# Cracked creek boats can manufactures produce expedition layup?



## tk (Apr 8, 2005)

There has been a lot of discussion on here about cracked creek boats and the frustration it causes. I would imagine that frustration is all around as it can't be economical for the manufacture and shop to deal with broken boats as well. Personally I've seen just about every brand/model of modern creek boats (Blunts and Y's don't count) cracked in the past year or so and I don't think any manufacture is immune to this. 

I'm curious if it would be possible for kayak manufacture's to produce "expedition" layup creeks boats? Personally I get tired of getting 40-80 days out of current creek boats compared to 200+ of the old designs (Blunt or Y for example). IMO for the type of kayaking I do, I would gladly pay extra for a heavy duty layup that lasted substantially longer, even if it was 5-10 extra lbs. I guess I'm looking for the durability of say a Blunt in a more updated design.

I'm curious:
-If this is possible from a manufacturing perspective? Would 5-10 extra lbs in plastic greatly improve durability?

-If anyone else besides me is looking for something like this as at least an option?


----------



## thecraw (Oct 12, 2003)

TK... I can only speak for Jackson on this topic. EJ is crazy about cross link plastic (exactly what the Y) was made of. Cross link is 30% more cost to us... and it's tinsel strength is rather impressive (its the only material underground fuel tanks can be made of for example). But that being said, blunt force impact (boat full of water after a swim for instance and slamming into rocks) is going to blow open any boat... period. 

We had a rash of bad boats last year that we are warranty'ing with no question. It's unfortunate, but the truth, and we stand by our products. 

The issue had more to do with cooking times then anything else. Cross linking is as much as process (exact heat required to get molecuels to actually "cross link") as an actual material difference. 
I am by no means an expert... actually far less than that, but I did ask your question at one point internally and it was explained that thickness "may" help a bit, but once you have a certain thickness, adding more isn't a 1 to 1 benefit. Another way to say that twice the thickness is by no means going to last twice as long or twice as strong. It was also explained that potentially to the contrary... if it's too thick, that can become too brittle...

This is a pretty lame description, i am sure some huge brained engineerd buzzard can get much better, but I am not far off.

Bottom line get products from brands that stand behind their warranty. There are a couple out there and some do very well.


----------



## deepsouthpaddler (Apr 14, 2004)

Amen! Had a long conversation about this on the way to the river after I got less than 50 river days on my 3rd creeker in a row. What you are asking for is a creekboat that can handle the typical creek bed, ie rocks. Colorado mank is certainly a rough test on creekboats, but I don't think that it is unreasonable to want a creek boat that can stand the test. Prijon / eskimo boats seem to hold up a lot longer, and older models that had different plastic held up well too. The new boats break way too easy.

If prijon would make a decent creeker (hated the hercules / embudo / creeker 225), they would have a best seller. Give me my nomad in prijon plastic and I'm set. I have heard so many people echo the same sentiments... if prijon would just make (nomad / jefe etc) I would love it!

In my mind, manufacturers have sacrificed strength for weight and ease / cost of manufacture. Most manufacturers boats do not have the hull strength to take rock hits and crack quickly. Bummer.

I think its possible from a manufacturing perspective, but I think the key question there is economics.


----------



## jmack (Jun 3, 2004)

*Old WS crosslink v. Jackson crosslink*

Now I am no chemist, but the Jackson crosslink is not the same stuff that Wavesport used to make boats out of in the good old days. I don't know if it is the chemical composition, or the thickness, or the molding process, but it is not the same. On the other hand, they do seem to have great customer service, so I would but one on that basis if they made a creeker design that I liked. Just saying, how come nobody (except Prijon) can make a creeker that is as durable as the old crosslink Ys. 

Rant over.

PS- shame on WS from switching from the best plastic in the industry to the worst.


----------



## tk (Apr 8, 2005)

Thx Marty. Interesting about cooking times and thicknesses. I was not trying to imply that double thickness gave twice the durability. 

