OOH! you venture once again into dangerous territory! As an observer of the some of the long CLC, vs Pygmy debates, I will offer my 2 cents worth.

Multichine hulls have a lower wetted surface for a given length and volume and will be somewhat faster, all other things being equal. Wether you notice the difference will depend on you level of paddling sophistication. I'm a pretty relaxed paddler who rarely takes long expeditions. I don't notice a lot of difference. Hard chime boats are easier to assemble simply because they have fewer pieces. They also generally have a higher initial stability for the same overall width. i.e they will feel less tippy in the water.

Pygmy uses butt joints with backer plates to join their panels, CLC uses scarf joints. Butt joints are easier to align. scarf joints are lighter (less wood) and don't creat flat spots in the curve of the panels. However, the degree of curve in most panels is such that I don't think the effect is too great.

The weight of both boats is comparable and will utimately have more to do with your skill with epoxy and fiberglass.

The bottom line? you pays your money and takes your choice. Contrary to all the arguments and hype, I believe both CLC and Pygmy produce good quality products. I suspect you will be quite happy with either. I would probably flip a coin and spend my time planning trips instead of sweating design details.

> I have been studying the double kayaks from CLC and Pygmy. They
> both look great. I am wondering if either one performs better or is
> easier to assemble. Does the multichine have any real advantages or
> diadvantages. Does Pygmy scarf their panels for splicing? How much
> do they really weigh complete?