Hey everyone,

I have been to the BWCA many times and I have always used a Kevlar Canoe. I am really not really about the weight when portaging.

My concern is on the water.

Is there a big difference in steering and power when using an aluminum canoe vs a Kevlar canoe?

Shape is a much larger factor than material.

quote schweady: "Shape is a much larger factor than material."

Well, lets just consider the usual rentals for sake of conversation. I agree on the shape factor. I'm wondering about weight on the water and turn-ability.

I'd never switch back since I own kevlar and don't want the noise or weight or coldness of aluminum but I do think the keel on the aluminum canoe I rented from an outfitter 15+ years ago - - I think an alumacraft - did tend to result in straighter travel and more "glide". But I'm the last one here to ask.

Aluminum, mass produced, punched out of a sheet and riveted together. The design and shape is more to ease manufacture, the keel is primarily a joint holding the 2 halves together and streamline the rivets.

With the exception of chopper glass sprayed construction most all composite canoes are built to specific designs for specific purposes, by hand.

"Is there a big difference in steering and power when using an aluminum canoe vs a Kevlar canoe?"

Yes, that goes for fiberglass cloth layups also. Have not seen any aluminum canoes in organised competition for many years, and back then the only real good competitor was Beaver Aluminum Marathon.

butthead

quote richardradosevich: "

quote schweady: "Shape is a much larger factor than material. "

Well, lets just consider the usual rentals for sake of conversation. I agree on the shape factor. I'm wondering about weight on the water and turn-ability "

Maneuverability will also be a function of the hull shape, specifically the amount of rocker. A composite hull can have no rocker and track very straight but be more challenging to turn, or extreme rocker and be as nimble as a leaf in a breeze but no ability to track straight. Most aluminum canoes have flat bottoms with little rocker. Add a keel (necessary to join the 2 halves together) and the tin tub will usually track straight.

Your other concern relates to mass and involves Newton's first law of motion: Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

The heavier aluminum canoe (assuming equal loads in the kevlar)will resist starting from a dead stop more than the lighter kevlar. It "might" also tend to maintain momentum better than the kevlar due to greater mass, but on the other hand, the kevlar might have glide advantage, again due to a better shape below waterline .

quote billconner: "I'd never switch back since I own kevlar and don't want the noise or weight or coldness of aluminum but I do think the keel on the aluminum canoe I rented from an outfitter 15+ years ago - - I think an alumacraft - did tend to result in straighter travel and more "glide". But I'm the last one here to ask. "

The "keel" on aluminum canoes is an artifact of the the manufacturing process; it exists to hold the two halves of the canoe together and has little effect on tracking. Tracking is determined by shape of the hull, a Minnesota II or Escape is much more resistant to turning. Beaver Canoes made fast straight tracking aluminum hulls without keels.

Weight of the hull has little to do with glide or tracking as the weight of the passengers and gear makes relative hull weights insignificant. On the other hand hull weight differences are quite noticeable on portages.

quote Banksiana: "

quote billconner: "I'd never switch back since I own kevlar and don't want the noise or weight or coldness of aluminum but I do think the keel on the aluminum canoe I rented from an outfitter 15+ years ago - - I think an alumacraft - did tend to result in straighter travel and more "glide". But I'm the last one here to ask. "

The "keel" on aluminum canoes is an artifact of the the manufacturing process; it exists to hold the two halves of the canoe together and has little effect on tracking. Tracking is determined by shape of the hull, a Minnesota II or Escape is much more resistant to turning. Beaver Canoes made fast straight tracking aluminum hulls without keels.

Weight of the hull has little to due with glide or tracking as the weight of the passengers and gear makes relative hull weights insignificant. On the other hand hull weight differences are quite noticeable on portages."

Not everyone agrees that with keel don't track better.
Canoe Design

One more factor that has not been mentioned yet - an aluminum canoe with a keel will be a more effective boulder catcher than a composite canoe. That will undoubtedly hinder your forward progress and maneuverability.

quote thebotanyguy: "One more factor that has not been mentioned yet - an aluminum canoe with a keel will be a more effective boulder catcher than a composite canoe. That will undoubtedly hinder your forward progress and maneuverability."

And if you are with novices who drop a kevlar on a sharp rock, that could hinder forward progress too.

It would seem weather would affect this "rating" as well.

quote butthead: "Aluminum, mass produced, punched out of a sheet and riveted together. The design and shape is more to ease manufacture, the keel is primarily a joint holding the 2 halves together and streamline the rivets.