I was trying to keep this manufacture neutral, as I have seen issues with every brand (Jackson boats from this year included). I think from a boat performance perspective, manufactures are going the right way and give us a lot of options, which is awesome! Durability wise, I'm not sure if I could say that. A warranty and good company only goes so far in a big, remote, canyon.

Maybe durability is cooking related for all brands? I'm far more ignorant on the kayak production process, which is part of why I'm asking this question to try and learn and understand what is/isn't possible. Almost every campfire this year has included this discussion/debate. Could the industry to build a 200 day boat? If you could charge more $$$, add plastic, more durable pillars, different seat, added material, etc, could it be done? If so, what would be the trade off's and would paddlers find it worth while?


----------



## KSC (Oct 22, 2003)

I've never heard of a paddler in Colorado who hasn't had this dream: a modern creek boat design with more durable plastic. I think most people would drop extra $ for such a boat in an instant. I have definitely gravitated towards manufacturers with a reputation for good customer service because of this, but even with a warranty it's a major pain in the ass. You have the issue of dealing with a cracked boat on the run and then you're usually left without a boat for a while (usually during the middle of the season). 

From talking with people, the best I can gather as to why this hasn't happened is that there's just not much money to be made from selling creekboats. The result is nobody wants to invest in the technology to build a bomber boat. I'm told that the machinery Prijon uses for their plastic is extremely costly and I guess there are patent issues involved as well. I have no idea what happened to the good old Wavesport crosslink plastic. It does seem to be a problem of economics, not technology.

It would be great to hear from an expert on the subject though.


----------



## Steve Kahn (Apr 17, 2004)

*creekers*

i hear you KSC, but am not with you 100% - i don't see this as a new "technology problem", or economic induced technology problem, as you describe.

- i mean, my old old rpm seemed like it would never break. granted in my rpm i was learning and did not take the abuse that more technical stuff does. but even still, doesn't seem like the change was technology, or requisite economic input.

they already did make bomber boats out of bomber plastic. they just weren't modern designs. is there something with the new modern designs that made it easier to make with crappier plastic, or are we back to teh conspiracy theory that the manufacturers make crappy boats so they can sell you a new one every season?

anyways, anyone want to share shuttle on bailey for sat.? - 10:30 takeout? steve - 303-913-1350.

S


----------



## crane (Oct 25, 2006)

does anybody know if there has been any testing to see if additions of somesort of "meshing" or flexable skeleton has been done during the molding process?

they use fiberglass strands in concrete pooring to increase strength and decrease cracking. if there was material out there that is flexible and could with stand the process of baking/ cooling, why not? i dont think it would help at all for the "wearing down" of plastic, but i do think it would help with the strength of it. 

it may not solve the problem completly, but if it could increase the amount of days out of a boat with minimal cost and weight added to current designs, it may be worth a try. FYI, i am not an engineer or plastic expert, just a kayaker.


----------



## will rawstron (May 20, 2004)

As a chronic boat abuser and breaker who runs broken 'bitched' boats on all roadside runs, and reserves new plastic for times that a breakage would be really inconvenient, I would gladly pay extra for a beefed up hull. 

I would be stoked on a boat weighing up to 10 extra pounds. These things paddle better when loaded anyways. 

Sadly, I've broken 5 boats in two years and upwards of 12 since '02. 

We want tougher plastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


----------



## cdw (Mar 28, 2005)

thecraw said:


> TK... I can only speak for Jackson on this topic. EJ is crazy about cross link plastic (exactly what the Y) was made of. Cross link is 30% more cost to us... and it's tinsel strength is rather impressive (its the only material underground fuel tanks can be made of for example).


How come they break like my grandmother's china bein' stepped on by a pissed off ungulate?

Paddle Prijon or Eskimo, or keep the roofing sealant companies in business.


