-
Happy D.B. Cooper Day (1971)! ✈️💵🪂
Old Town Next?
- Thread starter Big Al
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2019
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 45
Ode to a Next Canoe
Your reviews are like a trip to the zoo
You have no rocker to speak of
And your seat gets no love
Your weight is obscene
And your hull is not “green”
But you were on sale
So I will just bail
When I run the rapids for Funda
Now here you are in the back of my Tundra
Your reviews are like a trip to the zoo
You have no rocker to speak of
And your seat gets no love
Your weight is obscene
And your hull is not “green”
But you were on sale
So I will just bail
When I run the rapids for Funda
Now here you are in the back of my Tundra
Attachments
Lol! Someone -- either you or those who disparaged it -- will get the last laugh!
Big Al, got a big chuckle reading this thread, and never really considered a Next because of the weight BUT..... been looking for a solo I wouldn't be worried about dragging down a muddy river bank and over rocks in thin water, soooo, here is my new to me Next ($675)
G
Guest
Guest
Al and Matt, I’ll be interested in what you think of the seat, and the rigid framed seat back. I have never actually tried a Next seat and seat back, but I have never liked any rigid seat back.
Not any style of “traditional” wood framed back rests
https://www.oakorchardcanoe.com/detail.php?product=0855
Not the plastic Coleman/Mohawk plastic snap-ons
https://www.mohawkcanoes.com/products/seat-back-plastic
Not the GCI Sit Backer
http://www.campingstation.com/gci-outdoortm-sit-backertm-canoe-seat-stadium-seat-black-or-green.html
They are all too tall and too rigid to allow any torso rotation, the rigid frames hit my back and shoulder blades uncomfortably and some versions add an inch or more to the seat depth, which I really do not need.
I’ll be interested in what you think of that OEM seat design. The good news is that changing any of that, from seat pan to depth to location to backrest is pretty easy.
In all things canoe , the environment dictates if it is a good or a bad choice. The good thing is that the only important thing is the hull.. The outfitting is easy to deal with.. especially with those alu drops you can put a backband in and install a nice on the bottom seat at a height you like.
It is hardly a matter of snottery and yep 59 lbs matters when you are solo on the Bonfield Dixon Portage.. ( Algonquin) easy port but over three miles long and not cartable.
We gotta remember that canoe country can have rivers, lakes , big seas or a mix but most of us have one sort of those not alot of each.
It is hardly a matter of snottery and yep 59 lbs matters when you are solo on the Bonfield Dixon Portage.. ( Algonquin) easy port but over three miles long and not cartable.
We gotta remember that canoe country can have rivers, lakes , big seas or a mix but most of us have one sort of those not alot of each.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2019
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 45
Mike, I have never sat in any of the seats you linked but one thing they appear to have in common is they attach to a rigid flat canoe bench. As you can see in these pictures, this seat is not flat, it slopes back. It is very comfortable. The back rest can lay back to nap point (verified) or you can sit way up. Additionally this seat slides for and aft. I was able to use this feature to trim for 3 days of camping gear. The seat is easily removable for car topping, you just pull 4 pins and it’s out in seconds. I can only sit in my rec kayak or ww kayak for about 2 hours before my hips start to ache. I sat it this for about 4 with no issues. The seat also has a nice bag attached. Perfect for hat, sunscreen, rain gear etc.
i paddled for 3 days. The river was low so the rapids were tame. I did purposely hit a wave train above green hills rv park and took on water. The boat sits low. I took the seat out and tried paddling from my knees but it was more tippy that way. The low seat has good stability. As I said the river was low so I was in/out many times to cross low spots. Entering is super easy. Just plop in the general direction of the large seat. It never felt unstable entering. I found a milk jug in the river. I cut the bottom off so I could use the jug to bail. If you ever do this, don’t do it in your lap. Soiled milk smell is rough when it soaks in.
The boat was much more maneuverable than my Coleman canoe. It is much like a kayak. It turns slower than my rec kayak. I had a 60 liter barrel in the back. A soft sided cooler behind the seat and a 30 liter barrel in the front. My buddy was in a liquid logic XP 10 kayak. He got stuck in places I managed to get through.
Any way, here are close ups of the seat
Attachments
Last edited:
Al and Matt, I’ll be interested in what you think of the seat, and the rigid framed seat back. I have never actually tried a Next seat and seat back, but I have never liked any rigid seat back.
