|
| Figure 1 |
Do you remember the name Waterstick? Their "started in a garage" romantic beginnings? The buyout/partnering with BayComp, the big Canadian composites company? The falling out that followed all too soon thereafter, and the cancellation of the beloved Zen ProBend paddle which I unashamedly called "the best bent-shaft paddle I've ever used, period"? (When they stopped production, I stocked up on three identical Zens just to make certain I would have access to that paddle for the foreseeable future.)
The common thread through that entire story is the paddle's designer, Steve Horvath. When Steve left Waterstick/BayComp, those of us familiar with him knew we hadn't seen the last of his contributions to kayaking. True to form, Steve is back - with new paddle designs being manufactured by DynaPlas in Toronto and marketed under the name H2O Paddles. I was recently given the opportunity to review two of Steve's new designs that should be appearing in local dealers this season.
For this review H2O supplied the two right hand control, 12 degree offset paddles shown in Figure 1. The top paddle is 191 centimeters and uses their "H2O-Team" blades, while the bottom paddle is 194 centimeters and sports their "H20-2" blade design.
There's some bad news about these paddles that must be acknowledged right up front: H2O's colors are uggggg-ly. I can't help another comparison with the Waterstick Zen, which in addition to being an incredible performer also had a unique look that turned heads on the river. True, the H2O's shaft still has that "graphite" look prized by many people, but those blade colors... and those grip colors....
Yes, I know the colors were chosen by H2O's team so they'd show up well in photographs. I know H2O's emphasis is on performance, and that appearance has nothing to do with performance. Yes, I suppose that blue blade color isn't all that bad. I guess we must hope that the performance of these new paddles makes the color choices unimportant....
It does.
H2O's paddles are based on a series of components, one of the standard production techniques for modern paddles. There are various shaft options (material, length, bent vs. straight, etc.), several blade choices, two grip sizes, and various grip colors.
The two paddles provided for this review use the same carbon fiber ergonomic bent-grip shaft, differing only in length. Both paddles had the larger grip size based on Steve's personal recommendation. The blades are the most distinguishing feature of the two paddles, so that's where we'll start.
 |
| Figure 2 |
Figure 2 is a closeup of the front of the two blades. The upper green blade is the H2O-Team blade, while the lower blue one is the H2O-2 blade.
The H2O-Team blade was heavily influenced by H2O's team paddlers. It is optimized for freestyle and playboating, which results in a smaller overall blade with less surface area and lower weight. As most experienced paddlers know, less weight usually yields increased rep rate and positioning speed, both of which can be critical for playmoves involving rapid torso twists and paddle placement transitions.
The H2O-2 blade is slightly larger and more powerful than its H2O-Team sibling. This yields a paddle better suited to river running and all-around kayaking, at some theoretical expense in terms of swing weight and speed.
 |
| Figure 3 |
Figure 3 shows the back side of both blades. Other than size and overall shape, they share a lot of characteristics and this is much more evident when looking at the back surface. Let's dig into some details regarding how these blades are constructed.
The first thing that catches the eye is the "skeletal" look of the blades. That's not just cosmetics - that "spine" and those "ribs" are there to do essentially the same job as the bones in our bodies.
Our bodies are designed so that normal loads and stresses are primarily borne by our skeletons. Muscles and their attachment points seek to transfer load to our bones, which are far more efficient at handling sustained loads than our soft tissues.
Likewise, the H2O blades have thicker regions that act as the blade's skeleton. The majority of the blade is thin to keep swing weight as low as possible. The entire blade could be left thin, but large areas of thin material have drastically reduced stiffness and rigidity. Something must be done to reinforce them or they will flex and twist under the uneven loads they experience during normal use.
The Waterstick Revolution blades accomplished this with "faceting". Multiple, generally flat regions were angled with respect to each other. The resulting seam lines acted as strengthening ribs of a sort. The system worked pretty well, but such discontinuities in the material (the "lines" where the facets adjoined) also become potential failure points.
Thanks to ongoing advances in materials and manufacturing techniques, the H2O blades are able to use a reinforcement technique that accomplishes its mission (increasing stiffness and rigidity) while also inherently strengthening the blade. Instead of inherently weaker seam lines, the spine and ribs are actually the strongest part of the blade.
 |
| Figure 4 |
Figure 4 is closeup of the blade tip and the spine's placement within the blade itself. The blade tip is of a traditional thickness, thanks to the way the spine tapers as it approaches the tip.
 |
| Figure 5 |
Figure 5 details how the ribs come out to the edge of the blade surface.
Steve had another interesting comment regarding why that rib extends all the way to the blade's edge. (After all, they could have just stopped farther back in the blade, just as the spine does.) Steve claimed that most blade edge impacts occur right at the two spots where those ribs extend to the blade edge. By leaving the material thicker in those two spots, the blade could be made more resistant to impacts.
