My Pirogue

[tx river rat]

I need to stop using the word speed ,what I am talking about is ease of paddling ,how far you go with the same amount of exertion.
Your boat will be great ,You built it. And there is no such thing as a bad boat.
Ron

 

[hairymick]

Nice boat Bee, real nice. Well done.

I have some thoughts on rocker too, particularly as it applies to pirogues. Even tho I have only built a couple.

If I understand the thinking behind the U.J. pirogues correctly, they have around 2.5 inches rocker each end. This achieves a couple of things. It gives them extraordianry turning capability but more importantly, with one paddler on board and the boat properly trimmed, the bow and stern should be just touching the water surface.

What this achieves is a very clean entry and exit for a flat bottom boat as the boat passes through the water, causing minimal hull drag. This increases hull speed and ease of paddling. Pirogues have a flat bottom and the rocker is the only way to achieve such little drag.

A kayak is a different animal entirely and needs to pass through the water like a spear.

 

[oldsparkey]

If I understand the thinking behind the U.J. pirogues correctly, they have around 2.5 inches rocker each end. This achieves a couple of things. It gives them extraordianry turning capability but more importantly, with one paddler on board and the boat properly trimmed, the bow and stern should be just touching the water surface.

What this achieves is a very clean entry and exit for a flat bottom boat as the boat passes through the water, causing minimal hull drag. This increases hull speed and ease of paddling. Pirogues have a flat bottom and the rocker is the only way to achieve such little drag.

A kayak is a different animal entirely and needs to pass through the water like a spear.

Well said Mick.....
When I pack my pirogues for camping I make sure they are level or just a little bit heavy in the stern. They paddle easy ( very little effort) and will turn on a dime and offer a nickle in change.
I do not paddle open water but the rivers and streams around here where you have to duck and dodge everything on the way between campsites. Plus the shallow draft helps out in areas where other boats drag there bottom ..... I just ease along in those areas and float over them.

Me cheating and using a kayak paddle in the Okefenokee Swamp. 02-12-02..( 4 nights , 5 days) ... The little green line along the sides is 2 inches from the bottom................The Bass on the front side was a burned in the wood. Plus you can see it does move at a good clip with some easy paddling. The boat weighs 32 pounds and will take me and all my gear.... Still have it and use it 8 years later.

Photo .. courtesy of Bill Logans web site.......http://www.canoe-suwannee.com/

 

[beekeeper]

I need to stop using the word speed ,what I am talking about is ease of paddling ,how far you go with the same amount of exertion.
Your boat will be great ,You built it. And there is no such thing as a bad boat.
Ron

Ron you can keep useing the term "speed". I understood it in the context of "easy to paddle". I wanted it made clear my goal was not raceing speed.
I know you can change the handling characteristics of the boat by adjusting the load to move the trim fore or aft. My use may be different from others on here. My load is me,tackle bag, ice chest,and a storage box. Unlike camping gear that will be used after the paddling,I need to have most of my gear within reach most of the time. I do have some flexibility, but it would be best if the boat worked well without a lot of adjustments.

beekeeper

 

[beekeeper]

Nice boat Bee, real nice. Well done.

I have some thoughts on rocker too, particularly as it applies to pirogues. Even tho I have only built a couple.

If I understand the thinking behind the U.J. pirogues correctly, they have around 2.5 inches rocker each end. This achieves a couple of things. It gives them extraordianry turning capability but more importantly, with one paddler on board and the boat properly trimmed, the bow and stern should be just touching the water surface.

What this achieves is a very clean entry and exit for a flat bottom boat as the boat passes through the water, causing minimal hull drag. This increases hull speed and ease of paddling. Pirogues have a flat bottom and the rocker is the only way to achieve such little drag.

A kayak is a different animal entirely and needs to pass through the water like a spear.

Thanks for the compliment. I worked hard building this boat, mostly overcoming mistakes made trying an uncharted building technique. Even if it does not meet all my goals, it was worth doing for all the experience and things I learned.
Your thoughts on rocker seem to be opposite tx river rat's, or am I confused again.

beekeeper

 

[hairymick]

Bee, I am not a boat designer and the little I think I know could be completely off target. having said that, I think Ron and I are talking about two very different hull forms.

Any displacement hull, as in kayaks and canoes, needs to displace its tonnage as cleanly or as efficiently as possible. If you have a look at Chuck's image of his magnificent U.J pirogue, you can see that it is travelling at pace but still producing very lille bow wave or wake. This indicates to me that it is properly trimmed and the paddler is getting very close to optimum hull speed for the effort he is applying.

With a pirogue, ie a flat bottom boat that has simple hull panels and hull shape, there is little one can do other than increase or decrease the amount of rocker to achieve such a clean passing through the water.

Multi chine boats, or as is Rons preference, Assymetrical, multi chine hulls as in his kayaks and his beloved TV are very different. Matt can give a better mathematical explanation of why and how it works.

A while ago, Matt designed a pirogue for me that he called "P5" a 5 panel pirogue from which Rons "TV" evolved. I have built and paddled both boats and I think the P5 is faster and easier paddling.