Will have to defer on the Next OEM seat comfort to Big Al, never part of my plan. Maiden voyage of my OT Next TR today, Ed’s cane bucket seat, 2 inch drops, Wenonah footbrace, 54 pounds. Very similar performance to my old MR Serenade TR (except the Next doesn’t oilcan!) Single purpose boat to float the muddy Genesee River, NY: thick skinned to take a beating, stiff hull to cross gravel bars and be dragged up muddy banks, paddles well with a single blade, able to be transported redneck style (pickup bed, so 13‘ max), paddled with a high seat to enable frequent step outs to clear gravel and sand bars, and relatively cheap. Did pretty well in open water, too.
That's better! I think OT dropped the ball by putting that expensive and heavy seat in the Next. Would have been better as an option, IMO.
Looks like two tons of fun! Ha ha I don't think 59 pounds is heavy, in fact that's a light canoe in my books. I like the outfitting on that canoe, the sliding seat set up is pretty cool. Not sure if I could paddle from that seat, but I sure would like to try it out.
I just picked up a used Next for $600 and am pleasantly surprised at how comfortable the seat is. I'm just under 6 foot and had to use a 2 inch foam pad to comfortably paddle with a single blade, but is tracked straight and relatively fast, never pushed water. I am very happy with it for what it is. A small canoe for creeks, moderate rivers, and lakes for fishing and day tripping with out worry of damage.
My post-script on the Next: Having fulfilled its mission, I retrofitted the Next back to OEM specs to sell it off; but couldn’t resist actually trying out the big comfy seat. Like sitting in a Barcolounger! BUT: impossible to single paddle (I am 5’8”), tried multiple seat settings but totally awkward. Broke out the kayak paddle, the back of my arms hit the seatback on every stroke! Plus, for me, the Next tracked like a barge, adjusted trim to no avail. Conclusion: To sit and fish in, the Next is so comfortable one could nap all day. To paddle, it is awful in its OEM configuration with either a single or double paddle. Set up with a conventional hung high seat and using a canoe paddle with a good J stroke, this little hull really shines!
To me, this is where the Next really shines. I have a Swift Pack 13, but I hate being worried about dragging it on gravel bottoms or having my kids damage it. The seat is so comfortable, I can fish out of it all day, and I'm not concerned if I scraped the bottom. With it's stock seat it certainly favors taller paddlers, but I comfortably used a 260cm double blade and with the 2 inch foam pad really enjoyed a 58 inch straight blade.
Hope it goes to a good home and you find something that suits your needs better.
That Swift Pack 13 is tough
I have a Placid Boat works RapidFire and since 2006 it has seen thousands of miles of gravel bar river and oyster bar waters
Poly boats yes I have holed and they were not possible to fix sturdily. For that reason alone I switched to composites.
Swift and PBW shared the same manufacturing consultant so I would expect that little Pack to be equally tough .
I have a Placid Boat works RapidFire and since 2006 it has seen thousands of miles of gravel bar river and oyster bar waters
Poly boats yes I have holed and they were not possible to fix sturdily. For that reason alone I switched to composites.
Swift and PBW shared the same manufacturing consultant so I would expect that little Pack to be equally tough .
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2019
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 45
Interesting, I've never tried a single blade paddle with mine. I'm 5'11" and use a 250 kayak paddle. Other than drips, I never experienced any problem. Seat back goes unnoticed for me. My stroke must be difference that a typical canoeist because several have mentioned seat back issues?
Probably because the seat back interferes with torso rotation. Either with a single or a double. The arms do relatively little; the bulk of the power comes from the abdominal and back muscles
G
Guest
Guest
Yes, just that. With a blown L2/L3 in need of support I have tried about every “seat back” on the market. Not a single rigid or semi-rigid framed seat back worked for me. Not the GCI sit-backer, not the cheap plastic Coleman/Mohawk seat backs, none of the wood framed seat backs. Even the mostly cloth, padding and semi-rigid stays Crazy Creeks were too inflexible (and the seat pad was way too thick)
With any of those seat backs single blading was at best uncomfortable, and when double blading I was reduced to arm paddling, something I am not doing for very long or very far.
Those high back “Barcalounger” seats may work for (very) casual paddling and laid back fishing repose, but in canoe use nothing has worked as well for me as a low-rise, torso flexible Surf-to-Summit Performance-Pro back band.
https://www.amazon.com/Surf-Summit-Performance-Comfortable-Adjustable/dp/B01M63EECJ
YBMV (Your Back May Vary), but every canoe we own is set up (four clips on four pad eyes or webbing loops) to accommodate a STS back band.
P2160535 by Mike McCrea, on Flickr
PC180135 by Mike McCrea, on Flickr
P5010761 by Mike McCrea, on FlickrA low back band coupled with an oppositional-force foot brace is an ergonomic wonder for paddling while seated. Maybe a contour seat, with a hint of cant angle.
