I'm in the market for a new boat and was looking for some suggestions. Right now my short list is the Chatham 16,17, Looksha 17, Tempest 170, or Hurricane Tracer 165. (all in plastic) Any suggestions or feedback on these boats would be a great help.

I'm going to suggest that you widen your search a little and take a look at what Novus Composites has to offer. They don't make poly boats, but right now they have a sale going and some of their boats are very competitively priced. Check them out at nckayaks.com.

If a poly boat is what you're set on, I would also check P&H and Current Designs offerings. I'm quite partial to the Sirocco by Current Designs. Boreal Designs have some nice looking platic boats also.

There's a lot of different designs in that short list. Are you looking for maneuverability playfulness, rough water performance or a straight tracking, high volume, gear hauler.
The Chatham 16 is a much more playful boat than the others and does well in rough water and surf but has little room for more than a day trip. The Tempest 170 is another good rough water boat but with more volume. The Looksha 17 is a high initial stability, high volume boat with a rudder which makes it a different category of boat than some of the others.
The novus composite boats are known for going straight which usually means lack of rocker and lack of maneuverability. Even their website only talks about 'arrow straight' tracking not maneuverability. I know lots of kayakers local to the Tacoma area and don't know anyone who owns one. Judging by their weight vs. dimensions, I can't imagine they will withstand much abuse.

I totally agree; if your plan is to abuse your boat, why start with a boat that was painstakingly crafted and built to be as beautiful as it performs. If you plan to drag the boat instead of carry it to and from the water and run into things, by all means get a plastic tub. You needn't bother looking any further than one of the hundred pound sots that can be found in your local sporting goods shops.

By the way, Nick, NC also builds standard weight boats and since their boats are built to order, they can be reinforced to your hearts desire. There is absolutely nothing about their designs, nor the material, or processes they use that makes them less durable than any other high quality boats built anywhere.

NC builds boats that are very specifically designed to track and handle rough water. Maneuverability is a relative issue, and I will admit that I had to develop some new techniques to handle my NC, but it is not a problem. In fact, the NC has taught me methods that I now use to great advantage in my other boats.

Being convinced that sea kayaking is 90% about the paddler--his/her skills, experience, knowledge, judgment, and expectations--and maybe 10% or less about the boat, I'm intrigued by the concept of some sea kayaks being "rough water" boats. Nick mentioned the Chatham 16 and the Tempest 170 as being excellent rough water craft, and Magooch tell us that NC kayaks are "very specifically designed....to handle rough water." What are we to make of the fact that Arved Fuchs accomplished the first winter circumnavigation of Cape Horn in a kayak in 1984, paddling a Klepper Aerius I, a classic folder 15 feet in length and 28 inches in the beam, and bearing an enormous rudder? How about Freya Hoffmeister around Australia in her 18 foot long, 22 inch beam Epic 18X, also ruddered? I submit that almost any sea kayak I can visualize will be an excellent rough water craft in the hands of a skilled, experienced paddler, and that we should take all claims about the rough water capabilities of sea kayaks with about as much salt as is currently in all the world's oceans.

So Strang_Magic, are you saying that there are not specific design features that contribute to a boat's abilities in rough conditions? That would be of interest to designers who go to considerable trouble to utilize a variety of design parameters for just that purpose.

If your point is that a good paddler can make do with anything that floats--maybe. For those of us who aren't likely to ever reach that level of skill, it's nice that there are boats that give us some help.

sm,
The poster asked about a specific set of boats and I was trying to tell him my impressions of the design specs and intended use of the his list of boats. Perhaps "performance in dynamic conditions" is a better turn of phrase for you. I've paddled the ones I listed or paddled with people in them and seen how they perform. Granted a well designed sea kayak should make it through rough water but many boats these days are designed for higher performance in dynamic conditions. This means more rocker, low back deck and generally a tighter fit to the paddler for better boat 'feel'.
Fuchs' choice was almost assuredly driven by transportability and what was available, Hoffmeister's by average speed. There are also plenty of examples of non-ruddered boats like the NDK Explorer or the Valley Nordkapp making significant trips.
When I go to our local tide race to play or out to the Pacific coast I see NDK, Valley, Sterling, and Tiderace boats and zero ruddered high volume gear haulers. Those have their place but except for the Looksha, they weren't on the posters short list.
But don't take my word for it, if you don't think there's a difference between a Klepper and a Chatham 16 or Tiderace Xcite, I suggest you take them both to a tide race running at 6-10kts and carve some turns or out to the coast for a day of surfing and rock gardening and see the difference in performance. You'd be amazed at what's happened with kayak design in the last 30 years.