----------



## Kleiv (Oct 12, 2007)

*boat quality*

Word. I would gladly pay $200, $300, even $400 more to get a boat made like the old days. I've been kayaking for 15 years and the boat quality has gone to hell at all companies. I am not knowlegable enough to know exactly why, but from what I understand bake times are too short and there is less plastic. Even 2-3 lbs can make a difference.

I used to get 300 days plus out of a boat...now it can be as short as 10.

I think all companies should go back to cross link the old way. the way Y's were made 10 years ago. And if you swim your boat should still not break. I dropped a fully loaded Y (1999 model) with 50 days on the river off a 200 ft vertical cliff in New Zealand. No sliding...a dead freefall. The boat directly hit rock at probably damn near terminal velocity. Not only did it not break, the dent popped back out after a day in the sun and you could barely even tell it happend.


----------



## Snowhere (Feb 21, 2008)

So what plastic is my Pyrana Micro bat 230 made out of? I have had the boat for years but sadly have not used it much as having a couple of kids got in the way of my boating. 

Before that, I had a Wavesport MicroX I bought new in 95. Never broke it but the only class V I ran back when I had the Micro was Pine Creek, and I actually took my 28 gallon Jib instead! I would never get stuck in any keepers with the Jib so I was comfortable taking it anywhere. Nothing like the feel of being in a bouncing toothpick while stareing at the sky in that boat!

On a side note, I picked up a plastic welder for my motorcycles, but it will come in handy for boat adjustments!


----------



## Kelsey Thompson (Nov 9, 2007)

*Boat Plastics*

Yeah yeah I paddle for Wave Sport, but I'm not going to try to stand up for them or any other company because you guys will just stomp all over me. Here's what I have heard about why no one uses cross link plastic anymore.

Although some people think that crosslink maybe stronger/more durable factories hate dealing with it because moulding it is such a toxic process. I've heard lots about how factory workers are always sick from the fumes and such all the time (not that a factory is sent free with linear plastic) and that working with crosslink raised a lot of health concerns. Also in the event that your boat does break you can't weld it, which can cause a lot of problems on over nighters and when waiting for a warranty boat etc. Crosslink also has a large impact environmentally as it is very difficult to recycle. 


As many of you have mentioned Colorado is hard on boats, probably the worst that I've ever seen. My best advice to you would be to take a grinding wheel to all your local runs and make the rocks smooth ;-)

Kelsey Thompson
www.atlantickayaker.com


----------



## KSC (Oct 22, 2003)

Well, health and environmental concerns are certainly good reasons. WRT to recycling though, I wonder if you consider 10 broken linear plastic boats to 1 cross link, if the environmental/recycling issue is worth it. 

On a side note, I don't know what all manufacturers do, but it seems Dagger & LL require you to cut the serial # out of your boat when it is warrantied, thus creating a giant hole in your boat. This seems like a shame as surely many of these hulls could be patched up and one could get some more life out of them.


----------



## Roy (Oct 30, 2003)

There are definitely better plastics out there. 

As far as I know, all the boatmakers use polyethylene (PE). Prijon and Eskimo can use higher density PE in a blow molding process, but it's still PE. Jackson is using crosslink, but it's still PE. 

**sidenote: The best layman's description of crosslink vs. conventional PE that I've heard: regular PE at a molecular level is like a plate of spaghetti, where the molecular strings can slide between each other. Crosslinked PE has most of the noodles bonded to their neighbors in a fundamental (and non-recyclable, non-weldable) way. Linking the strands makes the material tougher, which is what you want, but there are costs.

Anyway, there's a lot of other plastics besides PE. At less than a buck a pound for retail HDPE, I can't imagine that hull materials are more than 5-10% of the cost of your boat. There seems to be a lot of room for materials improvement. 

I say that while being astounded at the abuse these boats are able to take, despite having destroyed yet another one this summer. I busted a Y back in the day too...