With the exception of chopper glass sprayed construction most all composite canoes are built to specific designs for specific purposes, by hand.


"Is there a big difference in steering and power when using an aluminum canoe vs a Kevlar canoe?"


Yes, that goes for fiberglass cloth layups also. Have not seen any aluminum canoes in organised competition for many years, and back then the only real good competitor was Beaver Aluminum Marathon.


butthead"

Thank you!

quote thebotanyguy: "

quote richardradosevich: "

quote schweady: "Shape is a much larger factor than material. "

Well, lets just consider the usual rentals for sake of conversation. I agree on the shape factor. I'm wondering about weight on the water and turn-ability "

Maneuverability will also be a function of the hull shape, specifically the amount of rocker. A composite hull can have no rocker and track very straight but be more challenging to turn, or extreme rocker and be as nimble as a leaf in a breeze but no ability to track straight. Most aluminum canoes have flat bottoms with little rocker. Add a keel (necessary to join the 2 halves together) and the tin tub will usually track straight.

Your other concern relates to mass and involves Newton's first law of motion: Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

The heavier aluminum canoe (assuming equal loads in the kevlar)will resist starting from a dead stop more than the lighter kevlar. It "might" also tend to maintain momentum better than the kevlar due to greater mass, but on the other hand, the kevlar might have glide advantage, again due to a better shape below waterline ."

Very analytical. We are on the same wave length

quote billconner:


Not everyone agrees that with keel don't track better.
Canoe Design "

The keel on aluminum canoes was a means to hold the two halves together, in the water it produces turbulence and drag slowing the forward progress of an already slow design- in terms of tracking the effects is negligible. The entry and exit lines and shape and length of a hull have much more profound effect on the tendency of a hull to track. You'd be hard pressed to describe either Grummans or Alumacrafts as straight tracking hulls.

I believe that I learned this from John Winter's book "The Shape of the Canoe".

Most aluminum canoe designs plow thru the water. A good kevlar glides.

quote Banksiana: "

quote billconner:

Not everyone agrees that with keel don't track better.
Canoe Design "

The keel on aluminum canoes was a means to hold the two halves together, in the water it produces turbulence and drag slowing the forward progress of an already slow design- in terms of tracking the effects is negligible. The entry and exit lines and shape and length of a hull have much more profound effect on the tendency of a hull to track. You'd be hard pressed to describe either Grummans or Alumacrafts as straight tracking hulls.

I believe that I learned this from John Winter's book "The Shape of the Canoe"."

Like most topics here, it's been discussed previously. Keel vs. no keel

And reading a number of online sources, clearly not strong consensus. Also not convinced 25-30 pounds in the 700-800 total weight range has much effect. 3%?

Not much to add. Butthead, Banksiana and Pinetree pretty much nailed it.

As far as hull weight; for the canoe-tripper, easy on the shoulders for portaging. For the racer, less mass to move through the water. A couple of heavy Duluth packs will pretty much negate any performance advantage of a lightweight hull. I also know of very few canoe-trippers that paddle tandem canoes "sit and switch" as a competitive duo of USCA Marathon canoe racers would.

A well designed and well manufactured fiberglass, Kevlar or Carbon-Graphite canoe will have a definite performance advantage over your average aluminum canoe. The exception being a Beaver canoe, (pictured below), as butthead mentioned. But the Beaver Canoe is a rare breed and haven't been manufactured for years.

Like most members here, I grew up paddling aluminum canoes, (i.e., Grummans, Alumacrafts, Mirro-crafts, etc.), although they served me well at the time, I see no advantage paddling or owning one now. Besides, a well designed composite canoe is just more fun to paddle IMHO.

Hans Solo

quote billconner: "Also not convinced 25-30 pounds in the 700-800 total weight range has much effect. 3%? "

Agree completely, the weight of the hull is insignificant compared to the weight of paddlers and gear. My fastest tripping hull is a Sawyer 222, all glass, no foam- a dream on the water but at well over 90# a beast on the land.

That's a great shot, Banksiana.

So there are obvious advantages and disadvantages. The one I hear the most is how much weight is in the canoe will be what effects it the most. I've always used Kevlar so I may as well stick to what I know and am used to.

a bit off topic regarding keels. i'm restoring a early 1950s 18' w/canvas chestnut prospector. my buddy has a similar canoe, his had the canvas and keel still attached, mine had been stripped to the planks. a purist would restore these canoes with the keel, as originally designed. in the case of these canoes the keels function was to protect the belly of the canoe from rocks, the effect on handling was not a consideration.

most kevlar hulls are going to be far superior to any aluminum design in handling. however a fair number of these kevlar boats are based on racing hulls and in certain weather conditions make terrible wilderness trippers. my opinion. also nothing compares to a wood/canvas canoe in handling, however a few may object to the weight.

