Pueo

No rudder needed for real surfing. Your rudder steered outrigger ski is no good for hollow North shore barrels.

#1 Sun, 10/12/2008 - 12:30pm

Got to be a strong argument for that

#3 Sun, 10/12/2008 - 12:37pm

Shell va'a leading by 4 Km was amazing..... now your'e saying they smoke cigarettes too..... Gobsmacked!
Who needs a rudder when when all it takes is cigarettes.

#5 Sun, 10/12/2008 - 5:23pm

"Bison"
You will not find it anywhere. It's brown tobacco, so strong that they can't sell it anywhere else in the world. (Does not meet European or American regulations). You have to roll your cigarettes by yourself, no filter !

#7 Sun, 10/12/2008 - 8:00pm

Or use your lighter 10 times for one cigarette. You end up not smoking halt of it because you burn your nose with the lighter... ;-)

#9 Mon, 10/13/2008 - 9:34am

eckhart,
sorry for hijacking... ;-)

#11 Mon, 10/13/2008 - 12:25pm

Thanks for the props Eckhart. Strikers only available to immediate family and close personal friends. Lanikai has been working on their stroke rate. 2007 #1 crew was at 65-66. 2008 #1 crew at 70-72. Shell improved their time over last year by 2 minutes. Lanikai improved their time by 14 minutes. It all depends on how flexible the individuals are to adapt to changes in the application. Some people are rigid and inflexible and not able to make the transition. This years crew had no problem with the higher rate but ran a little short on fuel in the last hour of the race.

#15 Tue, 10/14/2008 - 9:04pm

i have been told that the ultra-lites are about 20-21 lbs and standard are around 23 lbs, it seems like a pretty standard weight in nowadays canoes. I tried the demo as well, downwind and surfing was as expected, but flat and up-hill was phenomenal. Loved the new ama.

#19 Wed, 10/15/2008 - 5:44am

Hi Luke,

Below is ASSuming you are not already using coremat as std.

If you guys are getting 18 pounds or even under 20 with the coremat, are you gonna stick with it ?

Performance is there, fast to build, EZ to repair + lower cost to pass on to buyers.

#21 Wed, 10/15/2008 - 11:22am

Last I checked...Puni is Hawaiian....

#23 Wed, 10/15/2008 - 9:29pm

It`s been awhile since this thread was up for comment , just wondering if theres any new info to add here about Pueo , its performance , speed, handling , comfort, that kind of thing .

#25 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 4:34am

You'd be surprised at how high tech table tennis (ping pong) bats are now.