I forgot to mention surf skis and whitewater boats as being excellent rough water craft. Legendary storm kayaker Steve Sinclair regularly paddled monstrous Pacific Coast storm surf out of Elk, CA on his ski. Amazing what can be done in/with a huge variety of boats by a skilled paddler. What they are playing in, in the tide races, is often a case of what the consensus believes is the "hot" boat this cycle--NDK Romany, Impex Outer Island, now the Tahe boats are creeping in.

Regarding Fuch's choice, we know that there were a multitude of boats available back in that remote past, including the Nordkapp, which had already circled Horn with Frank Goodman. Do you know why Fuchs selected the Aerius I? I don't. Ditto Hoffmeister's selection of the Epic 18X. Maybe Epic offered her the boat for the publicity, and she said Why Not?---I can paddle anything, and paddle it well.

I am a strict agnostic when it comes to kayak design. The designers would have you believe that they've slaved for months perfecting every hydrodynamic detail of their craft, but I just don't buy it. In what sense are sea kayaks today more advanced as dynamic conditions boats than the Nordkapp or Anas Acuta of yesteryear? Amaze me.

kayaker729,
Some more boats to add to your list are the WS Tempest 165 or the Zephyr depending on your size. I was out yesterday at our local tide race with some other paddlers with those two boats,(other boats in attendance a Chatham 17, a Romany and a few Tiderace boats.) P&H also has some good plastic boats like the Scorpio.
I was working with someone on their roll earlier this week in a Looksha and I noticed the high fore and aft deck definitely made it more challenging to get a good boat body connection.
Good luck in your search.


SM,
Granted one oversized ruddered gear hauler is likely not much different than the other. But at the other end of the spectrum, designs can make a difference. For example,the two boats you mention, the Nordkapp and Anas Acuta, one is basically round bottomed, the other is hard chined. The designer likely had vastly different design goals as they drew up those two boats. Anybody who paddles those two boats for 10 minutes and puts them up on edge will feel the difference. There's not much point, it seems, in discussing it in further detail since you 'don't buy' kayak design.
You should demo some boats side by side and see for yourself.

: For example,the two boats you mention, the Nordkapp and Anas Acuta, one is basically round bottomed, the other is hard chined. The designer likely had vastly different design goals as they drew up those two boats.

The Anus Acuta was basically a West Greenland design, skin-on-frame, plywood and then in glass. Frank Goodman took that as a starting point, rounded the bilge because he could (glass) and increased the volume because the requirement was a gear-hauler to go to Nordkapp in Norway. The really big trips done in Nordkapps were done in ruddered, light weight or ultra-light weight versions built in New Zealand.

It is still a current design and still doing the big trips, circumnavigating Japan, Australia, New Caledonia, coasts of Thailand, Alaska, Greenland and another big trip coming up so I've heard.

Alex

It's nice to narrow down the list of boat options. Next you must sit in them to see if any become taken off the list. Then the ones that seem comfortable to sit in must be paddled to make a purchase choice. So if you can't sit in it, it's a gamble. -I'm not buying a boat I can't try paddling.

My 1st boat was a Hurricane Tracer 165. It was a very good affordable 1st boat. And I still enjoy it.

You can read what I said about it in the review, along with others: http://www.paddling.net/Reviews/showReviews.html?prod=1506

Necky and Wilderness Syst. makes good boats; read reviews to see which model Necky turns you on... The Tracer weighs less than a poly boat; keep that in mind. Poly is perhaps better only if you're in rock garden type areas... The Tracer cost about the same as a poly, also.

My choice would be a skeg boat and refrain from a rudder boat. -My opin. Skeg gets in the way of rescues, tows, usually hinders pedal power, collects wind, hinders learning to steer because people use rudder to steer etc.

Nick, you provide fuel for my thesis. We know that the Nordkapp and the Anas Acuta are very different and different-looking boats, and you assure yourself that the designer had vastly different design goals for the two boats. And certainly one can instantly feel the difference when paddling the boats for 10 minutes, putting them on edge, etc. Yet the fact remains that, vast differences or no, all the boats I've discussed and you've discussed are fine rough-water boats in the hands of a skilled, experienced paddler. That's all I'm saying: The boat, not so much. The kayaker is the heart of the equation.

Kayaker729, I apologize for hijacking this thread. It's just that, in sea kayaking, like everything else, opinions are everywhere, all over the place, and I just like to stop once in a while--rudders vs. skegs vs. neither, skinny sticks vs. Europaddles, high angle vs. low angle, etc. etc.--and try to assess whether there are real truths behind the opinions. Often the box is empty.