Not too difficult to set up a direct paddling comparison, especially if renting.
Personal opinion relates to camping with brother who owns a Lowe knock off brand 17 foot al. and my Spirt2. Both of us thought the Spirit better on the water in all categories far as paddling was concerned.

butthead

quote Banksiana: "

quote billconner: "Also not convinced 25-30 pounds in the 700-800 total weight range has much effect. 3%?"

Agree completely, the weight of the hull is insignificant compared to the weight of paddlers and gear. My fastest tripping hull is a Sawyer 222, all glass, no foam- a dream on the water but at well over 90# a beast on the land.
"

Awesome picture, now that's the portage from hell.

The keel is a big difference in current- the water tries to turn you broadside by pushing on the keel. On flat water it helps to hold your track with crosswinds. I have had both and chose Kevlar. The only place aluminum outperforms is flat water shoreline fishing where it holds in the water better due to the keel.

quote Banksiana: "

quote billconner: "Also not convinced 25-30 pounds in the 700-800 total weight range has much effect. 3%? "

Agree completely, the weight of the hull is insignificant compared to the weight of paddlers and gear. My fastest tripping hull is a Sawyer 222, all glass, no foam- a dream on the water but at well over 90# a beast on the land.
"

Banksiana, where is that portage?

There are Kevlar models that will track so hard it is difficult to turn them, or you can get them so you need to coax them to go straight. It is the design of the hull. There are many more kevlar hulls out there that are more efficient in not wasting your forward efforts than aluminum Canoes, there are a few where that was sacrificed for initial stability.

For the BWCA, I would take a resin and cloth hull with a good shape any day over an aluminum canoe for what they do on the water. This is my opinion when comparing kevlar and aluminum. I have paddled many many miles in both in the BWCA and many other places.

I enjoy paddling a wood and canvas even more for the pure joy of paddling.

The portage is on the Kopka river- flows into Nipigon just south of Wabikimi provincial park.
A couple of steep portages on the route- the toughest requires a rope to get down.

I agree with others that say that most composite canoes are more efficient and that you enjoy paddling them much more than aluminum canoes. I find that the primary reason that I continue to use aluminum canoes is that they are more accessible because they are stored outside. We store our Kevlar and Royalex canoes inside a building and it is a lot of trouble for my wife and me to get them in and out of the building. This afternoon we will use an aluminum canoe for fishing. The reason is that it is laying on the bank of the pond.

I would say shape plays a big role. When I need a canoe for big water and stability I will go with a different canoe versus one that I will need for maneurvability and speed. I have overall preferred a kevlar canoe for shape design and being able to do what I need it to do for the job at hand.

Good stuff here. I will add that with the flat bottom, aluminum canoes have good initial stability, but zero secondary stability. Once the initial stability is lost due to a wave, hanging on a shallow rock or tree, or otherwise leaning it, it will easily swamp. Most composite canoes have an arched hull to significantly improve secondary stability, meaning they will recover from a serious lean without swamping.

"There are many more kevlar hulls out there that are more efficient in not wasting your forward efforts than aluminum Canoes, there are a few where that was sacrificed for initial stability."

As far as I understand, efficiency and initial stability are not mutually-exclusive attributes. I'm not buying it.

So-called "initial stability" doesn't just depend on hull shape, it also depends on things like wetted surface area and distribution thereof, displacement, loading, etc. Dynamic stability is another thing, and we have NEVER had a problem with it in the aluminum. NEVER! In all sorts of conditions. MASSIVE conditions. Conditions in which it was impossible to progress and turning around in 30-knot wind and 3-4-foot rollers was necessary. Freeboard and its distribution are especially important to compensate.

Yes, all things being equal, lighter weight will mean less displacement which will mean less force required to push water out of the way. But all other things are never equal. And I'm talking on the water. The ideal of efficiency has IMO sacrificed operability IMO, unless one is unloaded on perfectly flat water and paddling one of the racing-shaped canoes for speed.