#27 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 6:26am

Pardon me for this double post, but I just found this thread on the Pueo and having posted this comment in another thread, thought I should cut and paste it here.

~~~

I’ve had one opportunity to try the Pueo (with the new ama, old seat and cormat "soft" layup) and although the ama may look as flat as a 4x4, it did not plow like my bixler could with an inattentive port side paddle stroke. It did not “stick”, and felt well balanced. So initially, I am intrigued. I’d like to get a feeling for it in the surf though as I love to surf and work downwind runs. I think it’s refreshing to see a “new” design come to the market of OC-1 products that are so often similar and borrowed (or stolen!) from year after year. My impression of the Pueo in general was that it was responsive, had very little rocker (ama and hull), and that it had a lot of volume in the front for its size class (peggy, hurricane, etc). Being a bigger guy, this volume gave me a confidence downwind that I don’t feel in the Pegasus (which pearls in surf for me easily). But the lack of rocker makes me wonder how it performs in swelly following sea conditions compared to others. Hopefully I’ll have another opportunity to try one again in some good seas. Congratulations to Kamanu for bringing something new to the marketplace!

#29 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 9:30am

"Pulled from a google search"..

What makes a boat move faster?
Generally speaking, the speed of a boat is the result of the power propelling it forward (effective propulsion) and the resistance of the water to this effort.
You can generate power with a motor, a sail or the human body.
The displacement of a boat creates many types of resistance, all of which except Frictional Resistance ('skin friction') are included in the term 'Residual Resistance' (RR).
The faster the boat goes the more the Residual Resistance becomes the main problem to overcome.

Froude and the practical meaning of 'Hull Speed'
In order to understand this complex subject we must first present it a very simplified form: The main effort in overcoming Residual resistance consists of
1. 'Pushing' water up and aside from the bow, and
2. 'Pulling' the boat away from the water behind the stern, that is overcoming a 'suction' effect.
A longer boat (longer waterline) will keep the water from filling back that space for a longer time. This means that a long boat could go faster than a shorter boat before that significant increase in residual resistance occurs. When this happens a big wave can be seen coming from the stern, and a second big wave is formed at the bow, and from that moment on the boat seems to be moving between the crests of these two waves.

William Froude showed that the speed of waves in knots = 1.34 x L^1/2 where L is the boat's length in feet.
Froude discovered that as the boat's speed increases the number of waves along the hull decreases until the boat moves between a big wave at the bow and a big wave at the stern. From this point increasing the boat's speed becomes much more difficult, or in other words the boat reached its 'Hull Speed'.
A boat 100% longer than another will have a nominal hull speed that's about 42% higher (0.42 linear correlation). For example: the hull speed of a 20 ft boat is 6 knots and that of a 10 ft boat is 4.23 knots.
However, the longer boat could generate 100% more skin friction (Fr) and consequently moving it at its higher hull speed will require adding more than 42% in power.

Hull speed is just another term taken into consideration in the process of designing a boat, and taken out of a broader context it is meaningless: If you made your house watertight and put it in the water it would have a higher hull speed than the world's fastest paddlesports boat just because it is longer... It doesn't mean the house would actually be a fast vessel.
Hull speed is by no means a final limitation on speed, and it's very common for boats, including human powered ones to go faster than their hull speed.

Different strategies for increasing boat speed
1. Add power: With a strong engine and a big budget for fuel you don't have to worry too much about the energy spent on going faster than your 'hull speed'. The same goes for a stable sailing boat with lots of sail power.
If you want to add power to a human powered boat you need to find a way to add more groups of muscles to the propulsion effort by offering the user/s a better posture i.e. biomechanical improvements, and/or means to reduce discomfort and fatigue i.e. ergonomic improvements.
2. Add length: That's applying a 'delaying' strategy - You delay the occurrence of the steep increase in residual resistance by paying in increased frictional resistance that you get from having a longer hull. This strategy is good as long as you have the additional power needed to overcome the additional friction. Another problem you'd have to deal with is a decrease in your boat's maneuverability, which is more of a problem in human powered boats where the additional power needed for maneuvering is taken away from propulsion.
3. Reduce residual resistance: A good strategy for a human powered boat with only human muscles for propulsion. Very thin racing canoes and kayaks generate relatively little residual resistance even after when they go at speeds that are higher than their hull speed - This is why they create relatively small waves.