----------



## ag3dw (May 13, 2006)

*Ram Caps*

I am not much of a creeker but doesn't the bow take a lot of hits? Is that where peoples boats are cracking or is it wear on the bottom. I have only had a creeker crack at near the cockpit combing which was a warrenteed design issue. 

The boat makers (or someone who wants to start a small bizness) should make them available.


----------



## sbratt (May 10, 2006)

Most of the cracks these guys are having are on the hull closer to the seat. It's the lowest point on the boat and the least likely to give when your ass hits a rock. You can weld a bow crack and have a better chance of more life for the boat since it take less hits.


----------



## tk (Apr 8, 2005)

Kelsey Thompson said:


> Although some people think that crosslink maybe stronger/more durable factories hate dealing with it because moulding it is such a toxic process. I've heard lots about how factory workers are always sick from the fumes and such all the time (not that a factory is sent free with linear plastic) and that working with crosslink raised a lot of health concerns. Also in the event that your boat does break you can't weld it, which can cause a lot of problems on over nighters and when waiting for a warranty boat etc. Crosslink also has a large impact environmentally as it is very difficult to recycle.


In my mind, this is not a cross link/liner plastic debate as I am seeing both break. Its a old school durability vs modern creek boat durability issue. I would guess (hope) all manufactures have good working environments for their employees and take care of them. I would think they would have EPA and lawsuits if they didn't. But I would echo KSC comments on how environmentally friendly is it for their to be 3 or 4 broken boats whatever they are made of? Guess Will's yard has a kayak fence with 12 boats! Personally I would prefer just one boat that's not broken. Also I would gladly have a 5-10lb heavier boat or loose the ability to weld a kayak than have to worry about them breaking. Warranties and companies who take care of you are great, but I would give that up if I knew I could on average get 200 days out of a boat.

Kelsey, since you have ties to WS, maybe you could convince them to use some of their composite expertise (new carbon playboat) to make a their current creek boat as strong as they used to make Y's or for a really lofty goal, make it as strong as a Blunt! Instead of spending R&D $$$$ on 19lb carbon fiber play boats (which I'm not sure who would actually buy), what about composite or mesh layups like Crane mentioned? Seems like have some sort of meshing or composite weaving would be interesting approach and is applied commonly in other sports. I'm curious if this has been tried in the kayak industry ever on creek boats? 

Also, this is not a Colorado issue as I've seen it happen plenty in the north west and BC, Southeast, and Cali. Almost every campfire discussion all over seems to have this same discussion, that's why I posted this thread because I would love to see manufactures give us a option for a "expedition" layup, plastic, quality, whatever that can hold up to 200 days of boating (not 200 days of swimming).


----------



## Don (Oct 16, 2003)

*Recycling*

Roy was wrong on one point. You are able to recycle both Liner and Crosslink boats. They just might not become another kayak. But, you can recycle both locally in Denver. Confluence has a boat trade in program. Call'em 303-433-3676


----------



## benrodda (Mar 27, 2004)

A different take.... chemistry aside...

How much has the sport of whitewater kayaking (not recreational) grown in the past 15 years? And I am speaking in terms of actual participants not boat sales. 

Answer: I think that there are issues inherent to the sport that help the manufacturers stay in business. 1. We now have a quiver of boats for different purposes (play boats, creekers, river runners, etc). 2. The designs keep getting better allowing us to do more, so we replace our obsolite boats. 3. We paddle harder than we did 15 years ago... at least i think so. So we wear out boats a little faster. Think about how much more the impact was displaced over 10 feet versus 7 feet (maybe that point is a wash).... 

In the end I bet that the sport/industry as a whole is not growing fast enough to keep manufactures in a super profitable position unless they get our repeat business.

Also what about lexan? that stuff should be cheap pretty soon?