I'm talking lakes. While I would, and have, taken aluminum down riffle/small rapids, I would never take kevlar or carbon. Yes I used to whitewater kayak, even in small squirt boats, I know that aluminum is not good in this application...but it's better kevlar, on that water. IMO

Suit yourself. Just know your "beliefs" are contrary to those of every canoe designer and builder. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Flat bottomed canoes are not as speedy as round bottomed ones. You need to talk to Gene Jensens scion, Steve Scarborough or David Yost, or John Winters. They design canoes and know way more than anyone here about initial and secondary stability.

Operability depends on the paddler skills as much as the boat.

quote AndySG: "
Suit yourself. Just know your "beliefs" are contrary to those of every canoe designer and builder. Not that there is anything wrong with that."

As a matter of fact, they are not. I have a background in eng phys, and understand design criteria, performance envelope, and intended application. As I have tried to describe, we have found the Lowe Line to be demonstrably superior in many respects to the Q17, FOR OUR PADDLING.

For instance, we tend to go rather heavily loaded. We each weigh about 190, her pack is often around 45 lbs, mine maybe 65-70 lbs (yes we bring a lot of heavy food). The Q17 might not respond as favorably to this type of loading as does the Lowe Line.

Also, we are very, very strong paddlers compared to the average, and we enjoy using that strength. We travel at a higher average rate of speed, and exert more force which enables us to travel through rather more severe and complicated conditions. Again, the Q17 might not respond as favorably to this type of operation as does the Lowe Line.

I could go on, but you get the picture. The Q17 is neither intrinsically superior nor intrinsically inferior to any aluminum canoe. Each is a tool that is best used in the application for which it was intended. For our type of paddling on the water, the Lowe Line is the better performer. Also for our type of travel over land, the Lowe Line is the better performer. All according to our own performance criteria in each performance metric.

For those interested in more hydrodynamic depth, I offer this interesting series of pages:

http://www.greenval.com/shape_part1.html

It's a lay treatment, but it's enough to make you think about what you are experiencing on the water in different conditions.

Just thought I'd help out a bit, A link to the article

butthead

every experienced paddler knows the answer to kevlar vs. aluminum, the answer is neither

Coleman RamX, absolute best canoe ever made, you have to paddle backwards to slow them down so your buddies can keep up, and at the portage they jump out of the water

swamp one? just use the periscope and continue under water

quote ZaraSp00k: "every experienced paddler knows the answer to kevlar vs. aluminum, the answer is neither


Coleman RamX, absolute best canoe ever made, you have to paddle backwards to slow them down so your buddies can keep up, and at the portage they jump out of the water


swamp one? just use the periscope and continue under water"

:)

quote Moss Tent: "For those interested in more hydrodynamic depth, I offer this interesting series of pages:

http://www.greenval.com/shape_part1.html

It's a lay treatment, but it's enough to make you think about what you are experiencing on the water in different conditions."

I don't know that I'd classify John Winters as a layman...

While I know nothing about the good Mr. Winters, I never said that HE was a layman, I said that the article was "a lay treatment".

And believe me, it is.

That's not to say that any of it is incorrect, just that it doesn't answer many questions that a knowledgeable reader would have, especially regarding computational methods, modeling, and turbulence.

I do think that his articles are a fun introduction to the topic.

quote Moss Tent: "While I know nothing about the good Mr. Winters, I never said that HE was a layman, I said that the article was "a lay treatment".


And believe me, it is.


That's not to say that any of it is incorrect, just that it doesn't answer many questions that a knowledgeable reader would have, especially regarding computational methods, modeling, and turbulence.


I do think that his articles are a fun introduction to the topic."

Sure he wrote for the less scientifically inclined but if you email him with questions, watch out for the data.. Some of it that I have I still don't understand.

"And believe me, it is."

Having just a bit of difficulty there!


butthead

Good morning.

Just digging up this old thread…

Having been an aluminum guy all my life, I’m curious as to what type of speed you would pick up using a higher end, composite canoe versus a standard aluminum assuming an equal load?

I don't know how much faster my kevlar canoes are over aluminum, i can remember making really good time with aluminum in the late 80's getting into quetico. But my guess is a MNII is probably quicker on the water. For me the big gain is weight, my 20’ 6" Northwind weighs 48# and hauls a lot of gear.

The only data point I can contribute is many years ago we paddled an Alumacraft Quetico 17 on one trip and a Souris River Quetico 17 on the next. I did many tests over distance with gps and timing, etc. It appeared that we gained a bit over 1/2 mph easy cruising speed with the Kevlar boat. Neither of these canoes are particularly efficient and the tests were far from scientific. I remember how much nicer the Kevlar handled, how it was quieter, and how much lighter it felt (seemed like more than 22 pounds. We never went back.