The boat's 'fineness', often described by its Length to Beam ratio (L/B) at waterline is most useful for predicting its speed: An ICF K1 racing kayak has an L/B of 11:1. This kind of boats have low displacement and are very 'fine', which makes it possible to paddle them at up to twice their hull speed.

Speed in human powered boats
Adding power for propulsion is not relevant for canoes and kayaks unless the boat is designed to carry more paddlers (i.e. have more power), but it's good to keep in mind that a boat offering a better paddling position, improved stability and control, and the comfort of being able to reduce fatigue and prevent injury by changing positions adds to the paddler's effective propulsion and therefore may achieve and sustain higher speed.
The Comfort factor and the ability to sustain the physical effort over a longer period of time with less fatigue and no injury pertains to Ergonomics, and the effective power available per paddle stroke pertains to Biomechanics.

Making the boat longer is good for as long as increasing surface area does not end up in slowing you down.
Reducing Residual resistance is severely limited by the width of the person sitting in the boat but why sit inside the hull?...
-Rowing shells are faster than racing kayaks not only because of their great length but also due to the fact the rower sits on top a hull that's narrower than his waist - A rowing shell's L/B is much higher than that of any racing kayak.

Displacement/Length (D/L)

"High speeds for canoes are only made possible through their having excellent Displacement/Length ratios and narrow beams. The two combine to produce very small waves which are the major resistance at speeds above S/L 1.34."
-John Winters, "The Shape of the Canoe" http://boatbuilding.com/content/Redwing.html#Sprint%20racin

#31 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 10:16am

Good on ye' jibofo for calling 'em by the proper name.

If you have the conditions and time for it ... a simple, real world ) drag comparison test could be done in a river or a narrow tidal channel and a scale.

#33 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 11:06am

A few points on measuring drag:

1. The medium (air or water) doesn't matter as long as you meet the correct conditions for model and prototype (the real object) similarity. For the case of measuring drag, this would be making sure the model and prototype were operating at either the same Reynolds number or the same Froude number, which give the balance between viscous and inertial forces (Reynolds) and gravitational and inertial forces (Froude).
2. For something like a submarine or a fully submersed object, testing in a wind tunnel would be no different than testing in a water tunnel provided that Reynolds number similarity was obeyed since there is no free surface (air-water interface)
3. For a boat or other partially submerged object, Froude number similarity is required, so testing in a wind or water tunnel isn't going to do much good since the medium is homogenous and you would be measuring the drag of the entire form, not just what would actually be submerged.
4. Some final notes on measuring drag on a ship hull. The way this is typically done (and Keizo please correct me if I'm wrong on this, I'm in Civil so we aren't typically interested in drag on objects) is using a tow tank where the appropriate speed needed for Froude number similarity are easily achieved.
5. If you actually wanted to move the water past the hull instead of the other way around, it gets more complicated because you have to verify a lot about the flow instead of just having quiescent fluid around the hull. Either way (tow tank or flume), it's expensive to have the right facility. My lab just received two new flumes (think an open channel with pumps to drive flow) that cost about $300,000 each. Think on the scale of a ship model and you need a very long tank which gets surprisingly expensive.

Okay, way too much technical stuff there and I didn't even explain myself that well. Sorry for the nerd moment.

#35 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 11:38am

Thanks anowara, I knew the info was there and I'm sure the great canoe designers and builders use these concepts.

I hope to get a chance to take a Pueo for a rip one day too...

#37 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 11:57am

Thats one of the best personal opinion comparisons that seems to have no bias. Thanks for that.

#39 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 8:16pm

I have a Zephyr. I have to admit that I have never paddled a Pueo because I do not want to want one!

#41 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 8:29pm

give in jpi92109, the grass is really greener over here

#43 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 9:31pm

congrats to eckhart for the most non biased reviews i think i have ever read.

i find it interesting that we come back to the use of air drag for modeling watercraft. i remember not too long ago when i was ridiculed on the forum for even thinking something like that could produce useful data.

too bad no one has been able to give an opinion on the scorpius, my curiosity has been piqued.

#45 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 10:46pm

Id love to ear such a good review of all 3 as well.

Again, just a question, but for the average paddler (meaning not kai, Karel, Danny, Manny, etc) would you really seriously shop the Pueo vs a Scorpius if you knew youd be mostly big water paddling or flat water paddling? Most reviews seem to say the Pueo is more for smaller to medium and Zephyr and Scorpius for medium to big. However ive heard some testimony that the Scorpius is just plain fast anywhere?

