Larger Canoe: Tumblehome or Not

I like tumblehome better, especially in the center of wide canoes. But it is a very small, almost trivial factor in a lake and mild river canoe.

Why three in one canoe? Are these adults? I'd want something like the Wenonah Minnesota 3, which is 20 ft long. A canoe that big is only good for tripping with three people.

You said you don't have a canoe now. I'd recommend a 16 to 17 ft general use canoe. Something like a North Star Northwind, Winonah Spirit 2, or Swift Keewaydin. These canoes could be used for anything from solo fishing to a tandem multi-day trip.

Then if you decided to go on a trip with three people you could find another tandem, they are pretty easy to find used.

Good luck

PaddleTime said:

Not sure I’m completely following you there @Keeled Over … these canoes aren’t cheap, currently have no canoe, and looking to make the best long term investment that I can. Tumblehome is one part of the equation and some of the canoes I’ve been looking at are very close, save things like these smaller design tweaks. I’m not a go out and buy the one that’s in my favorite color type of guy.

Click to expand...

Nor am I. My point is that there are not a ton of different hulls that meet your needs. So, if -

"On tumblehome however essentially what it comes down to is I have a few canoes on the shortlist that are pretty much the same width / weight / length / all are Kevlar epoxy, etc. - there really aren’t many drastic differences on paper, but having tumblehome or flare is one of the things that stands out. It is likely I’ll have to buy without a test paddle. One builder is even telling me they can add tumblehome if I want or leave it flared."

Pretty much the same dimensions. Not any drastic differences on paper. Have to buy without a test paddle. Based on these, for me, it would make the selection process easier, and availability and price can have a bigger impact. Bunch of well designed and manufactured boats out there - if a lack of tumble-home was a big issue it probably would have been addressed by now.

Nothing wrong with doing research - I do plenty myself. Good luck.

PaddleTime said:

Some of the other canoes I’ve been looking at are asymmetrical (H20 Outfitter 18.5’, Swift Keewaydin 18.6, Lavieille 17.6). To round out the list I’ve been checking out there is the symmetrical hand laid Nighthawk Canoes Pegasus 18.5’ and the Savage River Voyageur 18.5’. I’m looking at Kevlar whichever route

Click to expand...

I'd consider these two person tripping canoes.

I have an old 18.5 Mad River that has similar specs to these. It is a great canoe for myself, two 'tween kids, and our gear. Or two adults and their gear.

However, three adults and gear wouldn't work. Trimming it would be difficult. It wouldn't be seaworthy enough for poor conditions you'd eventually encounter on a long trip.

These canoes are also kind of large for anything but tripping.

You ask about tumblehome versus flare. The Lavieille 17.6 it's kind of weird with really aggressive flare on the ends. I wouldn't buy it without a test paddle.

Paddle Time, Not sure if you had intended to canoe in Canada, bit if you do, and want to use their wonderful train system there is a max length of 18'. Or at least it used to be.

With the weight you suggested, I strongly recommend you test paddle some canoes before buying. Take your time, and try them out in the situation you are suggesting. With great respect to the experience here, some of the suggestions are not realistic. You can't make an informed decision from just doing research. Any canoe will paddle straight with proper paddling technique, don't shy away from large prospector type canoes.
For the weights you are suggesting, many of the hulls mentioned would be at their max or over, and paddling in adverse conditions would be sketchy.
Depending where you live, canoes can hold a good resale value, so if you buy an expensive hull and then find that you don't like it, there is a good chance that given time you could get a fair percentage of your money back. However, it would make more sense to save yourself this process and get some hulls on the water to find out how they feel. Internet reviews are useful, but often times self proclaimed experts will champion a particular canoe because that is the only one they actually know, or even worse, because they have read many reviews saying it's great, but haven't actually paddled it.

paddle time,
Flare makes for a drier canoe. They shed waves. In a loaded canoe it can be a challenge to get through a long wave train without swamping a boat. Same in rough lake conditions. The less water in the boat the better.

Thanks guys and I appreciate the discussion here. Lakes are currently frozen and this is a canoe forum, if I’m overthinking it I’d say this is hopefully the time and place to do so…

@Jim Dodd curious why you’d say tumblehome is more applicable to solo canoes? My first thought would be the bigger and wider the canoe the more it might help paddling. At the expense of seaworthiness perhaps (thanks and thanks @ppine for the comments there). I had not thought about how it could affect ride over waves. I am looking to take this on some larger lakes.

