OC-1 length and slalom course performance

[ezwater]

As far as I know, the "open" or championship OC-1 class still requires a minimum length of 4 meters, or 13'?

I suppose that "cruising" class slalom might allow any length.

Consider OC-1 slalom courses of easy to medium difficulty, and typical openness or tight/technical gate pattern.

If you could design and race *any* length of composite OC-1 in a championship event, what do you think would be the best length for the quickest time and fewest touches?

If you were going to race a Royalex or poly OC-1 in the slalom "cruising" on the same sort of course in question, and you had a mess of boats to choose from, what boat might you choose, and what length would it be?

[Shep]

Top of Page 5: http://ocs.whitewater-slalom.us/oc-srul7.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There is a National Championship in every class, given 3 or more participants. The current "must-have" slalom boats, like the Esquif Spark, Millbrook Inferno, Shacho, and Rayge, are all between than 10'11" and 11'8". By my (one) experience at nationals, the 13' and 15' categories have plenty of participants, but the open categories (REC and RACE) are the biggest prizes. I saw lots of Ocoees in the REC class as well.

To my mind, the Spark/Shacho/Rayge are the perfect length for RX and Composite. I think the Prelude might be the closest thing to a perfect plastic boat for slalom. I wouldn't go beyond 10' due to the weight penalty.

Shep

[ezwater]

Shows how long it has been since I was boat inspector at a slalom race.

So, based on what you're saying, composite canoes around 11' long have been doing very well.

The boats you cite, such as the Inferno, won't carry my weight and height. (220# and 6' 5") Millbrook may have some in the 13' range that would work. But I was more interested in boat length for the average sized racer anyway.

[Shep]

Yeah, that's what my impression is. I bet Kaz will contribute soon, but my impression is that the design of the Inferno is based on the Ignitor, which might be a better boat for you.

FWIW, I am 5'11" and 165lb without gear. I find the Inferno to be very fast, and very agile, but it can be brutally unforgiving if you make a mistake. I can't wait to try the Shacho, which I hear is much more forgiving. I picked up Kaz's old Spark, and I love paddling it. Most of the performance of the Inferno but without being such a harsh judge of my paddling skill. I expect the Shacho will be even better.

[ezwater]

I'm not interested *just* in slalom course performance, but a slalom course is a very good test of a boat's (and a paddler's) ability to move around a river.

We've been in an "age" of short boats. Creeking and playing are two influences on this length reduction. Kayaks led the way, and as an occasional kayaker, I soon found that I either could not fit in the new kayaks, or that they were too small for my height or weight, or both. OC-1s lagged, but soon there were short boats on the market that couldn't carry my weight, and that reacted too sensitively to my height. When I asked other paddlers about this, I was told that "new school" boats were better at creeking, playing, and just general rocketing around the river than "old school" boats.

I don't entirely believe that. For what is called "river running," I think that for average sized people, and especially for those of us larger and heavier than average, the smallest boats are no advance at all. Taking any easy slalom course as a proving ground, for any height and weight of paddler, there is probably an optimum boat length and volume. And for most OC-1 paddlers, it is probably over ten feet.

If you want to creek or play, that's another matter.

And when people select a modern kayak to convert into c-1, are they aware that perhaps a longer "new school" kayak might make a better conversion, because c-1 paddling benefits from speed and from a bit more fore-aft stability?

So as I said, I'm mainly interested in what length range is necessary for an OC-1 intended as a "river runner." Not for park-and-play, not for creeking.

[canotrouge]

I don't know if it will be of any help, but here what I paddle and my weight and hight.... So, I'm 6'2" 230lbs, I wish I was less, but that is what it is . I just acquire a Shacho, but unfortunately didn't have the time to paddle it yet
I think it will be a great all around boat( I don't creek...) Class II III IV rivers.

I paddled a Outrage X for many many years, and it was a god boat, but a bit on the long side. I paddled a Ocoee a bit but not much but really like the boat and it is a boat that work great at my weight. I now paddle a Spark... I know I'm on the heavy side for it but it does paddle really well and seems to cary my weight easily, I find it a bit narrow at the knees, and that is why I went with the Shacho, it is a bit wider so I think It will carry me a bit better.

I think if I would have access to a slalom course/races, I would of go with the Defiant, a wider boat that I think for a taller heavier paddler would work really good. I don't think some one as to go with really long, but you need some width, that is the reason I went with the Shacho, I think the Rayge would have been good to, in the shorter boat, but I think the Shacho will be drier, and more all around ish for what I do!

Just my thoughts...
p.s. I'm not a fan of sub 10' boats...

[ezwater]

In what way did you find your Outrage X "a bit on the long side"? I know that perception is part of what drives people into very short boats. But it sounds like boats in the 10-11 foot range are doing what you want.

[canotrouge]

I think I should of said to big.... Heavy... I paddle a 16' tripping canoe solo in class II II+ water,playing my way down the rapids, with surf and eddy turns, and I find it totaly good.... But the Outrage X was a heavy boat, and not that responsive for a 13+ feet boat compare to a Kevlar Viper 12 at 12+ feet. I think there is a bunch of "long" boats, in the 12 13 feet that are more responsive than the Outrage X. Hope that make sense.
Cheers
David