High Ends in the Wind

[Wadena]

the height of the ends above the sheer will have absolutely no effect on tracking once the gunwales are under water

I don't recall ever saying that the gunwales would be under water.....just that as the boat gets lower in the water, those high ends follow suit.....and with them being lower, things would improve in two ways......less surface for the wind to impact and more canoe in the water to stabilize the boat.

 

[MGC]

I think it's true that these days high ends have more "artistic than practical value". The question is whether that artistry makes makes them impractical.

This is a great thread! Very clearly we all have our own preferences. To Steve's point, "is there a practical value", I would say no. But, from my experience trying to store too many canoes there is an impractical aspect. When you design racks to store canoes you need to add a lot more room for the "high boys" than for the others. I suppose that a smarter man that I would buy canoes of varying lengths so that the ends could be nested
Michael Grace is 100% correct that the height of the bow/stern have nothing to do with tracking. That's all a function of the canoes entrance and exit lines. This is where (again IMHO) the short stubby canoes lose out.

What the high lines do is catch lot's of wind, look incredibly graceful and catch lot's more bees, wasps and butterflies when you car top them.

There are those of us that prefer working canoes and those that enjoy the classic leisure canoes. Isn't it wonderful that there is nothing (aside from our wives and storage space) to keep us from owning a few of each type?

 

[Fitz]

Working canoes

That's my point exactly. The Working Canoes used by Native Americans and Voyageurs alike, probably more often than not utilized high ends.

Another version I have wondered about are the so-called "crooked canoes" built with extreme rocker.

Thanks for the constructive debate. We won't settle anything. I just think high end canoes get a bad rap and there may be more to it than decoration.

 

[Michael Grace]

Wadena,

See the attached image and tell us what we're missing. Apologies- I don't have good graphics software on this home computer. Still... I drew identical profile shapes below the waterline(s); the only thing that differs between the left and right profile is the height of the ends above the maximum possible waterline. The two horizontal dashed lines represent two possible waterlines. As you can see, wherever the waterline is placed (as long as it doesn't go above gunwale height), the in-water profile of the canoe remains unchanged. Therefore, end height can have no effect on performance with respect to the portion of the canoe that is in the water.

Fitz- those crooked canoes are something else, huh? I remember photos of Eastern Cree where you can plainly see crooked canoes alongside other canoes that have much, much less rocker. These people apparently produced multiple types of canoes, likely for uses under different conditions. The crooked canoe would be extraordinarily maneuverable, but it would surely spin like a top in high winds. By the way- by virtue of its "crooked" nature, it has bery high ends, but its performance within the water is not because of the high ends, but rather because of its extreme rocker. Here, high ends are simply a consequence of the rocker.

Personally, I like high ends. They add a fanciful measure of beauty that I like (in moderation- a Kennebeck Katahdin, for example, is a bit much for my taste), but I can understand how others may prefer the flatter profile of a guide-style canoe. In a canoe with high ends, I've certainly been blown about when paddling with little load, but the height of the ends in the air is reduced with added load, and a bit of heeling allows the wind to pass (that's actual wind, the breeze, for those who are giggling at "wind to pass") with less effect on the canoe.

 

[MGC]

The canoe is art?

That's my point exactly. The Working Canoes used by Native Americans and Voyageurs alike, probably more often than not utilized high ends.

I don't think we can discount vanity and artistic statement in the native canoes. Native Americans were very in tune with creative statements that were reflected in practical and very utilitarian products.

Or, can we discount artistic liberties taken by the artists that captured "the portage" or "the rapid"? I look at some of the old art that I own (prints etc.) and I cannot begin to imagine that anyone ever really constructed anything so elaborate to haul furs, beans and tobacco.

To stay with the (my) theme, the bark canoe that I once owned did not have high lines. Birchbark canoes were not all built as show pieces or with high ends.

As an aside, does anyone remember the special edition Budweiser canoes? As I recall these precious beauties came standard with nice high ends. Did the folks at Budweiser know something special about canoe construction?

 

[Wadena]

See the attached image and tell us what we're missing. Apologies- I don't have good graphics software on this home computer. Still... I drew identical profile shapes below the waterline(s); the only thing that differs between the left and right profile is the height of the ends above the maximum possible waterline. The two horizontal dashed lines represent two possible waterlines. As you can see, wherever the waterline is placed (as long as it doesn't go above gunwale height), the in-water profile of the canoe remains unchanged. Therefore, end height can have no effect on performance with respect to the portion of the canoe that is in the water.

I've already explained several times on this thread. The horse is dead.

 

[Wadena]

I just think high end canoes get a bad rap and there may be more to it than decoration.

It's been well established that the high ends worked well when canoes tended to be loaded with everything except the kitchen sink.

The reason they get a bad rap today is because most canoes go out lightly loaded.

By the way, you seem to be dissin' decoration......don't you think decoration can have a practical impact?

I'm thinking of the practical impact of war paint.

 

[Canerodz]

So you are saying that a canoe will ride lower in the water as it has weight added to it, irrespective of the presence or absence of dramatically high ends, and will thus be less exposed to the wind and have a larger wetted surface and displacement, all of which will tend to reduce the impact of any apparent wind on the craft?

 

[beaver]

And that's the way it is.

"It is what it is and was what it was"

 

[Wadena]

So you are saying that a canoe will ride lower in the water as it has weight added to it, irrespective of the presence or absence of dramatically high ends, and will thus be less exposed to the wind and have a larger wetted surface and displacement, all of which will tend to reduce the impact of any apparent wind on the craft?

