Light OC6

With lighter OC6 in production in various places and rules governing canoe weights changing ie 2012 in Australia are there any other associations also making these changes that you know of?

Just a general interest question......

Submitted by Just Paddle on Tue, 01/12/2010 - 1:03pm

The island of Hawaii association, Moku O Hawaii, has un unlimited division with no weight restrictions.
There are a few canoes that compete in that division, but regatta's on this island still require Koa canoes with a minimum 400lb.
The unlimited race in long distance races, but because there are so few at this point, it is up to the club hosting the race to determine the divisions receiving awards. A club is not required to present awards for all divisions.

#1 Tue, 01/12/2010 - 2:01pm

And let me tell you how that came to be.....jealously, envy, and ignorance.

First it was jealousy and envy. They saw it was fast; they didn't have one; and they'd be damned if they were going to watch their crews potentially be beat by a faster canoe, so they came up with a rule that allowed them not to recognize it. (Sound familiar?) Subsequently, all Big Island clubs, with the exception of Kai 'Opua, hosting a long-distance race have reversed their position on the kialoas and indeed give recognition, including awards, at their respective races.

Kai 'Opua recognized my kialoa at the '08 Liliu'okalani race but, disqualified me when I raced it in '09. This was without giving me prior notice that they had changed their minds from the previous years race. The race director's (Mike Atwood) excuse was that Kai 'Opua's recognition of my kialoa in '08 "was a mistake". Clearly, the mistake was theirs so, the monkey rests on their back to so inform me prior to the '09 race.

An influential individual in Kai 'Opua also uses the excuse that kialoas are "not traditional" hence, it will not be recognized in the Liliu'okalani race.....ignorance. Jealousy and envy are still there as well.

The Truth Can Only Offend the Guilty.

#2 Tue, 01/12/2010 - 7:36pm

Wow! I thought that the problem on the big island was on the east end with the volcano, Kilauea. But, I guess there is a volcanic mountain on the west side as well.

#3 Tue, 01/12/2010 - 7:21pm

No volcano, just a sharing of a bit of historical data.

Notwithstanding, after 34 years, there still exists a mentality out there that must either be overcome or ignored so culture and sport can press on for the good of the whole. Preferably overcome based on documented evidence so everyone can move forward together harmoniously. If not, culture should not continue to take a back seat.

#4 Tue, 01/12/2010 - 9:20pm

speaking of historical data and culture, how much has the Koa canoe designs changed through the years?

I was looking at the fastest Koa canoe times in the history of the Moloka'i Hoe and it looks like they had some pretty impressive time even way back in the day when T-tops were non-existent with the heavy paddles and traditional hawaiian stroke etc.... I'm assuming in 1960, that Waikiki Surf Club crew with Dutchy Kino, Blue Makua, and the 1960 Outrigger Crew had the old type straight shaft paddles and no 10 degree blades like we have today.....

here's the top 10 fastest Moloka'i Hoe Koa finishers from

1989 - Hui Nalu 5:11:38
1984 - Outrigger 5:18:20 - Brant Ackerman, Henry Ayau, Bill Bright, Keone Downing etc.
1990 - Outrigger 5:19:38 - Bruce Black, Tom Conner, Kainoa Downing, Geoff Graf Etc.
1997 - Lanikai 5:26:11
1988 - Hanalei 5:28:07
1960 - Waikiki Surf Club 5:29:00 - Dutchy Kino, Blue Makua, Joe Gilman etc.
1997 - Outrigger 5:31:16
1988 - Outrigger 5:31:24
1960 - Outrigger 5:32:00
1989 - Kamehameha 5:32:37

#5 Wed, 01/13/2010 - 10:44am

Staying within the HCRA specs, some design characteristics have changed a lot while others, minimally.

#6 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 6:42am

How's that 1960 time? Extremely fast for back then.

#7 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 6:57am

Problem is no one really races their Koa's any more. Over the past couple years it seems that Lanikai, Outrigger, and Bob Puakea's koa boats are the only ones that are racing Molokai. Whats the point of perpetuating the koa boat if there are only 3 boats out of 100 that our koa. I'm all for an open class division. Have some restrictions so it doesn't turn in to a money building contest, but lets see where this sport can go. Maybe we can see the tahitians break 4 hours or maybe a hawaii team (doubtful after what the tahitians are doing, but you never know).

