Date: 2/27/2002, 9:50 am
Doug, I'll jump in on your question since no one else yet has. I paddled both models in Port Townsend, and ended up building the double. The two models are the same, except that Pygmy adds a third cockpit and moves the other two farther forward and aft to make room for it. In terms of paddling, they both paddled well. They are wide and stable. We opted for the double over the triple because we didn't expect to use the third cockpit often (and then, probably for the dog and only occasionally a third person). For two people only, we preferred the double because the triple forces the third person farther to the front and it seemed a little claustrophobic up there. Plus, we thought that for only two, the double worked better in terms of where the paddler weight was centered. In other words, we liked the paddler placement better in the double and thought it was a little more functional for two, which was our primary use. We would not have hesitated to get the triple if we had wanted to take a third person or a pooch out regularly.
The building process is similar for the two; the triple will require adding a third cockpit coaming. Mostly it involves a lot of clamps (get that PVC pipe sawed up!). I don't know how many hours it took--mine went together pretty fast because I had built two before, including an Arctic Tern, making Pygmy's method of construction was familiar to me. Joining the panels seemed to take forever because, to get all 20 feet of it, you have three lengths to join--that is, two joints per panel. And with the multichine hull, that makes for a lot of panel joints. Stitching the panels was more time consuming given the 20 foot length. But stitching is a lot of fun. Pulling the stitches out is more of a chore, so 20 feet and many chines of that was less fun. An incredible amount of fiberglass goes inside to support the weight of two or three paddlers, especially since one of the panel seams is (at least on the double) right under one cockpit. Nothing hard or even unenjoyable about that -- just added time and steps.
As for the lines and aesthetics, well, think of it as a nice looking van or station wagon instead of a sleek sports car. The lines are very pleasing, but she is wide and long. I call ours "the mothership"--which she is to my little fleet of kayaks. She's incredibly stable (I've been known to stand up in her if the other paddler is in the boat and providing balast). I don't know her final weight, but it's a lot less than the fiberglass doubles I've rented in the past. Still, she's not light and her length and width makes her ungainly on land. Getting her up on a Grand Cherokee is no easy task if the folks doing it are shorter than the car (as we are). Which is one reason why we have a kayak trailer now (having three kayaks is another reason). And we use a kayak cart to get her to the shore if its any distance from where we are parked. But in terms of appearance, suffice to say wherever we take her she turns heads and gets compliments. She's a "big boned gal," but good looking.
I put up a five pics of our double on Shutterfly (which is the only way I know how to post pics). The first two will give you a sense of her lines as she sits on shore. A second is a panorama shot of her on the water. The last two are to give you a sense of her proportions on land: one on top of our Jeep, the other on the trailer.
Hope this helps.
Messages In This Thread
- S&G: Pygmy Osprey triple
Doug Miller -- 2/26/2002, 12:51 am- Re: S&G: Pygmy Osprey triple
Harold Klein -- 3/2/2002, 12:18 am- Re: S&G: Pygmy Osprey triple
Gini -- 2/27/2002, 4:22 pm- Re: S&G: Pygmy Osprey triple
Ross Sieber -- 2/27/2002, 12:29 pm- Re: S&G: Pygmy Osprey triple
Gini -- 2/27/2002, 9:50 am - Re: S&G: Pygmy Osprey triple
- Re: S&G: Pygmy Osprey triple