This was a fun forum post. I love that Beaver came up because they really are a special canoe. Inverted keel to reduce drag (keel is inside the hull), lots of welding to allow for sharper lines at either end, and they are so lightweight! Even still, they are an exception, not a rule in this discussion.

The only times I am choosing aluminum over a "modern" option these days is in a heavily skewed, apples to oranges choice. Say 18 ft grumman "lightweight" versus Wenonah Basswood for a longer travel trip? I'm going Grumman because it's not what the Basswood hull was designed for. It's less an artifact of the material and more about hull design and MOST kevlar hulls have a far more thought out hull design (especially getting out of the major aluminum companies - ever paddle a smokercraft? Haha)

That said, more that anything, I am taking the craft that gets me into the wilderness. Kevlar? Wonderful. No kevlar available? Okay, aluminum. Heck, I'd take that pumpkin paddling magazine just wrote about if it meant a night under the stars in a wilderness campsite!

One of my favorite canoe dealers became a dealer after coming in second place to a composite canoe while paddling a Grumman. One test paddle in a Sawyer Cruiser and he ordered four boats and became a canoe dealer.

On the other hand whether the difference is "big" is subjective. I'd consider the 1/2 mph difference in cruising speed quoted above as HUGE but others might consider it meaningless. Same with handling...I value handling and think composites are worlds better but someone else might not care at all or might even prefer aluminum if they just use it for fishing on a pond.

justpaddlin: On the other hand whether the difference is "big" is subjective. I'd consider the 1/2 mph difference in cruising speed quoted above as HUGE but others might consider it meaningless. Same with handling...I value handling and think composites are worlds better but someone else might not care at all or might even prefer aluminum if they just use it for fishing on a pond.

Yeah, being 1/2 mile ahead after an hour of easy paddling is a pretty big difference...and that SR is on the slow side for composite because it prioritizes stability. A MNII would be even faster.

There's just no getting around the fact that it's a lot easier to build hulls that excel in exactly what you want them to when the design isn't constrained by the manufacturing limitations of the material. That doesn't mean that every composite design is superior to every aluminum design, but they usually are.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on speed increase? The 1/2 mph does sound like a likely increase IMO. I'm always in an aluminum canoe and unless there are three of us, we do get passed by strong paddlers in kevlar canoes. For many of the trips I do, I like aluminum but it sure would be nice to be faster when just cruising on day trips.

My physical challenged wife and I had no trouble out pacing aluminum canoes in our Wenonah Odyssey. If was a very fast Kevlar canoe.
Carl

Paddling down Jackfish Bay in my Sawyer 222 we passed a pair of 20 something males in an aluminum canoe. My wife was in the bow nursing my son.

I honestly don't think I would take an aluminum canoe if someone was giving it away. They absolutely suck in every regard... And they're heavy as sin and ugly to boot. Loud as a mofo.... Every fish from a mile around will know you're there. If you're going down a river Deliverence style... And you think you're going to smash a lot of rocks, and no portages..... maybe.

Blackdogyak: " They absolutely suck in every regard... And they're heavy as sin and ugly to boot. Loud as a mofo.... "

Don't sugarcoat it Blackdog. Tell us how you really feel. BTW, I agree with you.

The only advantage I can think of for an aluminum canoe is your ability to stand up in one (Stability).

I used to stand up to cast my fly fishing rods in an aluminum canoe. Can't get away with that in a Kevlar canoe.

also ripped a hole in my aluminum canoe going down basswood falls. (should have portaged).

Never had any durability issues with Kevlar. just a superior product all around.

ubbenholdthekraut: "The only advantage I can think of for an aluminum canoe is your ability to stand up in one (Stability).

I used to stand up to cast my fly fishing rods in an aluminum canoe. Can't get away with that in a Kevlar canoe."

Well I don’t recommend standing up in any canoe :) …but feeling comfortable doing that is more a function of design, not the make up of the canoe. I did that myself quite often in my Souris River Q18.5. I’ve seen others do that as well in other Kevlar models. I wouldn’t do it in my Northwind 17…but then again I am older now and it’s a different canoe, with different strengths/weaknesses.

T

Yes. Aluminum canoes are made from sheet metal. They can only be contorted so much and not into complex shapes. That makes them inherently slower than fiberglass and kevlar canoes. Al canoes are buoyant however because of their full ends. They tend to ride up and over wind driven waves on a lake.