#8 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 8:37am

I have heard that most of the clubs outside of Oahu would have to pay 2 different cost to get their Koa canoe to Molokai plus the shipping home which equals out to three separate payments. Oahu just pays for one only. If that is true than I can see why there are only 3 Oahu koas on the race course.

#9 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 8:59am

Steve West in his article "Justifying Limits", Kanuculture stated the Tahitian rules for racing va'a:
"There is no imposed shape. Wood. plastic or any other material may be used for the va'a or ama. The iako must be made of wood. 150kg is the minimum weight for the hull with spray skirts and accessories. 120Kg is the minimum weight for the canoe without ballast. 30 kg is the maximum weight of the ballast. No water pumps or foot chocks, drifters or keel to be added to the hull".

Sounds like a good international racing rule. But if some crew on the mainland finds a billionaire who decides canoe racing would be a fun hobby and decides to go America's Cup on the thing....brings over some space age composite million dollar canoe and kicks everyones' okoles- I wonder if the Tahitians would like to change the rules a bit ?

#10 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 9:36am

Without even being a Hawaiian it is easy to see where this 'no weight
restriction thing is is invariably a case of hulls built in
carbon/epoxy foam core sandwich and all the rest being of lightest spec like
nomex and PU spraypaint.

An analogy here would be the racing of vintage cars but all built using
formula 1 specs and technology, to make it a sport which costs as much as
formula 1 but is not as fast.

Those like Bill Rosehill with koa wa'a would once again be at a
disadvantage although the actual speed difference would not be great
compared to a superlight composite job.

#11 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 9:52am

He'd have to buy himself some Tahitian paddlers, too.

#12 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 9:57am

Aukina3 pointed out something interesting so I went to look up how many Koa canoes have raced in the past years and found this for both the women and mens races.

Moloka'i Hoe:

Na Wahine O Ke Kai

Although the numbers of entrants on the mens side have drop (peaking at 13 in 1985), the women's numbers have been cyclical, going up and down through the years.

Just because the numbers of Koa canoes have gone down in some respects, I personally don't believe that is justification for not continuing to perpetuate it. Even more so, blessed to Bobby Puakea and those women and men who take the honor in racing these koa canoes that are tied so tightly to the culture, the people and the past.

The spoken Hawai'ian language at one time was declining in numbers and there were some courageous people who made it a point not to let it slip from our life and stream of consciousness so to speak.

The Koa is a connection to our ancestors, to the ocean, and in a lot of respects, a part of why we all participate in the Moloka'i Hoe and Na Wahine O Ke Kai, to perpetuate the hawaiian sport of canoe paddling,

i believe we should let those who still have the ha'aheo and courage, to race in these beautiful works of art, but also let those who wish to compete in the modern fleet of canoes to do so side by side, co-existing in harmony.

#13 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 2:00pm

What would be the cost comparison to building a traditional Koa canoe to a canoe using the most modern light and exotic materials available to day?



#14 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 1:30pm

There is nothing space age about an outrigger canoe, in fact basic
scientific knowledge counts against the craft as the most efficient man
powered craft. The point in paddling of them is steeped in the thing that is
usually called tradition, and is something which goes way back. Losing sight
of these facts is questionable.

Building a one-off lightweight composite hull will probably cost less than
carving one from a koa log, and may not even be much more expensive than
building a wooden strip planked hull. So comparison of a 400 lb koa dugout
with a carbon composite laminate job is pointless unless one is into selling
carbon fibre.

The 400 lb limit no doubt has more to do with making something as precious
as a koa dugout last a long and useful life, rather than following the
advice of "the village idiot"

So modern Polynesian canoes can be built to weigh 120Kg's and still be
practical to use as well as reasonable in cost, if built in wood.

All that will happen with a 'no weight restriction classification' is that a
few manufacturers will produce a moulded hull light enough for two slim
girls to carry, and this will become the new "Hawaiian canoe". Tahitian
canoes will obviously not be on equal competitive terms, which will result
in a similar situation to the V1 versus sit-on OC1 situation.

#15 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 2:29pm

Hater in tha house!

#16 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 3:04pm

Not being an American i have been interested in this term 'hater' thanks for the info. Apparently it also means to be somenone who thinks for themselves besides the cynic connotation.

