Folding Kayaks: Klepper vs Pouch vs Sigma
Deborah Walters
I want to replace my Folbot double with a more durable and better
performing folding double. I like the Klepper's durability and sea
worthiness - but not it's speed and weight. I like the Pouch's
speed and weight, but not it's hull durability. I like Sigma's
hull durability and weight, but worry about it's windage and sea
worthiness. Does anyone out there have experience with all three?
Ralph Diaz, can you help me out with comparisons (I note the
Sigmas aren't in your book).
Deborah
rd...@ix.netcom.com
Hi, Deborah...
I have been in the first two, but no experience yet with the Sigma 2. I
have been after the designer, Vit Pesikov, to get me one to try out.
But like all small manufacturers (well under 50 units a year) it is
difficult to do.
I did like the single version of the boat, which I thoroughly tested
from all angles in my newsletter two or three years ago.
The Pouch of course is one of the faster and easiest of the double
foldables to paddle. I wouldn't worry about durability of the hull.
While not hypalon, it is tough enough plus makes for a fairly light boat
for its length.
I will confuse you some by throwing another very fine double into your
decision pot...the Nautiraid Raid 2 Expedition. It is as well built as
the Klepper at about half the price. And it performs very well, highly
seaworthy, etc. Pretty easy to assemble too.
You best bet, as always, is to give me a call. In the give and take of
a conversation I can get a more precise idea of what your needs are and
help you narrow down your choice, give you a better idea of tradeoffs,
etc. BTW that goes for anyone; i.e. feel free to call for such advice,
free of charge.
ralph diaz
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter
PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024
Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rd...@ix.netcom.com
"Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Name
A suggestion and a question. 1) Consider Feathercraft, they are very
seaworthy in rough water and 2) Which Folbot do you have? I have found my
Folbot Greenland 2 to be quite durable particularly because of the metal
front & rear keel strip. Ran over a lot of shellfish beads with minimal
scratches. You may find faster folding kayaks but I'm not sure about more
durable.
The Pouch is interesting, it is faster than the Folbot and I too worry
about the durability of its skin but I have only demo tested it. It is
good for a small paddler and is much harder to assemble. Personally I
prefer the Folbot even if its slower. The Klepper is a very good boat,
easy to assemble and the best choice for full upwind sailing. For the
money I like the Folbot but I'm not knocking the Klepper. If I were going
on a remote expedition with out my kids then I would like a Feathercraft.
Wondrful position to be in,contemplating a new kayak, good luck.
Frank Malinowski
In article <5e21h6$s...@prometheus.acsu.buffalo.edu>,
"Mac"
> You best bet, as always, is to give me a call. In the give and take of
> a conversation I can get a more precise idea of what your needs are and
> help you narrow down your choice, give you a better idea of tradeoffs,
> etc. BTW that goes for anyone; i.e. feel free to call for such advice,
> free of charge.
>
> ralph diaz
> --
>
that you had given the Sigma single a work out recently. What do you
think of it as a serious expedition boat. As it does not possess
hatches like Feathercraft's K1, what is it's carrying capacity and ease
of access like? Can Sigma's sail or a Batwing be fitted to the single?
My other question is, what is the hull of the Pouch manufactured of?
IS it capable of taking the odd knock without being easily torn?
Hey, did you see that the Australian yachting fraternity have developed
a folding yacht. They debuted it at the last America's Cup. Now if
they could only stop it from folding in the middle of the race...
Mac (expat Aussie)
Lanny Hoff
> My other question is, what is the hull of the Pouch manufactured of?
> IS it capable of taking the odd knock without being easily torn?
>
I own a Pouch folder, and the hull is made of a heavy vinyl. Although it
may not be as durable as a hypalon hull, it is still fairly stout stuff.
Think of it this way, whereas a Klepper hull may last for 20-25 years, the
Pouch hull is probably good for 15-20 years.
Now if only it were easier to put together. That is the only serious
sticking point as I see it.
