6' and 185 - 195 pounds I have never found someone else's Ignitor outfitted so that I could fit in for trying it out. The Spark appealed to me because of the blend of performance, weight and plastic (translation- it allows more mistakes than a composite boat but the performance comes closest to composite). It really was picked up as a boat for my wife and boys to train in, but I use it the most (last year they did the most of their practice in a Slasher).

Bob provided a nice review on the performance.

I have become very fond of lighter boats- the Spark and the Prowler weigh about the same. I now dread pulling out heavier boats (for example- Dagger Dimension).

Good luck.

This past weekend I convinced Alan to sell me (or he convinced me to buy?) his Defiant. So now Alan is one step closer to a Prowler (sorry Jim) and I have a new boat to learn. Alan's hull was #15 made in a standard lay-up in 1999 and weighing in at exactly 40 lbs. fully outfitted. (New buyers take note: vacuum bagging does save weight and should be stronger, too.)

I'm now reading the threads on outfitting with renewed interest. Alan is 3 inches taller than I am with a 4-inch longer inseam, so the thigh strap anchor positions will need some work (I may just add a second set), and then I'll be ready to go.

Thanks to all of you for your insight and assistance, and special thanks to Alan. Based on our discussions and his past slalom record, I won't be able to blame the boat for any lack of performance. Of course, he did agree to sell it to me, so it really is (or will be) all his fault.

Cheers!

John