I am for sure looking to buy new on research and while it might be a gamble, I’ve used a similar approach with success before across a variety of pursuits. Hence the research. Granted there’s a chance canoes might be different. I’m not in “canoe country” thus test paddles are not possible for these canoes. I might be able to test paddle 1 of them but it would be a couple years before I could. @Steve in Idaho listed some models I’m looking at any input appreciated. @Keeled Over thanks for the train tip - do plan on Canada but would be driving. That said for transport 18.5’ is already pushing it.

@MrPoling I had really settled on 18.5’ max - we pack light and it seems there are a lot of success stories out there of 3 using the SR Quetico 18.5 for example. 3 in one canoe - works best for our group. Need it to be good for 3 average size adults packing light. Smallest size we can get away with and still be comfortable is what I’m after. 18.5’ is lengthy on a vehicle and I need this work for fishing with 2 when not on a backcountry trip. 2 canoes would be “odd man out” and hoping to avoid that plus not looking to transport 2 canoes etc.

@memaquay , would you say a large prospector especially if more limited in rocker (2” or under perhaps) I’m guessing would be a good compromise?

Kinda sounding like maybe the widest 18.5’ I can get (for the most load capacity) and that fits the other parameters might be a good way to go.

PaddleTime said:

Need it to be good for 3 average size adults packing light.

Click to expand...

"Average" size adults and "packing light" mean different things to different people.

I think of 160 pounds as an average weight. To other people average will be 200.

To me packing light means taking a minimum of food (all dried), minimum shelter (of lightweight construction), down sleeping quilts, ultralight sleeping pads, no "extra" clothing, and no creature comforts (chairs, booze, fishing gear, etc).

To other people packing light means only bringing whiskey and leaving the wine at home, one rod per person, brining two tents and one tarp, and only one cast iron pan.

PaddleTime said:

Lakes are currently frozen and this is a canoe forum, if I’m overthinking it I’d say this is hopefully the time and place to do so…

Click to expand...

Different people approach things differently but just keep in mind that the advice you're getting are from people who have been through the same thing as you (beginner canoe tripper) and who now have years of experience and have owned many different canoes. Don't throw that advice away. Pay attention to what they think is important/unimportant.

Alan

Agreed there Alan regardless again we would be right at 650-700lbs absolute max, more accurately 670lbs, so I’d say 675 is about right on, decreasing as the trip progresses.

And without a doubt soaking up all the info I can here and the input on the various design considerations has been appreciated as I continue to narrow the choices. I look up things like axle ratio and turning radius on vehicles as well so researching all I can on these canoes, good winter project and I enjoy learning about the details.

PaddleTime said:

@Jim Dodd curious why you’d say tumblehome is more applicable to solo canoes? My first thought would be the bigger and wider the canoe the more it might help paddling. At the expense of seaworthiness perhaps (thanks and thanks @ppine for the comments there). I had not thought about how it could affect ride over waves. I am looking to take this on some larger lakes.

Click to expand...

Tumblehome is very advantageous for solo canoes because the paddler sits at the widest point of the canoe, and thus allows greater efficiency with a more vertical paddle. Most canoes up to 18'6" aren't designed for a paddler in the middle. Tumblehome amidships results in a wetter ride in rough water. Waves commonly come in slightly aft of the bow paddler, and tumblehome will facilitate the water coming over the gunwales. Flare or straight sides will be drier. Coming from a racing/fast boat background, I use 18'-18'6" as my standard canoe length for two people for flatwater/light river conditions (my standard solo is 17'6"). I've only had three people on two occasions--one was my 9 yo daughter (which was fine for an 11 day trip), and the other was an adult just for a day trip. I really don't like having a third adult (i.e. deadweight) in my canoe.

Ahh, thanks @Mason, that makes sense on solo being in the middle and tumblehome helping.

As I have the longest reach, on these 3 seaters I’ll probably be in the middle I’d guess. Any reason I couldn’t shift to one side, and put heavier gear on the opposite side in front of me to counterbalance, perhaps making tumblehome a bit of a moot point for that paddling position? Just throwing out ideas. Flared sounds good for crossing big lakes. Seems like we’d be loading these canoes towards the top of the suggested / ideal listed capacities or close.

PaddleTime said:

Ahh, thanks @Mason, that makes sense on solo being in the middle and tumblehome helping.

Any reason I couldn’t shift to one side, and put heavier gear on the opposite side in front of me to counterbalance, perhaps making tumblehome a bit of a moot point for that paddling position? Just throwing out ideas. Seems like we’d be loading these canoes towards the top of the suggested / ideal listed capacities or close.