Yours,
Lanny Hoff
ken...@aol.com
What about Feathercraft K2?
Advantages:
1. Synthetic deck, won't get as heavy as cotton decks, I believe.
2. Separate, small cockpits.
3. Sea socks, great for saving your life and keeping the inside of the boat clean at the same time.
4. Quality like Klepper, though different concept/materials
Disadvantages:
1. You may not want such a small cockpit.
2. Still on the heavy side.
I think their web site is www.feathercraft.com
Ken
Jukka Vaijärvi
In article <stale19-1502...@ppp-31.ts-1.min.idt.net> sta...@mail.idt.net (Lanny Hoff) writes:
>From: sta...@mail.idt.net (Lanny Hoff)
>Subject: Re: Folding Kayaks: Klepper vs Pouch vs Sigma
>Date: 16 Feb 1997 04:41:18 GMT
>> My other question is, what is the hull of the Pouch manufactured of?
>> IS it capable of taking the odd knock without being easily torn?
>>
>I own a Pouch folder, and the hull is made of a heavy vinyl. Although it
>may not be as durable as a hypalon hull, it is still fairly stout stuff.
>Think of it this way, whereas a Klepper hull may last for 20-25 years, the
>Pouch hull is probably good for 15-20 years.
I have one old Pouch double, maybe manufactured back in the 70's, and I have
strenghened the hull by glueing a whole lenghth piece of pvc on the outer
side. The boat was assembled during the work. It succeeded quite well, I have
not noticed any difference in speed - and it sure survives any rocks now much
better.
By the way is there any cure for the "corkscrew" dilemma? Bow and stern of my
poach are not in the same plane, but have angle of some 15 degrees.
jukka.v...@stat.fi
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Tiedemiehet ovat yleisesti huolissaan siitä, että vanhemmat,
opettajat ja poliitikot eivät tiedä kuinka helposti perversiot
ovat saatavissa Internetissä." (Rita Strömmer, Iltalehti)
rd...@ix.netcom.com
Jukka Vaij=E4rvi wrote:
=2E
> =
> By the way is there any cure for the "corkscrew" dilemma? Bow and stern=
of my
> poach are not in the same plane, but have angle of some 15 degrees.
> =
No, there isn't. If a wooden framed folding kayak is left with bilge
water inside for too long, you sometimes see a twist at the bow or stern
wooden piece. Also, the frame on Pouchs is fairly lightly constructed
compared to say the Klepper, and that can, again at times--not always,
lend to that cockscrewing you mention. But, hey, the boat is 25 years
old! Imagine what the situation would have been with other types of
kayaks. A plastic one (not valid in a sense since they have only been
manufactured for about 15 years) would have been unusable after about
10, and a fiberglass kayak would have pretty much weakened and
deteriorated by about 20 years.
ralph diaz
-- =
"Mac"
>
> I own a Pouch folder, and the hull is made of a heavy vinyl. Although it
> may not be as durable as a hypalon hull, it is still fairly stout stuff.
>
> Think of it this way, whereas a Klepper hull may last for 20-25 years, the
> Pouch hull is probably good for 15-20 years.
>
> sticking point as I see it.
>
> Yours,
> Lanny Hoff
Can the vinyl take being creased when rolled for long periods. My main
concern is that the vinyl may crack in storage while rolled up. While
it's in the water you will of course always have the concern of tearing
it on submerged obstacles but that's always on the cards for a folder
regardless of material used.
What about the cotton decking. Is it stout enough to take into open
ocean conditions? And have you tried paddling it solo?
Mac
ken...@aol.com
According to a recent Pouch brochure, the hull is made of "severl layers of polymer fabric with a cotton canvas core, coated with polyurethane"
So that doesn't sound like hypalon to me.
ken...@aol.com
What's the Sigma? Who makes it and what can you tell me about it?
murrtrc
rd...@ix.netcom.com
The Sigmas are the product of Kayak Labs, a very small operation located
in Rhode Island and recently moved to Massachusetts. Its chief designer
and pretty much solo worker is Vit Pesikov, a Russian who came to the US
about a dozen years ago (he was featured in an interview about Russian
paddling scene about four years ago in Sea Kayaker).
