inwall tapering at bow and stern

I believe inwales are tapered simply for aesthetics. The ones with tapered inwales are much more elegant, to my eye, than un-tapered ones. The latter just look bulky, chunky by comparison. Un-tapered may be stronger simply because of their larger dimensions, but history has proven tapered inwales highly functional - their smaller dimensions hold up through the test of time.

Which side is tapered? It may not matter as long as the taper is smooth and flows into the rest of the inwale. That said, some models with short tapers like the Old Town 50# model are tapered on the inside. This is a very straight taper, and it ends abruptly at a large angle at or just beyond the point where the deck begins. This made the build easy using short, straight-sided decks. As a counter-example, the Old Town Otca with its longer, curved-sided decks, has long inwale tapers that flow into the lines of the rest of the gunwale.
 
Last edited:
I'm restoring a 50#er currently. The original inwales were very obviously tapered on the inboard side of the inwales. Two Chestnut restorations were the same.
 
Dave,

On the Rushton Indian Girl I restored a couple years ago the inwales are tapered on the inside. Tapering on the inside gives you the added advantage of being able to fit the inwale and the deck concave curve together better. As an aside the outwales are tapered also in both the horizontal and vertical axis. Pictures attached. If you have trouble sleeping tonight you can watch the whole restoration video. Resurrection of a Burn Pile Rushton Good luck with your project.

Jim
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5154a.JPG
    IMG_5154a.JPG
    189 KB · Views: 33
  • IMG_4804A.JPG
    IMG_4804A.JPG
    176.7 KB · Views: 33
Okay, thank you fellas for your replies.
The new gunwales on the 18 ft square stern are sort of beefy, and I want to extend them out past the stem, but they push the sidewall out too much to allow the shear plank to attach to the stem nicely. By tapering the inside of the inwale, I should be able to make a nice transition.
All this wood canvas canoe work is new to me so because I don't know what I'm doing I get to ask great folks like you all, thank you.

Jim thanks for the link, I viewed your amazing rebuild a couple years ago and found it an impressive bit of work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MGC
This is one of those "sum of the whole" kinds of propositions. While it might seem as though beefy stems would offer a "strength" advantage, the reality is there is no need for them to do so. The inside rails tie to the deck, the outside rails tie to the inside. The entire assembly offers far more structure that the single skinny rail does. The entire assembly of thin boards, stems, decks, rails provide a combined unit strength and also to a degree, flexibility that is actually quite perfect and borderline genius. Done properly, massive/beefy structure is unnecessary.
I recall working (as a young engineer) with a particular designer who was known for his massive and beefy assemblies. You could spot his designs from a mile away. There was zero elegance to what he designed. His rationalization was "it's solid/kräftig". Yes solid, but unnecessary. I learned how to obtain similar or superior functionality using 1/3 of the material mass. I researched and used better materials, eliminated most of the heavy metal bits and made a design that did not require Anatoly to carry.
Taper away.
 
i've done it both ways. I now leave them intact. this photo is of my current new build, still under construction.
 

Attachments

  • 20251020_115635.jpg
    20251020_115635.jpg
    107.6 KB · Views: 20
Okay, now I have to dredge up the intestinal fortitude to start cutting on the 20 ft ash gunwales.
Right now I'm thinking I'll taper the inside of the inwale and run it past the stem. Then do a tenon notch thing like Jerry Stelmok illustrates in the book he and Rollin wrote. (Page 107-108).
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3382.JPG
    IMG_3382.JPG
    166.5 KB · Views: 15
  • IMG_3384.JPG
    IMG_3384.JPG
    163.5 KB · Views: 16
Back
Top