Matt, if for some reason you elect to keep the Next I’d remove that (heavy?) adjustable “Element” seat and backrest and install a fixed seat at your desired location, with a low-rise back band.
Maybe leave the pedal foot braces, though I’d rather have a full width foot brace bar so my feet aren’t trapped along the chines; that position works OK in narrow kayaks, less so in canoes with wider chines where some feet/leg repositioning aids comfort.
Old Town’s Pack, Disco 119 and Next are all neat little, too-oft-dissed canoes that have their place, and all of them benefited from DIY owner improvements. I loved my (real weight) 33 lb OT Pack, and used the crap out of it for nearly 20 years, from teeny gentle waters tripper when I packed lighter to small stream day-boat to loaner boat/kid canoe to, finally, customized duck hunting platform with cowling raised camo covers and shotgun rest.
Matt, if for some reason you elect to keep the Next I’d remove that (heavy?) adjustable “Element” seat and backrest and install a fixed seat at your desired location, with a low-rise back band.
Maybe leave the pedal foot braces, though I’d rather have a full width foot brace bar so my feet aren’t trapped along the chines; that position works OK in narrow kayaks, less so in canoes with wider chines where some feet/leg repositioning aids comfort.
Mike, please go back to my original post and pic, as that is exactly what I did
Regarding Yellowcanoe's praise of the Swift Pack 13.6, I can only say that mine was so delicate, the gelcoat would spiderweb-crack if I even sneezed; cannot imagine ever dragging it over gravelbeds! My PB Spitfire was a little better, but benefited from a stiffer hull. Would love to see a pic of the '06 Rapidfire hull that had gone thousands of miles over gravel bar rivers and oyster bar waters.
Maybe leave the pedal foot braces, though I’d rather have a full width foot brace bar so my feet aren’t trapped along the chines; that position works OK in narrow kayaks, less so in canoes with wider chines where some feet/leg repositioning aids comfort.
Mike, please go back to my original post and pic, as that is exactly what I did
(not the backband tho')
. I only needed the Next for one trip. Set up that way, it was a great little canoe and saved my Vagabond from bruises. Regarding Yellowcanoe's praise of the Swift Pack 13.6, I can only say that mine was so delicate, the gelcoat would spiderweb-crack if I even sneezed; cannot imagine ever dragging it over gravelbeds! My PB Spitfire was a little better, but benefited from a stiffer hull. Would love to see a pic of the '06 Rapidfire hull that had gone thousands of miles over gravel bar rivers and oyster bar waters.
here ya go.. Its on the left. The ivory disguises scratches. It has had a couple of internal patches because a 300 lb person fell on it while it was on rocks on Lake Superior at a portage. The thwarts are foam filled and are probably the weakest link. One got broken. But the point is that the composite hull is infinitely repairable. We watched a poly kayak slowly sink with its hapless renter at Chassahowitzka.. The craft had an impossible to reach hole in the stern. IF you want better pix I have to go down to the boat dock. We haven't brought them to the house yet. I totally agree on a backband,. Really needed for low to the bottom of the boat seats.. The RF has one similar to Mikes.. I don't care for foam reinforced bottoms and the Swifts have gone to that. They seem to have too many laminate options. Hemlock and Placid do not use foam diamonds. But rather extra fabric for stiffness. If I were just starting out on a budget I would consider an Next and find a handy man. I got my first own canoe in 1969 and the next one in 1989. The first was a hundred dollar Grumman and we toted it all over Algonquin. It kept getting heavier! For the same reason ( money ) my first yak was poly. My husband the same till he got a hole in the stern that we tried to have a shop repair.. never worked for long.
Last edited:
If I were just starting out on a budget I would consider an Next and find a handy man.
Well, rather than disparage poly-boats, I believe if it gets folks out on the water and enjoying nature all the better. For the vast majority of us that can ill afford to bash our $3000 boats against the rocks, they also serve as sacrificial lambs. I agree about PB boats, their laminates and infusion process is superb, Hemlock cannot produce as stiff a hull without additional weight hand-laminating. The Kestrel had too much flex for my tastes. Were you at WPSCA this year?
Well, rather than disparage poly-boats, I believe if it gets folks out on the water and enjoying nature all the better. For the vast majority of us that can ill afford to bash our $3000 boats against the rocks, they also serve as sacrificial lambs. I agree about PB boats, their laminates and infusion process is superb, Hemlock cannot produce as stiff a hull without additional weight hand-laminating. The Kestrel had too much flex for my tastes. Were you at WPSCA this year?