#17 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 3:49pm

Hey guys...think outside the box a bit.Understand why hawaii placed rules on canoe design. Tahitians to a lesser extent. Say everything is unlimited. Say a guy with millions decides he would like canoe racing as a hobby and wants to create the fastest canoe and crew possible. He has unlimited funds but wants to keep his budget at only 10 million $. He gets a olympic class c1 crew. He pays them.TThey train together. He hires a great local boy steersman. He hires the best engineers and uses the best materials. After testing they have a composite canoe that meets Tahitian weight standards but is 50 foot long, it has been modeled to fit the selected crew perfectly as far as weight distribution. There are no lashings. The ama to iako connection is flexible in such a way that there is seldom any slap. The seats are integral. There are no imperfections in the hull. It has been tank tested over and over again in situations similar to the Kaiwi. They arrive...they win and....?

Is it crew or canoe ?

#18 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 4:11pm

And take the modern Kayak, it's origin is Eskimo or Inuit and are they ever mentioned or part of modern races?

#19 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 4:25pm

As a scenario, if we put aside the cultural and traditional aspect of the argument, and adding to all that's been said, using automotive racing example, there's Formula 1, and then there's Nascar racing - both have four wheels and powerful engines, but deviate in design - depending on how far off center the changes to the canoes are, it may or may not change the complexion of the sport and then you may have uku million categories to contend with. The rules standardize the racing modes so its easier to compare results based on apples and apples rather than apples and oranges. As long as the sports governing body defines what dimensions and waterlines constitute a legitimate hawai'ian outrigger racing canoe for their race, then that is what should be entered in the race.
if someone else decides to start their own racing format and regulation, that is their kuleana.
As OC-1 exploded in popularity, it made sense to have PA'A and the Epic Challenge on the large race circuits. For smaller scale races that are just locally put together, I would see no fuss with it.
Sorry, just jabbering.

#20 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 4:59pm

It's awesome to see this recurring dialogue regarding open class designs. I think that this topic is continually one of the most interesting on the site, and it's one that I feel passionately about. It seems like the issue is going to continue gaining momentum as paddling communities around the world grapple with the decision to open up the regulations or not.

Sorry if I'm just re-phrasing what's already been said (which I am), but it seems like the arguments on both sides always come back to a couple of key points (which I'm writing up to straighten out for myself).

This seems like the critical issue for most people. How do we evolve the canoe without breaking away from the culture and tradition inherent in the canoe. I remember reading on ocpaddler a couple of years ago about the concept of a static matrix that the Hawaiians had to work with because of the limitations of a Koa log. The log gives you some set parameters that you can't really work around. The log gives you your dimensions, and all ocean people (especially Polynesians) seem to have maximized their design given their set design limitations. Whereas with the advent of composites, we have pretty unlimited design potential. So I guess the argument is based around whether it is a break with tradition for us to go outside of that matrix with composite technology.
If it is against tradition, then why?
In my mind it always seems like a death penalty to say that the outrigger canoe has finished it's evolution. If the tradition and the culture of the canoe is alive in all of us who paddle (which I very much hope it is) then shouldn't we continue to evolve as our resources and abilities evolve?

The lazy millionaire:
What I hear most often is the argument that someone is going to pay $1,000,000 to have the best canoe possible designed and built for them and that will ruin the spirit of fair competition. I actually think that that would be awesome for a ton of reasons. I would think that it would be a great thing for the sport if someone with that kind of money started paying attention to it. Also if someone spent all that money and time designing the world's best canoe, then wouldn't they want to manufacture and sell it? But I guess they might want to keep the design all to themselves so they could win $5,000 from the Moloka'i Hoe every year. Even if they did keep the design to themselves, it would at least open up everybody's eyes to what is possible, and the next year someone else will make a comparable canoe. But then what happens if the focus is on the canoe and not the paddlers.....

Then the outrigger canoe will become the primary aspect of the sport. Shouldn't the focus be on the canoe itself, since that is our link to the past?

#21 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 6:37pm

Well Said Luke. I couldn't agree more. How about this all the top clubs that want to go faster design an open class boat, show up to molokai with $500 Winner take all, tell the Tahitians to bring there design and we race. If OHCRA DQ's us oh well! Then we can start our own race.

#22 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 6:47pm

Our club has bought the first folding Mirage at 138kg. When you pick it up you smile, when you sit in it you smile, when you paddle it you smile. It is all about the canoe and all our juniors are in love with it!!!!!!!!!!!!