Sounds like we need to get Eckhart a Scorpius for a week!

#47 Tue, 01/06/2009 - 11:01pm

Regarding coremat layup, noticed a few (almost 20 year old) RoseSkis in last year's ILH kayak races. They appeared to be aging very well and holding their own against the latest state of the art skis. Imagine these coremat and polyester skis sold for $700.00 brand new and are still around. So on a marginal cost basis, maybe a standard coremat layup Pueo could go for under $2,000.00? (I'm dreamingzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz)

#49 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 1:21am

20 miles per hour on a Zephyr !!, that is absolutely amazing.

#51 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 4:27am

hey eck,
youre a lanikai guy, couldnt you get a scorpious from the dolans for a day? when i bought my boat here kai had his friend doug from hawaii kai distribute his baots and had pegasus demos. that was like 4 years ago or so. hit up kai and ask. im sure if he does he'd let you know.

#53 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 8:03am

Just Paddle _ I move the foot well 6 inch forward on a Hurricane - it makes a definite difference.

Pueo does well as it is. However, if I owned one, I would likely move the foot wells by three inches forward - no good reason except that it seems enough volume up front to do that.

#55 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 8:29am

last nerd moment:

didnt keizo go to college for an aeronautical degree? air drag and water drag are probably alot like, of course water will give more drag, but i would imagine that they would both come up with similar results.

and

i find it interesting that we come back to the use of air drag for modeling watercraft. i remember not too long ago when i was ridiculed on the forum for even thinking something like that could produce useful data.

From an engineering perspective, fluid is fluid, we don't care what you call it since it is the fundamental properties of a fluid which generate various forces like drag. So air drag and water drag, given a few assumptions, are exactly alike, but will give different values for the actual drag force since things like viscosity and density differ between the two fluids.

Going back to the similarity stuff I mentioned in my previous post, the idea behind Reynolds number or Froude number similarity is that the ratio of the important forces is the same between the model and prototype. So, for instance the Froude number for a ship hull is defined as

Fr = V / sqrt(g * L)

where V is the velocity, g is acceleration due to gravity, and L is the hull length. By forcing Fr to a certain value (say 1), you can alter the hull length and calculate the velocity needed for testing. This ensure the balance between inertial (V) and gravity (sqrt(g * L)) remains the same regardless of scale.

Testing in a wind or water tunnel would be useful for looking at a fully submerged object where Reynolds number similarity is required for testing, like a rudder or surfboard skegs. It's not so useful for testing a ship hull.

I think Keizo got a degree in Mechanical and Aerospace engineering, which is about as broad a field as Civil engineering (no, I don't build bridges and I'm closer to a physicist than an engineer). But he at the least got a very good background in fluid mechanics, aerodynamics, etc.

#57 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 9:45am

as I have been told in the past - I am a "freak of nature." Thanks Goto if you are listening....

I am a 6'-7", about 223lb paddler (just for comparison - 37" inseam).

I have tried several canoes (mostly hurricanes, huki's, and a few others), in an attempt to get one that actually fits..... well, I found it - the Pueo.... Keizo, Luke, and the rest of the guys have made an amazing canoe that I would completely suggest you try out. I was worried about ever finding a boat that I could feel comfortable in, and they did a great job accomodating me.

yeah, we don't get the epic waves here (Seattle) that you guys might get, but she cuts through all the water conditions up here like you wouldn't believe.

I wasn't sure what to expect with it, but I have easily cut down my average speed a lot by using this canoe, or atleast that is what my gps tells me.

I have to say, it definately feels lighter and a bit more "tippy" than others, but that is one of the reasons it rips through the water. There is a fine line between paddling and swimming, but once you get use to the way the runs, it is great....

if you have any questions, shout them out to me.....

#59 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 10:39am

Kea Pa'aina is a Kai Waa rep now as well. He can be reached at 386-5327.

#61 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 11:42am

removed - double post

#63 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 12:44pm

This subjective info was taken from oc1design.blogspot.com. 10 consumer reviews of each. Whoever it was that posted reviews thought the Pueo was pretty good in the big stuff too.

#65 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 8:49pm

a really really fast wave

#67 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 10:20pm

On a regular basis ? No, you're right, that is not meant in the post. These are absolut peak values, and I do not know if 20 have actually been met/exceeded, but it has been close.

#69 Wed, 01/07/2009 - 11:44pm