----------



## WyoPadlr1 (May 5, 2005)

This has been a great thread to read, considering that the topic comes up so regularly now, and it often degenerates into paddling reps just trying to defend their company's boats, but not so much this time. 
I've been paddling plastic boats for 24 years now: Perception, Prijon, WaveSport, Dagger, Pyranha, LiquidLogic, even an old Quality Kayak from NZ. They definitely got a lot better for a while, but now they seem to be getting worse. They all break. 
Early Prijons were pretty much crap. I broke 2 T-Slaloms and a T-Canyon, all around the cockpits. Now, they seem to have fixed those issues, but haven’t paddled Prijon in a while. Had an Embudo for about 4 weeks, but wasn’t stoked on it.
I spent some time in the WaveSport factory in Oak Creek back when they were making Extremes and then the Descente. The guys were pretty fume-sick all the time, and the boats took a LONG time to cook. But, the boats were nearly INDESTRUCTIBLE, like the last cross-linked Y-Boat I owned seemed like it was going to last forever. WaveSport boats during that era were the toughest, and my Y only weighed 39lbs dry. It went to Cali for weeks at least four times, as well as BC, and lots of trips down the Popo Agie and the Box. I sold it to a beginner who probably got another 3 years out it. Now, WaveSport boats seem to last about as long as a rubber on prom night, even their playboats. And the boats have gotten heavier, not lighter, and heavier hasn’t equated to stronger.
I lost count of how many Pyranhas I broke during a 2 year period of giving them a try, so it's not worth going there........
LiquidLogic? I broke a GUS, no problem, and it weighed as much as a tank, and paddled like one. The new JefeGrande? Do you really want your creeker to weigh 50+ f*&#ing pounds before you put any gear in it? I paddled it empty, and it handles ok, but couldn't imagine carrying it loaded on the portages in the Box, or in to BullLake, or elsewhere. And the Jefe's are breaking on the chines and under the seats like everything else. I've seen two. 
I bought a Nomad 8.5 the first year it came out, moved the seat forward, and pounded the living crap out of it: Cali, WA, Big South, Ten Sleep, the Box numerous times, a bad wrap/pin and lost it for four days in WA (got it back in perfect shape, pinned on a rock). That was amazing plastic: it stayed rigid, but gave without cracking. Unwisely sold it this spring, since I was out of commission myself, and it is still going strong. Now, the Nomads seem to be breaking like crazy. Shame on Dagger for switching plastic or cooking/curing time. 
Now, look at what’s getting paddled: CO “mank” may or may not be any worse than anybody else’s mank, but a lot more mank is getting paddled: Yule Creek, Big Timber in MT, Ten Sleep, Box Elder, upper Popo Agie and Bull Lake in WY, South Silver and Upper Cherry in CA are just examples, and everybody has theirs. The boats are getting a LOT more intentional grinding and pounding at the exact time that boat manufacturers are having to streamline production time and materials just to remain profitable, and still keep up with design changes that happen a lot quicker nowadays. Linear plastic takes less time to cook, less time to cure, therefore shorter turnaround times for boats in the molds. Was also told that raw linear plastic is cheaper and more plentiful, all the health and environmental issues notwithstanding that either do or don’t balance out. 
You would think that having to warranty hulls all the time would start to eat into the company’s bottom line, but apparently not as much as using better materials and taking longer to make each boat. So, profit drives the durability issue more than anything. 
Me, personally, I’d pay $300-$400 more for a creek boat that was a lot stronger / more durable, and yet 10-15 pounds LIGHTER, not heavier. That is what we need to be pushing the boat manufacturers for. Otherwise, they’ll keep putting heavier, weaker boats out there that just wreck your back and shoulders and don’t hold up to current paddling trends. The market (creek boaters) has to be able to convince the boat makers that it is in their best interests (profit) to come out with stronger, lighter creek boats, not the opposite. Until then, ya gotta keep eatin’ yer Wheaties, lifting weights when yer not paddling, and carrying lots of Bitchathane............ :roll:


----------



## millerotis (Mar 16, 2007)

I just read through this thread and I can't agree more. I have a commercial outfitting company overseas and we run a lot creeks during trips. I have 4 Dagger GTs that are 7-8 years old (can't remember) and they have taken a pounding. I started with 4 and still have 3 unbroken. We broke 4 creek boats from one company that were almost new (3 had less than 30 days on them and one with less than 50 days on it). Everything breaks too quickly. The good news is that my Burns are doing great and I plan on buying at least 3 more this year - because they are great boats but also because they DIDN'T break.

