> I find it amusing that people who build production plastic or glass boats
> have no difficulty in specifying a universal layup (one good for all but
> extreme sea kayaking) while people who write books on building wood strip
> boats seem to have such difficulty in doing the same.

> I should comment that the footnote in Epoxyworks indicates (as my poor
> memory recalls) that the data is too scattered to be of any use. That is,
> the data does not agree well with engineering models, such as PB&J.

A kayak out in the water, with a load, bobbing up and down is certainly not the same thing as a static 12x12 panel being subjected to a measured downward force! I do think that at least the numbers in the chart give us an idea as to the general strength differences of various wood/'glass layups, as well as giving us an idea of weight vs strength differences between layups. Perhaps until some rich engineering scientist becomes enamored with wood strip kayaks, and has access to some elaborate instrumentation, who can build the same kayak, in varying wood/'glass combinations, then instrument the skin of the boat and perform laboratory testing in some sort of tank that can provide blows to the hull like those of rocks and stumps and things not seen or not avoided by the kayaker (i suppose that in this case, known load weight in the cockpit), and turn these measurements into meaningful data for kayak construction...whew! sounds like rocket science to me.....well, I guess we'll just have to go with what has worked for others and with our own instincts and experiences in the real world. I have confidence in Nick's and Mr. Moore's building methods, with regard to my own kayaking aspirations......I'm pretty conservative, and my paddling adventures will most likely not be nearly as adventurous as many buiders here, and will not be done in coastal environs. I suppose if I were "hard core" sea kayaker and required the ultimate in a tough kayak, I would not be looking at a strip built boat. garland