#23 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 8:29pm

19 years ago, I gave a UH-Manoa Naval Architect, the HCRA specs and requested he advise me on a design that lived within those specs but would be faster than any other canoe which also meets the specs. He said it couldn't be done. He's been proven wrong.

As a Hawaiian Forest Consultant by profession, I have been affiliated with many 'scientist' types who are very book-smart. Take them out of the classroom and they'd starve. I view the foregoing example with the Naval Architect as the same thing.

If you want the fastest possible design, I believe it is found with the most experienced builder(s). I may be wrong, but with my experience to date, I have examples that support this position.

#24 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 10:00pm

A case of schooling getting in the way of education Bill.

The Million dollar boat is a little far fetched IMO

Survey and LISTEN to every designer and builder who cares to input thoughts and ideas.. Set a open minded formula that has room for developement and evolution with cultural spices.

Said it already, boat builders will once again have jobs and the cream will rise to the top.


#25 Thu, 01/14/2010 - 10:40pm


#26 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 6:11am

Every time the discussion of "unlimited" canoes comes up, people are always worried about cost. For sure almost any unlimited canoe will cost less than a koa which is the goal of many clubs.
Beyond that, the issue of unlimited funding is easily handled by "claiming races" which are used in many types of racing. Basically the ruling body sets a price (lets say $35,000 (or whatever) which is about halfway between a lightning/mirage and a koa ) that the winning canoe can be "claimed" for by any club competing in the race.
If club "A" wants to spend $150,000 on building a canoe, they can, but if it wins a race, club "B" (or any other) can claim it for $35,000.
By using claiming races costs are easily controlled and clubs with less financing can benefit from the richer clubs spending.

#27 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 6:55am

I have to agree, I love when this topic comes around on OCP. It's always a great dialogue and I appreciate reading the arguments on both sides. The nagging itch for me though comes when its made into an either/or - for/against discussion. This really is a situation where you can appease both viewpoints. There are numerous other racing sports that have both stock and unlimited racing classes. It can be done in a way that both continues to honor "tradition" (however it may be defined) and still allow for evolution of design.

That being said, some of what I took away from the comments above is that maintaining set "traditional" standards allows for "apples to apples" comparison of the paddlers performance. Cool; the Olympics and other international competitions believe in this to honor the athlete. In regards to an unlimited design class, the canoe itself becomes as or more important than the ability of the crew. That's cool too; now it would seem the canoe (even though it may not meet most definitions of "traditional") takes on the place of reverence as an important member of the crew (or hopefully the most important) rather than just simply an object.

Maybe I'm just putting words in peoples mouths, but thanks for the great read so far. And thanks as always to the various builders for your valuable input and your passion for the canoe.

#28 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 8:00am

Right on. We want to see the fastest canoe and we would dearly like the opportunity to paddle it. The perfected canoe is a very worthy goal. I am glad Bill is pursuing it with so much passion. I am glad Luke and the boys are pushing the envelope and I agree totally with six as one. . There needs to be room for evolution and refinement but there still needs to be crew versus crew without an overreaching equipment advantage. In an unlimited class there will always remain the question of ....canoe or crew ? Lets do both.

#29 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 12:59pm

Leaving construction methods out for a sec.

How far would you go ?

Rudders ?
Adjustable iako ? edit ... on the fly .
Ama for conditions ?
Self bailing ?
Footplates and molded seats ??
Hiding behind a rock ... double blade ?

just wondering,

#30 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 2:11pm

Poidog and Sixasone-- you guys have a really good and important point that never occurred to me. There probably is a need to have a regulated design and a suitable race format (World Sprints, HCRA State Sprints) as well as an open class race format (all distance races). And there really is no loss if we go that route.

Another good point that I just heard for the first time is what about surf boards? Has anyone ever regretted the fact that there are no design restrictions on surfboards? It would seem silly if the governing body of surfing had weight limits and designs restrictions on boards so that they wouldn't progress too far from the 18th century.

I know that's not a perfect comparison, and that the outrigger canoe would need some limitation (i.e. no rudder, single blade paddle, no mechanical bailing, two 'iako, one ama). But, like Onnopaddle said... how do we figure those out? Or who do we trust to make those few regulations for us?