Being an outfitter, my boats probably take more of a pounding than most. But I still should be able to get 75-100 days out of a boat! And warranties don't help me much. It is expensive and time consuming to get a boat here. If I break a boat, I don't get to replace it for at least a month, if not longer.

I would not only pay more for a creek boat that didn't break so easily, I would buy more of them! And I would put my guests in those boats and suggest they buy them too!


----------



## benrodda (Mar 27, 2004)

Man I hate seeing the whole "I would pay more for a boat that lasts longer". 

The verdict is clear they are not building the boats as strong as they used to and they already cost more. 

plain and simple they need our return business.


----------



## Electric-Mayhem (Jan 19, 2004)

If there is any indication of how much the prep and curing process matter with regards to breaking boats, I think the "comp" weight boat era from Riot is as good as it gets.

Not sure if anyone else noticed, but the lighter boats seemed to break ALOT less then the normal weight boats. I paddled with a dude named Dave for a while in Boulder, who had a Comp weight Disco that he beat on all the time, and it never broke. Meanhwhile I had a normal weight Big Gun that broke, and I heard a ton of people who had major issues with their Riots at the same time. 

Seems to me that since it was a Comp weight boat, they paid more attention to the boat as it was molded, and it really showed in its long term use. Meanwhile, the normal mass produced variety seem to break really easy.

Some other things I have noticed that attribute to breakage:

1. The darker boats seem to break more easily. From what I understand, this has to do with the pigment acting as binding agent, and having different colors need different curing times and temperatures. Plus, its counter intuitive, but from what I hear, the lighter the boat the more actual pigment goes into, thus having more of a binding agent. Needless to say, I've seen a lot less bright colored boats (Yellows, Whites, Oranges, etc) and more darker (Reds, Blues, Blacks, Purples) break.

2. The companies who outsource their molding or who provide molding for other industries seem to have alot less of a breakage problem. These who outsource locally to professional plastic molders are Jackson (I think), Liquid Logic (at least they did this as of a couple years ago), an DragoRossi (their parent company is the largest producer of plastic goods in Italy). Prijon moonlights on occasion for park benches and other such things, plus they use a different process too. 

I haven't heard of many problems with most of these companies (until Liquid logic recently it would seem) having a lot of breaking issues. I can personally vouch for Drago boats, as I have beat the crap out of both a Fish and a Mafia, including putting a huuuge kidney wrenching gouge in the Mafia, and they boat held up really well. I literally have not heard of a single Drago Boat breaking yet, and I frequent the forum, which is usually the first place you hear about that kind of stuff. Don't hear to many complaints with Jackson hulls (the same can't always be said for their outfitting). Seems to me that this is because these companies that actually do the molding already have the experience and expertise to be able to deal with changes in the plastic, so their end product comes out all the better.

Irregardless, its soon going to be time for the next step in Materials use I think. Robson was threatening a few years ago, but other then that its the same ol stuff from every company. I think the answer might be to make a PE/fiberglass or carbon composite that is moldable like plastic, but has the fiber strands in it to bind everything together. You still would get the ease of molding and bendability with memory, but with the added strength and rigidity of the fibers. That was the idea behind the Robson prototype as I recall, but it fell by the wayside it would seem.

I think a large part, as people have said, is for the companies to really focus on the molding process and keeping the temperatures right for each individual boat, especially when it comes to creekers. I know you guys say "I would be willing to pay $XXX for a stronger boat", but I don't completely believe it. When Drago came out, everyone was absolutely floored that they cost $1400 and all said they refused to even look at it and wrote Drago off instantly as not worth it without even trying the boats. I think the same would go for any "expedition trim" special layup boat too.