There are several models from one to three seater, in fundamentally two
different lengths. Features include an incredibly strong aluminum frame
with dimensions about 30%-50% greater than that of other folding kayaks
made with aluminum frames (even the Sigma ribs are aluminum tubing), and
a variable width system in which lateral deck zippers control the width
of the boat from around 29" to 32" (something like that but I may be off
a bit since I'm working from memory on the fly here). The hull is made
of some reinforced polymer and the deck is cordura.
While it is a boat from a very small manufacturer, which normally raises
the issue of down-the-road availability of parts, there is nothing
exotic about the frame and any of it, including fastening system, could
be replicated by many home craftsmen or general repair shops unrelated
to kayaking or even boating.
I have only tested the Sigma 1, and have been trying to get my hands on
the double for some extensive testing. The Sigma 1 is a nice boat,
pretty fast. My own objection, personal in nature, is to the variable
width. The boat is plenty stable even at its narrowest setting and
generally is not pleasing looking at any setting (uneven sides at the
narrow setting, fat as a cow at its widest setting). But Vit is aiming
to give the paddler the option of extreme stability in extreme
conditions. I think that at its widest it approaches the stability
given by (dare I say this?) Tim Ingram's sponsons.
If you absolutely need to know more, contact me directly, preferably by
phone for that give and take of a live contact. E-mail gets a bit too
sequential for quick/thorough dealing with individual decision making.
best,
ralph diaz
--
Carter R. Mackley
I'm looking at a possible trip on the Greenriver in March (Greenriver, UT
to Colorado confluence section). We have only two or three days, so we
won't be able to do the whole thing. Does anyone have advice on a two or
three day trip on that section. I would also appreciate info/numbers to
shuttle services.
Thanks
Carter
Dave Rettinger
In article <cmackley-180...@cshl012p01.shl.micron.net>,
I have no idea about the water level, but I'd reccomend Tex's Riverways as
an outfitter/shuttle service. Their # is (801) 259-7722. They did our
shuttle and rented us a toilet (required). Most importantly, they cleaned
out said toilet. They were reliable (n=1), friendly and knowledgable. I'd
use them again.
dave
_____________
Dave Rettinger
c/o University of Colorado
Psychology -- CB 345
Boulder, CO 80309-0345
da...@psych.colorado.edu
http://psych.colorado.edu/~daver
"War Dims Hopes for Peace"
-Actual headline from the Wisconsin State Journal, 12/27/65
Roy Webb
Carter R. Mackley wrote:
>
> I'm looking at a possible trip on the Greenriver in March (Greenriver, UT
> to Colorado confluence section). We have only two or three days, so we
> won't be able to do the whole thing. Does anyone have advice on a two or
> three day trip on that section. I would also appreciate info/numbers to
> shuttle services.
>
>
> Carter
If you're committed to just the Green River, about the best you could do
would be put in at the Ruby Ranch, by the mouth of the San Rafael River
and then take out at Mineral Bottom. This is about 50 miles or so
(don't have a river guide handy), and thus do-able in your time. Ruby
Ranch used to charge an access/parking fee, although it wasn't much, and
the road out of Mineral Bottom can be exciting if it's wet, but that's
always the case. Other alternatives then would be put in at Mineral
Bottom and float to the confluence, but then you gotta get hauled
back upstream; or the lower Colorado, from Potash down to the
confluence, but then you've also gotta get jet-boated back, or some of
the stretches of the Colorado above Moab, or Horsethief and Ruby Canyons
below Grand Junction. All very nice. For shuttles and other advice,
I'd contact either Moki-Mac Expeditions in Green River or Tex's
Riverways in Moab, although again there are quite a few others who do
the same thing; they're just the ones I know.
Roy Webb