#31 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 3:28pm

A truly open minded approach would be no limitation other than paddle powered, otherwise it becomes ambiguous.
If seating on the butt is stipulated then it is a tradition based rule.....why not kneeling?
If a single blade paddle is stipulated then it is a tradition based rule.....why not double blade
If an ama is stipulated then it is atradition based ama causes unwanted weight drag when lightweight and minimal drag is a prerequisite for speed.
Why two kiato?.....for traditional reasons I suppose
Why no rudder?.....for traditional reason I suppose

#32 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 3:40pm

I agree Goodwaka, the regulations would be really ambiguous. I just think that we need to come up with a definition for the outrigger canoe. And then the regulations will serve the purpose of holding the canoe to that definition.

It seems like it should be our goal to come up with the simplest definition possible and not one riddled with political compromise.

I guess in the end it will be one person's opinion vs another's.

I don't think that the definition of the outrigger canoe involves a 400 pound weight limit, a waterline restriction, a beam restriction, a bow shape restriction, a deck (or lack of) restriction, etc... but obviously there is a powerful group of people who strongly believe that the definition should include that. Who am I to say that they are wrong?

#33 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 4:08pm

In swimming not unlike paddling and other water sports, the ability to reduce drag in the water offers paramount advantages to the athlete and then the argument lies in how far do you allow advances in technology to supercede the skills of the athlete as the deciding factor in performance.

As it turns out, in swimming, once the top swimmer in the world starts getting beat by unknowns, and subsequently threatens to boycott future races, then the tide turns...

All the discussion is interesting and thought this news item might be of some relevance to the discussion

Have a great weekend!

#34 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 4:18pm

Ok luke, I'll say it as I've said it for the last 34 years........"they are wrong". Threads on this subject have clearly shown they are wrong. Of utmost importance, most of them are not canoe builders and, those who may be, have only built HCRA spec canoes and have no experience, knowledge, or adequate background to know any different about any other design characteristics. This is the reason their restrictions have no standing. They didn't in 1976, and they don't today.

#35 Fri, 01/15/2010 - 9:33pm

As you say Luke "we need to come up with a definition for the outrigger
canoe. And then the regulations will serve the purpose of holding the canoe
to that definition."

It could be so simple, like recognizing the fact that a canoe originally
came from a single tree trunk and the resultant shape required an outrigger
to make him stable and seaworthy.

Someone else (Mulus I think) mentioned previously that Eskimos invented the
Kayak and that we don/t insist on still making them with sticks and skins,
although some people still do...and good on them. The thing is that the
first kayak was actually a composite boat and composites technology has
evolved a whole lot since Eskimo's or who ever started it off.

Shaping of a composite boat has virtually no limitations as far as the
stability factor goes, so they don't need outriggers. Otherwise boat
designers would surely have been onto it by now and rowboats, kayaks,
surfski's etc. would have outriggers to help them go faster....enough said
about that, but as you all know that is what I think anyway.

Back to if we have to have an ama for stability because the
position of the paddlers weight relies on it, then that is a good start.

I would like to see the idea developed further to include a single blade,
and also like the regulation requiring wood in the shaft construction.
Likewise, with wooden kiato/iako.

Since the outrigger owes much to wood for it's existence, the weight issue
can be solved by basing it on wooden construction rather than materials
technology coming from the aerospace industry. Although freedom to use any
materials is good, the emphasis on extreme light weight does not really suit
single blade paddling as much as it does a double blade.

#36 Sat, 01/16/2010 - 8:44am

Seems like this thread is ending....and goodwaka sort of said it all as far as I am concerned. There has to be parameters or else us outrigger guys will be racing against composite 10 man dragon boats or some other ridiculous scenario. I have noticed others talking about their favorite OC1's and how the less ama the better. Flying the ama downwind...not feeling the ama drag. Seems like some of us rather not be on outriggers except for the traditional aspects. We do not have to be canoe builders to love outriggers and the reason many of us love outriggers is a because of tradition. Outrigger canoes are a piko. I think the Tahitian restrictions are good and maybe they should be an international norm. i also know where the guys in OCHRA come from with their rules....tradition. But one thing in common... the love of that canoe is shared by one and all...because of tradition. Get away from its piko, its essence and then its just another sport. mana lost;

#37 Sun, 01/17/2010 - 1:52pm

A lot of ama designs create more drag than one would think. If the ama and hull were designed for efficiency, one would not notice it was there near as much as it is noticed now.

Many seem to agree, parameters are good to a degree. The Tahitian standard is good in that it encourages, promotes, and perpetuates the art of building canoes of wood.