The boat is symmetrical in hull form with a flat bottom and is a superior paddle craft to either my Touring Pirogue or the TV in my opinion.

 

[beekeeper]

Bee, I am not a boat designer and the little I think I know could be completely off target. having said that, I think Ron and I are talking about two very different hull forms.......

I thought we were talking about the kind of boats I have. Are you saying that other designs have features that change the effects of rocker? Seems to me the effect of rocker would remain constant and any differences would probably be some other feature. Only if someone has paddled two identical boats and load (except for the rocker) will we know for sure. I don't have two identical boats, but after I use the pirogue I will know if it works better than my other boats. "You got to go to know."

beekeeper

 

[tx river rat]

Let me make this clear I have the utmost respect for Hairy and the other posters on this board.
To me a peerow is a three panel boat, flat bottom. I dont consider the Laker series the T-V P5 or my duck perows.
The T-V actually evolved from the laker series a 4 panel design. James Hagar and I did a lot of talking about what we wanted in a boat came up with the specks and Matt was gracious enough to draw it for us. It is still the best design I own for the river and fishing I do . Now I have faster boats,but they want do it all like the T-V.
I sure am not an expert ,so I am just voicing my opion.
I have built four perows, three with 1 to 1 1/2 inch rockers one with a six inch rocker ,there not even close to the same in ease of paddling and handling. I have also been lucky enough to paddle several built by other folks.
There is a lot of tuning you can do to this hull ,asymmetrical or symmetrical, rocker, slope of the sides all these make a huge difference in performance.
Hairy go back and look on Matts web site you will find most of the boats in the peerow class have 1 inch of rocker at the bow are stern

Here is a pic of a three panel that is a very high performance peerow

Ron

 

[hairymick]

G'day Johno,

Matt hasn't listed these plan for the P5 regardless of my thoughts on how good she is. This is entirely his call of course and i respect that. I think if you send him an email he would sell them to you. It is a remarkably good boat.

G'day Bee.

In my opinion, there are many things which affect a boats performance. Rocker alone is just one of them. With a flat bottom, slab sided boat like a pirogue, length relative to beam is another factor to consider.

With multi-panel boats, like a kayak or a more traditional canoe, the way the bow pierces the water and the way the stern releases the water are no less important, likewise, generally speaking, the more rounded the hull shape, the less drag that hull will impart on the water it is passing through.

G'day Ron,

Thanks mate, and the thoughts are reciprocated. and I agree with you in that traditionally, a pirogue is probably a 3 panel boat but I defer to those from where this brilliant design originated.

Re the origins of the TV, perhaps Matt could enlighten us a bit more. I built the prototype, Touring Pirogue

which is a flat bottom, 3 panel boat with an assymetrical hull and an astonishingly good padlecraft in its own right. My understanding is that Matt adapted or designed a Laker style bottom to this boat and added a tumble home panel to achieve your lovely TV.

Somewhere in between, he designed the P5 for me to build for my Ex-wife. I think the P5 with a Laker style bottom is an idea worth muchy of more thought.

You are absolutely correct about the 1" rocker on Matt's pirogues. Perhaps he could enlighten us as to the benifiets of the reduced rocker on his hulls. As I said, I am no designer and I trust Matt's wisdom in these things completely.

 

[jdupre']

Woooo- boy!! My puter is down for a couple weeks and I've been missing this great thread. I'll throw my limited experience into the mix.

Great boat, beekeeper. Ya done good. It looks a lot like the little 12 footer keith and seedtick lent to Jack on our trip to the swamp last year. With the extra length it should be a great paddling craft. It should be real stable with all of that flare.

Rocker... At first, differential rocker would seem unnecessary .. just move weight around to trim the boat. BUT.. that puts more or less of the sides down into the water which may or may not affect the path of water around the boat. Lowering almost any part of a typical pirogue into the water will necessarily increase the waterline width at that point. Not the best for slipping through the water. Beam width is a VERY important variable in the paddling ease of a boat. A boat with a 25 inch bottom and 4 inches of rocker will sit down in the water deeper and give an actual waterline width maybe an inch or two wider than a 1 inch rockered boat, especially in a heavily flared boat.
Also, the front view of a heavily rockered boat presents a rather blunt profile to the water. It has to push this water straight down to get through it. A boat with little rocker presents mostly the v of the bow to the water and more easily pushes the water aside. Got that realization from Tx river rat. Makes perfect sense.


Joey

 

[tx river rat]

JD
Glad to see you back.
Ron

 

[beekeeper]

Joey
Thank you for your thoughts. When I finished the boat I measured the beam. It is 36", the same as my skiff. Shows what kind of a designer I am. I had figured 35". I know it will be ok because the beam width is not a problem on the skiff. A benefit of the 30 degree sides is now the top the sides are lower.

beekeeper

 

[TopWaterboy]

Bee,
I'll need to get by there to inspect this fine work soon.
Top

 

[beekeeper]

I have paddled it two times and I like it. I need more paddle time to form more factual ideas. I believe it has met the goals I had for it. It is stable enough. Less than my green skiff and as stable or better than my son's blue skiff. It does paddle easy and tracks well. Not much wind encountered. Seems to drift little in the light breezes I experienced. It does not turn as easy as the other boats that have more rocker. I was able to dodge ever cypress tree that jumped in front of me. :| :wink:
Another boater said I had about two inches of the bottom showing at the bow.