Yes, but not irrespective of rocker, which will, of course, have the practical effect of reducing the impact of heavy loading on the high end problem.

 

[Wadena]

Another Site of Interest

I'm sure some of you have already seen this site, but for those who haven't......this shows that early canoes had ends both low and high.

http://www.civilisations.ca/aborig/watercraft/wab03eng.html

Clearly, the real problem the freight haulers had was having ends that were high enough after the canoe was loaded to the max, as the bow of a heavily loaded canoe will tend to submerge if too low, especially when bouncing in whitewater......thus the ends seem high to us. To them those ends were just perfect for the job they had to do.

 

[MGC]

High end convert

Well, here's my chance to eat some crow. After seeing this spectacular Gerrish at the Clayton show today, I need to put a toe over into the high end camp. That is of course presuming that the high ends are located on a georgous Gerrish like this one. If this beauty did not win top prize I'll eat the nearest Garwood.

 

[Kathryn Klos]

The Gerrish that Pam Wedd builds is based on Dave McDaniel's 14 footer. It's stellar, like the canoe that inspired it.

 

[Todd Bradshaw]

"Clearly, the real problem the freight haulers had was having ends that were high enough after the canoe was loaded to the max, as the bow of a heavily loaded canoe will tend to submerge if too low, especially when bouncing in whitewater......thus the ends seem high to us. To them those ends were just perfect for the job they had to do.


No, the high part of the high ends of a fur-trade-style freight canoe is not in a position where it will even get wet when going through most big waves. Much of the high part is actually out in front of the beginning of the waterline. The high ends preventing water intrusion or adding buoyancy in waves just is not going to happen. The thing that keeps the boat dry is the flare in the hull sides which starts immediately after the stem and runs the entire length of the canoe. Hull volume and buoyancy increase rather rapidly as a wave climbs up the side of the boat - producing an increase in lift (it also makes a lightly-loaded canoe narrower and faster).

Chapelle & Adney on fur trade canoes - page 141:
"It should also be noted that the height of the ends varied a good deal in any given range of length, as this dimension was determined not by the length of the canoe but by the judgement and taste of the builder and tribal form of end. {the original fur trade boats were built by natives who later taught the traders how to build their own canoes} Generally, however, small canoes had relatively higher ends than larger canoes in proportion to length, because, as will be remembered, one function of the end was to hold the upended canoe far enough off the ground to permit the user to seek shelter under it."

Another thing to consider, especially for a typical recreational canoe, is that there really is very little wind-catching area added when you compare low ends to high ends on a similarly-sized hull. The difference in the "sail area" of the ends of a Old Town Guide and an Otca or Molotor is only a fraction of one square foot. Make yourself a canoe sail that has an area of only two-thirds of one square foot and see how far it gets you? Your paddle blade likely has more wind catching area than that extra bit added by high ends.

Unless you go to ridiculous extremes (like the Dolphin Chief model) I firmly believe that this entire "high ends catch wind and it affects performance" thing is another one of those dumb rumors that get perpetuated by people who actually have no experience to support it - they're just passing along something that they heard as if it's a fact. Same thing with the old "Varnished grips cause blisters and oiled ones don't" crap. Blisters are caused either by bad technique (over-gripping) or by rough spots on the paddle. Oil the grip if you like oiled grips or varnish it if you like varnished grips, but in either case, if you make sure it's smooth and paddle properly you'll be just fine (just like your other hand that spends all day clutching a varnished shaft and doesn't get blisters).

I lump 99% of this whole "high ends catch wind" thing into the same "urban canoe myth" category. The best thing about high ends is that they make canoes look really sweet. This is not a new concept - it goes all the way back through the fur trade era and before, when different tribes had their own end styles (every year at the big pow-wow and canoe showcase, the Ford tribe and Chevy tribe would all turn out to see whether this year's models had tail-fins). As far as I see it, the worst thing about high ends is that some canoes don't have them.

One thing worth noting on the Gerrish in the photo above is that in addition to being lovely and having high ends, the sheer line is an arc and it adds depth to the hull in the area where canoes do take water in waves (like right into the bow paddler's lap). Unlike the stem heights, this really does make a serious performance difference. If you want to add depth or height to a hull to give it better performance in rough water, that's the place to put it - about 1/4-1/3 of the way in from the ends.

Notice the amount of flare in the hull and how early it starts.

 

[Dan Miller]

If this beauty did not win top prize I'll eat the nearest Garwood.

Get out your sawzall and a fork...I'll provide the Gar.

Ken Kelly's Ted Shea won Queen of the River (for those that don't know, that is the special award given every five years and offered to all those who won Small Craft of the Year in prior shows). Dave won Best Preserved.

Should've stopped by and introduced yourself. Did you at least make it to the Storage Facility Thursday or Friday?

 

[MGC]

Gar breakfast burrito

The Shea was spectacular. Here are a few poor photo's of it. An amazing boat.
I was only up yesterday and did a whirlwind tour. Someday I hope that I can get the full tour. I did see you once but you were looking pretty busy.

Seems like there were fewer people there this year? Was it the threat of lousy weather (photo's prove otherwise) or gas?

 

[Wadena]

It seems to me that most canoes with high ends also have quite a bit of rocker......and that is another factor in why these canoes look good.

More rocker makes for more pleasing lines.....or so it seems to me.

Unfortunately, neither high ends nor rocker are helpful in my usual type of canoing, so I often use the straighter, flatter, uglier canoes.