Boat Building Forum

Find advice on all aspects of building your own kayak, canoe or any lightweight boats

Re: CLC facts
By:Dean Taylor
Date: 12/2/1998, 11:14 pm
In Response To: CLC facts (Chris Kulczycki)

> I have been watching this thread and wanted to correct a few errors in the
> post below.

> 1) CLC includes 2.5 gal of epoxy in most kits. I think that's more than
> the competition gives.

> 2) All but the ultralight Patuxent series have 4mm decks. we can achive
> the same strength as a 'glassed multi-chine deck due to the arched shape,
> but we will gladly include glass for the deck for $10 extra if you just
> ask.

> 3) Multi-chine decks must be glassed to hold them together - no choice
> here.

> 4) CLC multi-chine hulls are fully glassed inside and out to make assembly
> easy, not for strength. It's the same with all multi chine kayaks.

> 5) If a certain CLC model weighs more its because hatches, bulkheads, a
> real backband and seat, and deck rigging are standard (not extra cost
> options) and they are included in the weight.

> 6) Any company that would offer a hard chine boat without fillets (and I
> don't know if any company does) has probably not done strength tests on
> the joints.

> 7) Any high end or custom boat builder who substituted butt joints for
> scarfs in a sailboat or most other type craft would be laughed out of
> business.

> 8) A deck seam does not make a boat stiffer than a true cambered deck.
> Cambered decks have the highest stiffnes to weight ratio.

> 9) Rubrails are a pretty and practical option that a lot of folks pay
> extra for. It beats putting a strip of electrical tape over the sheer
> joint to hide it, as you will see in the catalog from our esteemed
> competitor.

> 10) CLC kits are cheaper because we buy full containers of wood from
> European mills. Do our own cutting on our own CNC machine, and buy massive
> quantities of epoxy. We also sell close to 2000 kit a year. But maybe the
> real reason is that I am not greedy enough - we make a very nice profit as
> it is.

> Now I'd like to offer three opinions.

> 1) Negative advertising (as practiced by a certain competitor) often
> attracts and sells to people who have a negative and aggressive attitude.
> I certainly don't want to deal with customers, or anyone else, with that
> sort of attitude.

> 2) It's only a kayak. If you spend all you're time concerned about which
> one is a pound lighter, 2% faster, or 4% stronger you'll turn into one of
> those silly obsessed gear-heads that just sits around reading spec sheets
> and playing with his equipment. THESE ARE ALL GREAT BOATS; JUST TOSS A
> COIN, BUILD THE DAMN THING, AND GO PADDLING!

> 3) GO PADDLING! (in case you missed this in opinion #2)

> Feel free to e-mail or call if you have questions.

> Chris Kulczycki, Kayak Designer Chesapeake Light Craft Inc.

I lurk in this group but have never posted. I am a 61 year old disabled male who used to paddle years ago but resumed last year. I investigated both companies and have paddled 2 Pygmy (private owner) and 4 CLC models (CLC paddle days and one private owner). I could go either way but the Chesapeake 17 is suited to my disabilities and they were helpful. Pygmy when I called and said I was from Baltimore proceded to run down CLC. CLC in contrast provided straight forward phone information and was very helpful. I have not build yet because of certain circumstances and have missed some CLC classes but I will go that way. They have proven to me they are very kind and helpful. Look at their website where they have some weight saving options. Yes, I am paddling fiberglass now. I agree get out and paddle.

Dean

Dean

Messages In This Thread

CLC Vs Pygmy
Bob H. -- 11/30/1998, 5:50 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
Brian -- 12/12/1998, 1:16 am
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
steve -- 12/13/1998, 11:07 am
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
Brian -- 12/13/1998, 11:12 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
K. Morton -- 12/3/1998, 3:10 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
Mark Bodnar -- 12/2/1998, 10:32 pm
Go Pygmy
Jon K. -- 12/2/1998, 10:42 am
Re: Go Pygmy
L.C. -- 12/2/1998, 10:07 pm
CLC facts
Chris Kulczycki -- 12/2/1998, 2:07 pm
Re: CLC facts
Dean Taylor -- 12/2/1998, 11:14 pm
Re: CLC facts
Nolan Penney -- 12/3/1998, 8:00 am
Re: Stripping Deck
Tom Jablonski -- 12/3/1998, 11:47 am
Re: Stripping Deck
Nolan Penney -- 12/3/1998, 3:33 pm
Re: Stripping Deck
John Fereira -- 12/9/1998, 12:43 pm
Re: Stripping Deck
Nick Schade -- 12/10/1998, 9:04 am
Re: Stripping Deck
Tom Jablonski -- 12/3/1998, 5:32 pm
Re: Stripping Deck
Nolan Penney -- 12/4/1998, 7:54 am
Is it more tippy?
Brian C. -- 12/3/1998, 3:56 pm
Re: Is it more tippy?
Nolan Penney -- 12/4/1998, 6:55 am
Re: Stripping Deck
Don Beale -- 12/3/1998, 12:58 pm
you can email a scan to me
Brian C. -- 12/3/1998, 1:04 pm
Re: CLC facts?
John Lange -- 12/2/1998, 4:52 pm
Re: CLC vs the dark side and other siily matters
Chris Kulczycki -- 12/2/1998, 6:01 pm
You'd be a nice addition
Nolan Penney -- 12/3/1998, 8:03 am
Re: CLC facts
Jon K. -- 12/2/1998, 4:35 pm
Re: CLC facts
K. Morton -- 12/3/1998, 4:13 pm
Re: butt vs scarf
Nolan Penney -- 12/3/1998, 8:06 am
Re: butt vs scarf
Warren long -- 12/8/1998, 12:13 pm
Re: butt vs scarf
Nolan Penney -- 12/9/1998, 7:17 am
Re: butt vs scarf
Timothy - Toronto, Ontario -- 12/3/1998, 8:52 am
The Pygmy butt joint is different
Jon K. -- 12/3/1998, 10:25 am
Re: butt vs scarf
Nolan Penney -- 12/3/1998, 9:11 am
Re: butt vs scarf
Timothy - Toronto, Ontario -- 12/3/1998, 12:26 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
Frank -- 12/2/1998, 8:38 am
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
Andy Gere -- 12/2/1998, 2:04 am
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
BillThomas -- 12/1/1998, 8:12 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
Ross Leidy -- 12/1/1998, 5:28 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
Philip Serra -- 12/1/1998, 12:45 pm
Re: GREATEST BUILDER
Scotty -- 12/1/1998, 1:42 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
Mike Scarborough -- 11/30/1998, 10:53 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy
chris rolt -- 11/30/1998, 8:21 pm
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy - Weight
Timothy - Toronto, Ontario -- 12/1/1998, 10:20 am
Re: CLC Vs Pygmy - Weight
Rich Kuchar -- 12/2/1998, 8:08 am
Re: Better builder
Timothy - Toronto, Ontario -- 12/3/1998, 8:58 am