Joey said.....
"Also, the front view of a heavily rockered boat presents a rather blunt profile to the water. It has to push this water straight down to get through it. A boat with little rocker presents mostly the v of the bow to the water and more easily pushes the water aside. Got that realization from Tx river rat. Makes perfect sense. "

I believe this picture of my Grandson"s boat shows that:

hairymick said...
"A while ago, Matt designed a pirogue for me that he called "P5" a 5 panel pirogue from which Rons "TV" evolved. I have built and paddled both boats and I think the P5 is faster and easier paddling."

Are the five panels the flat bottom (1) + (2)sides + (2)tumblehomes = 5?

beekeeper

 

[tx river rat]

The T-V is a 4 panel boat ,same as the Laker series and my duck.
A 5 panel has a flat panel in the bottom two sloping panels and two panels coming up .
http://www.jemwatercraft.com/proddetail ... =Freedom11
Similar to the above freedom

http://www.jemwatercraft.com/proddetail ... gPirogueTV
You can look at the bottom in these drawings to see the four panel hull
Then you add decks and tumble holms.
Ron

 

[beekeeper]

Looking at the bottom (end view)of the five panel boat (http://www.jemwatercraft.com/proddetail ... =Freedom11) it appears to just be a narrow flat bottom (1 panel) + two shallow (short) sides + two almost vertical sides (tumblehomes on any other boat) that = 5 panels. Seems to me a three paneled boat built to have the same footprint dimensions would be equally as fast(easy to paddle). Apples to oranges. The width of this boat in the water is less than a wider pirogue. It also sits lower in the water.
I would think the speed advantage of this style kayak is gained from the "long and narrow = speed" principle. It may gain some from the "more rounded bottom is more efficient" idea. Would my pirogue with sides flared to 30 deg. be more efficient (more rounded profile) than one with 15 deg. sides?

beekeeper

 

[tx river rat]

No they are not the same as tumble homes, the tumble holmes go on top of that.
3 panel boat (perow) bottom and two sides
4 panel boat (lake) two sides and v bottom two piece bottom
five panel( Freedom) Flat panel for the bottom 2 angle pieces two sides
The panel count does not include decks or tumbleholms
3 panel hull will run the shallowist,hum is that a word,
4 panel better tracking and speed ,the fastest going down river
5 panel less initial stability but predictable secondary stability better in side waves
fastest going against a current
That is with the same length and width dimensions and same rocker
Ron
Just my 2 cents.
The 3 panel will be the slowest because it breaks the water less.

 

[beekeeper]

Ron
I knew I should not have used the term "tumblehome". The boat has a fat bottom + 2 angled or flared sides, with 2 more near vertical sides on top of those. If these top 2 sides were angled in they would be considered "tumblehomes". I was only trying to point out that its speed advantage is probably because of a more narrow width per length. I realize the five panel construction makes it that way. A three panel boat could probably be built to a similar ratio of width of boat (in the water)to length. Seems to me the footprint dimensions (width and length) of my boat would be practically the same as a five panel boat built to float as shallow as mine does. I guess all I'm trying to say is it is faster because it is not as wide for the same length. Just my 2 cents worth. :roll:
Would my pirogue with sides flared to 30 deg. be more efficient (more rounded profile) than one with 15 deg. sides?


beekeeper

 

[Jimmy W]

hairymick said...
"A while ago, Matt designed a pirogue for me that he called "P5" a 5 panel pirogue from which Rons "TV" evolved. I have built and paddled both boats and I think the P5 is faster and easier paddling."

Are the five panels the flat bottom (1) + (2)sides + (2)tumblehomes = 5?
beekeeper

That seems to be how Mick was counting the 5 panels. His build thread for the P5 is here. http://www.jemwatercraft.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1975
I came close to ordering plans for the P5, but then Matt came out with the asymmetrical Touring Pirogue T and I built it instead.

 

[beekeeper]

I have paddled it two times and I like it. I need more paddle time to form more factual ideas. I believe it has met the goals I had for it. It is stable enough. Less than my green skiff and as stable or better than my son's blue skiff. It does paddle easy and tracks well. Not much wind encountered. Seems to drift little in the light breezes I experienced. It does not turn as easy as the other boats that have more rocker........

beekeeper[/quote

Another observation was, the 1/4" bottom seems to flex some when entering or leaveing the boat. My other boats have 9mm luan and it seems stiffer. I have not noticed any flex in them. The 1/4" is/ may be strong enough, but I will probably use the 9mm luan in the future. They weigh the same.

beekeeper


]