Kevlar boats can be made in any shape and are by nature light and fast, especially the longer ones. They tend to slice through waves. I used paddle an old Sawyer Cruiser on rivers. The sheer ends made for a fast boat, but it was capable of taking on some water when slicing thru waves.

I am nowhere near as experienced with kevlar canoes as most of you are, I have only used one on one trip. The only positive that I got from that experience was that the kevlar canoe was so much nicer to portage. On the water I would take my aluminum canoe over a kevlar any day. In the kevlar, I felt like the wind had its way with us, pushing us all around. Its just my experience that I feel like an aluminum canoe drifts less quickly while trying to fish and it cuts through windy conditions better while trying to paddle.

We've owned and/or rented canoes made of aluminum, wood/canvas, ABS, fiberglass, polyethylene, and Kevlar. As the Kevlar canoes have enabled us to continue to single-walk portages in our 70s, the only other material we might consider is carbon. A caveat: we don't fish, and usually paddle with ~375 pounds in the canoe, so don't have the wind issues reported by some.

TZ

TrailZen: "and usually paddle with ~375 pounds in the canoe, so don't have the wind issues reported by some.

TZ"

I thought this was gear weight when I first read it and thought, "Wow".

Chuckles: "

TrailZen: "and usually paddle with ~375 pounds in the canoe, so don't have the wind issues reported by some.

TZ"

I thought this was gear weight when I first read it and thought, "Wow". "

Yeah, if the two of us could single-walk 375 pounds of gear I'd go "WOW", too! Our typical gear weight, including canoe, for a 10-day trip is 125-135 pounds.

TZ

Not a speed or turning comment - but while I love my kevlar canoes - if I had to vote on one for comfort, sitting higher up, fishing and paddling...my Alumacraft Queticos win. The days of me lugging them into the BWCA are over, however.

JustThinking: "The keel is a big difference in current- the water tries to turn you broadside by pushing on the keel. On flat water it helps to hold your track with crosswinds. I have had both and chose Kevlar. The only place aluminum outperforms is flat water shoreline fishing where it holds in the water better due to the keel."

As someone who's only flipped in current in an aluminum canoe with a keel, this makes a lot of sense.

Having paddled both, the only thing aluminum canoes to better is serving as a table for hot pans.

Get a kevlar hands down.
PERIOD.....
Some outfitters will still have a few for sale. Most outfitters dump some to most of their canoes every fall.
Piragus in Ely gets new canoes every year.
You might even be able to put a reservation down now and pick it up next September.
Spend $1000-1500 now end enjoy it for 30 years. The same with an outfitters used carbon fiber pent shaft paddles. $130 now and use it for 30 years.

You can not put a complex curve in aluminum. The kevlar is molded to the most efficient shape . Especially in the bow and stern.
I bet your Alumicraft gurgles. The aluminum bow can't be pressed to an efficient shape.
Each hull design has its own maximum hull speed.
I can paddle my 20ft wenonah mn3 fully loaded with a kayak paddle up to 6mph solo. A 15.5 wenonah solo I could get no faster than 3.5 mph.

Your only debate is which kelar canoe to get.
We have had a mn3 for 20 years.
We have done 3 person and 2 person trips in it. And I have done 5 solo trips in it.
You quickly get used to the extra length.
My brother who sits in the stern would be in danger of getting a hook in the face if we ever paddled a 17ft canoe.

The mn3 is fast. But you need to be careful on big water. We have survived paddling into strong winds and big waves. But we have been doing it together for 40 years. But its not fun seeing the bow dip down to the water level not knowing if it was going to spring back up..

I did purchase a 20ft Northwind/ star. It has more feet room for the bow person and more volume then the minn2.
The wenonah Seneca has tons of volume but will be slower.
In the pic the mn3 is skinny and the Northstar 20 is the wider canoe. If you are in the Minneapolis are you could try some of my canoes
Aluminum gets hot and cold. Is heavy. 20 lbs lighter on the shoulders is huge. 30lbs is a joy. Aluminum is loud and has glare.
And kevlar can give you some beautiful pics

I love my Grumman Eagle 17' canoe. It is great in the water, tracks well in the wind, fast, stable, and lighter than most aluminum canoes, but the biggest factor for me is the price. I bought mine used for around $300. I still can't afford $1000 for a used kevlar. Other things simply take priority.

Kevlar canoes might be better than aluminum, but the cost-benefit comparison doesn't make enough of a difference for me at this point.