So many aspects of the canoe are being whittled away. "If we don't stand for something, we'll fall for anything." And more of the culture will be lost forever.

#38 Sun, 01/17/2010 - 9:33pm

how hard would it be for HCRA to have an unrestricted open class in the Molokai?

Do you guys think that sometimes restrictions promote creativity and ingenuity?

#39 Tue, 01/19/2010 - 11:57am

How hard would it be to just change some of the rules as defined by HCRA? What needs to be done to "simplify" some of the rules we have such a problem with. Seems like its as much of a hassle to create a open class as it would be to tweak some of the existing rules.

HCRA is kinda like all the other organizations Big Brothers. What ever it does "almost" everyone does just because its the cool thing to do!!!

#40 Tue, 01/19/2010 - 4:27pm

poo and Tpop,

Your questions, while simple, are sensitive questions where people don't want to stick their necks out to offer a truthful answer. Earlier, Jim said if you are at all familiar with OHCRA, the organization that controls the Hoe, it is unlikely change will come from within. There's a lot of truth to that and, there's also a contingent on the other islands who hold the same position.

Remember the decades of void this sport had prior to regaining momentum in the '70's with the birth of hull specs? Due to that void, for most in the sport today, the existing hull specs is all they know. Those who gave birth to these specs, have had all control over hull design since '76. Too many of us have been brainwashed in to thinking a spec canoe is the ultimate in design. Our ancestors are upstairs shaking their heads in disbelief.

Change could require loss of control over something they know little or nothing about. (We all know how that goes in clubs, the job force, gov't, etc.) For many, if it's not their brainchild and there's a hint of loosing control, it ain't gonna fly.

#41 Wed, 01/20/2010 - 9:35pm

I think that as Bill has suggested, just show up, race and take the DQ. It may piss off the powers that be, but if people keep doing it, more will join in and change will be inevitable.

#42 Thu, 01/21/2010 - 6:53am


My standing offer for all, to paddle my 197# cedar strip kialoa remains on the table. It is not only fast due to its light weight, but also due to its wa'a aki design. And altho' its covered deck is what the Tahitian canoes have, I also have a koa 400+# dugout wa'a aki of identical design (below the waterline) built in 1991 with the traditional manus fore and aft as Nappy wishes to see retained. The opportunity is always open.

#43 Thu, 01/21/2010 - 9:57pm

I hope to take you up on that someday, Bill!

#44 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 11:03am

Any chance you could post some pics of your cedar strip canoe? I'd love to see it.

#45 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 12:54pm

Bill asked me to post these, so here goes Bill

Cheers Rambo

#46 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 3:19pm

No photo of his matching 1 man?

#47 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 3:23pm

Sorry jpi, not yet. I'm working on molding the one in the top photos.

Thanks Rambo.

#48 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 3:38pm

Oh ive seen it, just really think other would appreciate it also. Would make a great shot with the 2 cedar 6 mans and a cedar 1 man!

#49 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 5:03pm

Oh the 'cedar' 1-man....forgot about that one.

#50 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 5:31pm

Master pieces. I would love to take you up on that some day to Bill. there's no feeling like wood.

#51 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 5:57pm

They're not canoes.....they're works of art! Beeeeeautiful! Pity there aren't more of these around. You're a master craftsman Bill.

#52 Fri, 01/22/2010 - 10:44pm

Workin' on it hasto, there will be........

#53 Sat, 01/23/2010 - 12:58pm

I did get to paddle the 197 pounder at the State Races in Hilo.
Biggest mistake I made...LOL. Took it out the night before, then jumped in our Koa to "fine-tune" on the course.
That night and the next day during the race, I kept thinking about Bill's canoe. It spoiled me. You could feel the raw power of the paddlers. Thanks Bill.

My thoughts are to make this work is to build ten canoes and have an invitational race (Lanikai, Outrigger, etc).
This could be the start of a new association. As Bill said, you're not going to change the existing powers to be.
Manny did it with the OC-1s and was successful. After that, it is the survival of the fittest.

#54 Sat, 01/23/2010 - 7:44pm

Is it the raw power of the paddler or the weight of the 197lb that made it great? I believe that smoothness would be the key to moving a lighter canoe instead of powering it.

#55 Sat, 01/23/2010 - 9:59pm

Please register or login to post a comment.

Page loaded in 0.259 seconds.