Ok, I'm gonna stop typing now.

JH


----------



## crane (Oct 25, 2006)

i would have to agree with elcectric mayhem. i already said this before, why not try adding a "binding fiber" to the mold? it could increase strength without decreasing flex. 
i know companies are always trying new plastics and mixes. corey volt had a nomad that was a newer platic that he was testing out for dagger.
it just may be time to take the manufacturing in another direction. they could keep the same "cheap" plastic with the addition of something to physically bind it, and still have a product that is fast to produce without having to change any molds that is much stronger and lasts longer.

robinson may have been on to something. i wish they would have finished a product.


----------



## tk (Apr 8, 2005)

crane said:


> i know companies are always trying new plastics and mixes. corey volt had a nomad that was a newer platic that he was testing out for dagger.


That's good to hear that new things are being tried. I know that I've received more than one response from this thread from manufactures who are watching this thread. More than one has said it has instigated some level of internal discussion.


----------



## Canada (Oct 24, 2006)

tk said:


> That's good to hear that new things are being tried. I know that I've received more than one response from this thread from manufactures who are watching this thread. More than one has said it has instigated some level of internal discussion.


Awesome. In my shed I have a foreplay, jive and crossfire that all have been severly abused in old plastic that have never broken. You can't tell me the factories today can't come up with a ventilation system to make the use of the old plastic safe. You can feel the difference when you just flex the plastic on an old versus new boat. The funny thing about this is that I think they could really grab some market share with a more durable boat. I personally don't have brand loyalty. I look for the best design and typically buy after it's out for a year so feedback on durability is somewhat reliable. Possibly some of this is driven by the recent trend for park and play sponsered kayakers.

As far as the 1,400 tag on a drago, I would have considered it if I could have demo'd the boat. It seemed like they were focussed on Europe, and I heard of one shop somewhere that had a demo. If I heard it was a ground breaking boat that was stronger and lighter, I would have sought it out. Cool graphics didn't make it worth it.


----------



## Nathan (Aug 7, 2004)

Since this has come up a couple times in this thread it has sparked my curiosity, would having a binding fiber/weave have any benefit for plastic? It is beneficial in concrete because concrete has poor tensile strength. Does plastic have a greater tensile or compressional strength? Do the cracks in boats generally result from tensile or compressional failure? I'm sure this is something manufactures look into? I would think that knowing which types of stresses are causing the failures would be the first step in trying to build a better boat.


----------



## Canada (Oct 24, 2006)

what about a composite weave in the pressure point areas. Sort of like the nose cone on the scorpion, but built into the boat under the seat and in the nose?


----------



## tk (Apr 8, 2005)

I like the idea of using a Kevlar fabric of sorts in places. I recall in engineering school in a composites course playing with difference pieces of Kevlar fabric in relation to carbon to increase strength in various ways (impact, elongation, etc). Some of the fabrics were ultra light, but I'm sure they cost quite a bit per sq/ft. Not sure how the process would work in relation to boat molding or what may have been tried by R&D groups in the past. But the idea is interesting.

More ideas along those lines are being posted to this thread.

http://www.mountainbuzz.com/forums/f11/truck-bed-liner-on-creekboat-hull-21289.html#post111143


----------



## deepsouthpaddler (Apr 14, 2004)

One note is that as I was reseraching the truck liner thing, I found that one of the companies had kevlar fibers in their plastic to add to the strength. Its already being done to some extent in plastics. Seems like the kayak manufacturers just need to catch up.


----------



## Canada (Oct 24, 2006)

Kevlar, fiberglass weave, wire mesh. The possibilities are endless, with little wieght impact. I look forward to see what the engineers come up with over the next couple years. Maybe this is the next big leap like the introduction of the 007. It wasn't that long ago when my lazer was a hot boat!


----------

