Boat Weights - Minimum Weight

Nick Penfold · Post by **Nick Penfold** » Sat May 10, 2008 12:33 am

I haven't been around long enough to know how the minimum weight rule came about, but having looked at a (fibreglass) boat built for the 1972 Olympics (there's a little museum at Augsburg) I suspect that boats - especially decks - were being built dangerously flimsy. You'd really have to be careful where you put your weight getting in and out of that boat. For all that top racers might be able to have 'disposable' boats the thought of a boat actually folding up around a competitor is not nice. You could die like that.
Carbon and kevlar certainly make strong, lighter boats possible and that's not new. Lynne Simpson's pre-preg boats weighed barely 6 kilos and she kept a top-up weight just in front of the seat. I don't remember enough maths do do the sums on inertia of rotation, but I do remember that weight at the centre has almost no effect and weight at the ends has a lot - times the square of the distance from the centre or something?
But the bottom line is that minimum weight is an International rule, so if we don't like it that's where we have to lobby for change.

davebrads · Post by **davebrads** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:06 pm

I have been around long enough. I remember seeing a Krakatoa Electra come off the water with crazed decks after a single run down the Serpents Tail. Obviously something had to be done.

I am comfortable with the current weight limits. Although construction methods have improved so that boats can be built that are both light and stiff, these boats tend to be expensive and fragile. The current weight limit allows a manufacturer to make a robust construction offering good value to the average paddler, while keeping within the weight limit (to be honest, few people would want a boat built above the weight limit, even if they knew it would last a couple of years longer)

edit: I meant light and stiff, not light and strong

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Fri May 16, 2008 4:19 pm

Hey! That is my old sponsor you are slating there Dave! But, yes, you're right. Anyway, Mr Krakatoa (AKA Chris arms-longer-than-a-gorilla Lovelock) only made them that light to save materials! I had (still have I think) one of the first super low profile Cosmics (I weighed 68kgs then!) and that was around 7kgs. I also had (may still have that too somewhere lol) the 6th Pyranha Vedel of the same genre. Delivered by main man Graham Macereth himself on the top of his van

Combination of glass and diolen as I recall. Not sure if carbon had arrived then but that was about 7kgs too.

Anyone recall the Crystal Palace Exhibition slaloms in the pool? I qualified for those 3 times in the 70's but only the top 10 went through to the Sunday Final - I came 11th each ****** year and the prize was always a new boat! Grrrr! Anyway, J C Mouldings approached and said if I paddled their new "Streaker" (yes, they REALLY called it that!) in the pool slalom, they would sponsor me that season (as Krakatoa said I would only get a new boat if I was ranked in the top ten that year and I finished ****** 11th! Grrrr!). I decided against the offer, paddled my Cosmic, still came ****** 11th and went home pretty miffed. But then I got a call saying they would sponsor me anyway and they asked what spec I wanted. Regarding the weight I told them 7kgs max. They called me 2 weeks before Tully (yes it was always held at Easter even then!) and said they just took the boat out of the mould.......and rolled it up and threw it away!!! They could not get it to work that weight so I agreed 8kgs! That was my last sponsor boat (I'm sure I still have that one! lol) and all went pear shaped from then

So that is my two penneth about ye olde boats and weights

Dutch Geezer · Post by **Dutch Geezer** » Sat May 17, 2008 10:44 pm

Double Dutch built a lightweight boat for Paul R for one of the championships. It was built using expensive ultra lightweight carbon and was well under 7 kgs.

Paul did not race that boat as it was too hard to control the front of the boat.

I think the boat got sold on and the nose exploded when it touched the wall just at the bottom of the ski ramp.

This can be a problem with lightweight boats. They are built very light and stiff for artificial courses. They then get sold onto paddlers who go to natural rocky rivers and they are too fragile because they were not built to withstand sharp pointy rocks or walls.

Nick Penfold · Post by **Nick Penfold** » Mon May 19, 2008 6:25 pm

I'm actually quite interested in whether a light boat is, on balance, a "good thing".
Remember, I don't really paddle but I spend a lot of time on the bank watching other people do it. It's quite clear that there are places where a light boat/paddler gets blown out while a heavy one (especially a C2) just barrels through. And then there are places where a light b/p just floats over a problem while one sitting deeper is badly kicked about. Logically a light boat (or at least a boat light in the ends) turns fast: on the other hand a light boat driving through a wave train may be at a disadvantage compared to a heavier one.
In any case there's more variation in the weights of paddlers than in the weights of boats.
What is the ideal? If you could make a boat that weighed nothing at all, would it be a good one?

PaulBolton · Post by **PaulBolton** » Tue May 20, 2008 8:59 am

Hi Nick,

you're absolutely right, there are occassions when a heavier boat deals with a "water obstacle" better. However, on most courses, this is generally only applicable on one water feature, whereas every course has at least twelve 180 degree turns. Therefore, a boat that turns quickly without losing on-line speed will be advantageous. Generally, the lighter a boat the more dynamic it will be, hence this discussion on minimum weights. Personally, I think 9Kg is too heavy and that a durable boat could be made at 6-7Kgs. Regardless, the worst combination is invariably a paddler(s) who is too heavy for a boat - goes slow, is difficult to turn and more unstable.......by the way, did anyone see the "senior" C2s at Peterborough!!!

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Tue May 20, 2008 11:52 am

Do you mean the one with a total paddler age of 19, or the one with an age of 111+ (and a combined IQ of 19)

OR the div 4 vets having fun rinsing the boat out?

Carlr · Post by **Carlr** » Tue May 20, 2008 12:44 pm

CP, I didnt realize it was you paddling C2 with combined age 111, I can understand the IQ of 19 but thought that was a bit on the high side!!

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Tue May 20, 2008 1:52 pm

Ok so I was boasting about our IQ, but yep it's over 111 years, with one short sighted and one unable to judge distance.
Guess why we do not want div 1/Prem, one can see the direction, but does not know how far till it passes the end of the boat, and the other doesnt know the direction till we get close. . . Bit of a risk doing HPP, let alone Tryweryn.

Back to boat weights: One of the original reasons to bring in the restriction was safety, so boats did not explode, another was to encourage less developed countries, the 'rich' countries can afford expensive construction, but this could be seen to be a further hurdle to poorer nations breaking into the world rankings. The ICF wants to spread slalom participation so such hurdles are not welcome.
We can now build stronger, lighter, more robust boats, but if we want the rule changed we need to petion the ICF to change it, and that means getting the BCU (not just the slalom committee) to propose it.