Click to expand...

Having not paddled with a threesome, I can only say "I suppose". @yknpdlr has lots of experience with big boats and big crews. On loading near listed capacities, quoting Roy Scheider "You're gonna need a bigger boat".

PaddleTime said:

@Steve in Idaho listed some models I’m looking at any input appreciated.

Click to expand...

I haven't paddled any of those you listed. But I have done a trip in an 18' Souris River (Quetico?). I suppose you could get by with three and gear in that under ideal conditions if you had to, but I wouldn't want to.

I'd be trying to figure out a plan for the third person to be in a solo canoe.

PaddleTime said:

@memaquay , would you say a large prospector especially if more limited in rocker (2” or under perhaps) I’m guessing would be a good compromise?

Click to expand...

The reason I dissed the Prospectors (and I actually love them) is that - relative to flat water oriented hulls - they lack glide and can be a handful in wind. Adding weight helps in the wind. They do tend to be drier with a load than the sleeker boats, and probably more forgiving of that third person.

Again though, you should understand that I think most of us here would hate the complication of having that third paddle in the water, let alone the extra high cg weight.

PaddleTime said:

Kinda sounding like maybe the widest 18.5’ I can get (for the most load capacity) and that fits the other parameters might be a good way to go.

Click to expand...

Just remember - the wider you go, the more hp it takes to move it.

I've never done this, but I've thought about it. If I had to put three adults in a canoe, I'd probably treat it like we do skiing untracked snow in the back country where we take turns breaking trail and "resting" in the rear. In this case, the middle person would be resting as low as possible while the other two paddle. Paddlers would rotate through that position at set intervals. But that would require at least one paddler to be comfortable and competent with both bow and stern positions.

PaddleTime said:

I look up things like axle ratio and turning radius on vehicles as well so researching all I can on these canoes, good winter project and I enjoy learning about the details.

Click to expand...

That's all well and good, and I applaud you for it, but from my perspective as a mechanic it's easy to get wrapped up in those little details that probably don't matter (unless you have a very specific use situation) and you end up with a Jeep Liberty instead of a Toyota Rav 4 because the Jeep looked better on paper.

Alan

@PaddleTime - what canoes are being used in the way you plan in the locations you intend to trip?

@Alan Gage as far as canoes go I think I’m looking more for the crew cab half ton pickup. just trying to determine if I want to go aluminum bed, steel, or composite bed and the best axle ratio for mostly highway driving. Anyway…

@Steve in Idaho for your typical canoe lake tripping from what I’ve seen the SR Quetico 18.5 is one of the most talked about and suggested for 3 from afar from my research. But if anyone has “paddles in the water” info would be great to hear. I’m set on a solid foam core floor however. Seems like Northstar and Wenonah are also popular for renting etc. - they also look nice but I am personally looking for epoxy construction on a purchase. As far as popular canoes for fishing lakes (part of my need) we are either looking at a bass boat or the around 100lb canoe category (obviously looking for something lightweight).

I have a Souris River Quetico 17. I would call it a comfortable canoe, good for neophytes. The 18.5 will be a stable canoe, and the advertised weight of 49 pounds is a bonus. I see they sell them standard with three seats as well, which would be a bonus. It might be one of the better options out there.

As previously mentioned, many of us who have done lots of tripping would not be comfortable with 3 in a canoe, unless it was a really big canoe. The usual practice with odd numbers is to have someone in a solo. However, I think the 18.5 Quetico might be one of the better choices for your quest.

I’ve taken a 18.5’ TW Special with two guys and a week’s worth of food/gear and wished we had more freeboard in bigger water. We “pack light” also. 20’ sounds like a much safer and enjoyable ride with three in my opinion.

Bob

memaquay said:

I have a Souris River Quetico 17. I would call it a comfortable canoe, good for neophytes. The 18.5 will be a stable canoe, and the advertised weight of 49 pounds is a bonus. I see they sell them standard with three seats as well, which would be a bonus. It might be one of the better options out there.

As previously mentioned, many of us who have done lots of tripping would not be comfortable with 3 in a canoe, unless it was a really big canoe. The usual practice with odd numbers is to have someone in a solo. However, I think the 18.5 Quetico might be one of the better choices for your quest.

Click to expand...

Agree with Quetico 18.5. There are very few canoes designed to handle the OP's guesstimate of 650-700 pounds and that assumes everything stays dry. With a max efficient capacity of 650 the Keewaydin 18.5 is a bad choice. There are no H2O's designed for that load.