My first impression upon seeing where those ribs extended at the edge was to question their placement relative to "most common impact points". My admittedly questionable memory seemed to place most impacts either on the very end or along the sides - I just didn't remember a lot of corner hits. Then, during on-water testing, I had an unexpected interaction with a submerged rock at a local playspot (read: I whacked a rock I didn't know was there while attaining back up to the hole). I thought of Steve's comments, took a look at the blade to see where the impact occurred, and... yeah, OK, maybe Steve has forgotten more about paddles than most of us ever knew in the first place. [grin]
 |
| Figure 6 |
Returning to the front face of the blade for a moment, Figure 6 shows a subtle feature running along the spine beginning where the shaft tapers into nothingness. See that little channel, a sort of rounded slot extending toward the blade tip? Steve gives credit to the ever-innovative Corran Addison for that little tidbit. It seems that Corran was experimenting with how water flows across the power face of a paddle blade and found that adding a channel like this one caused the water to disperse more evenly. Even dispersion helps to reduce blade flutter, which for all the discussion it gets sure seems to be present to some degree in almost every paddle I've ever reviewed. We'll see later, in the on-water testing section, how the H2O paddles fared in that department.
 |
| Figure 7 |
Figure 7 is a side view of how the shaft inserts into the blade. I pestered Steve on the topic of water getting into the blades and/or shaft, since that is a complaint heard about almost every paddle and construction technique. After swearing me to secrecy, he described how H2O attaches the blades to the shaft. I must honor my promise to keep certain details private, but take it from me that theirs is the most waterproof assembly process I've ever heard. I would actually worry more about water entering though a pinhole leak in the shaft than through the blade/shaft interface.
 |
| Figure 8 |
Figure 8 is a closeup of the blade/shaft interface. There's another advantage hidden away inside: The monolithic blade has a "web" (H2O calls it an "I-Beam") that bisects the shaft opening. Imagine the shaft hole in an unassembled blade, then imagine a thin sheet of the blade's plastic cutting across the hole from one side to the other. You'd end up with two D-shaped "holes" instead of a single round hole. Now, cut a corresponding slot down the end of the shaft so the blade's web can insert into that slot. Several advantages result, including an increase of bonding area in the blade/shaft interface and prevention of the blade from twisting out of alignment.
Remember all those horror stories about certain manufacturer's blades twisting on the shaft, falling off completely, etc.? Given H20's I-Beam, I don't think those sorts of problems will be bothering H2O paddlers.
Let's move on to another area of significant innovation: The H2O grips.
H2O's grips are made of Santoprene. That's nothing new - Santoprene has been in use for kayak paddle grips for years now by several different manufacturers. Santoprene has several characteristics that make it an almost idea material for interacting with the human hand in a gripping application.
H2O's grips are also textured, but again... that's not unique. H2O's choice of texture pattern may be new, but the idea of molding an undulating surface into a grip predates the sport of kayaking itself.
So if the material isn't the innovation, and texturing isn't new, then why are H2O's grips a "significant innovation"? Because of a combination of design choices that yielded a great end result.
 |
| Figure 9 |
Look carefully at Figure 9. The paddle shaft is just visible as it exits the Santoprene. It's clear from this photograph that the ergonomic "bend" in the grip area is part of the paddle shaft itself. Unlike some other paddle manufacturers, H2O's wrist-friendly ergonomics are not molded into the Santoprene - they're inherent in the shape of the shaft itself. This again harks back to the design of the Waterstick ProBend shaft, as well as bent-shaft offerings from Werner and many others.
The obvious question to this Santoprene-over-bent-shaft design is "WHY?" Other designs deliver ergonomics with either an angle in the shaft or an angle molded into the grip material. Why have both? The answer is that there are several design goals in the grip area, and forcing one material or one component to try and accomplish all of them leads to tradeoffs and compromises. If multiple components can be used, with each optimized to deliver its portion of the complete result, it is possible to favor those characteristics best suited for its role without sacrificing overall performance.
(This approach is reminiscent of the innovative tubes used by Aire for their catarafts and inflatable kayaks. By using inflatable chambers housed within and protected by separate outer tubes, those outer tubes could be optimized for abrasion and wear resistance without having to be airtight. Separating basic functionalities in this manner places a broader spectrum of materials at the designer's disposal.)
Relying solely on a bent shaft compromises the grip surface. Relying solely on a shaped grip compromises reliability. Separating the desired features, and achieving each separately, permits the correct design and materials to be used for each purpose.
Those who have used Santoprene grips know that they have a great "feel". But shaped Santoprene is difficult and expensive to mold and bond to the underlying shaft. It can also be a warranty problem: molded grips want to rotate around a smooth, straight shaft as torquing forces from the paddler's hands impart upon them.
A traditional bent shaft delivers the ergonomic advantages and (at first it would seem) permits elimination of the molded grip. However, there's just no way to equal the feel of a Santoprene grip with carbon composite. Numerous paddle manufacturers have tried various textures but the bottom line is that human hands grip a harder smoother surface differently than they do a softer textured one.
Just what is that difference? Generally it translates to a tighter grip on the harder smoother surface. This means the muscles that control the hand - those in the forearm - are under a higher and more constant strain when gripping a bare paddle shaft. The brain subconsciously grips to the degree necessary to achieve whatever amount of "control" the paddler desires, and it just takes more on a bare carbon composite shaft.
 |
| Figure 10 |
So H2O separated the desired functionalities and delivered them independently of each other. A truly bent shaft forms the basis and mechanical strength of the grip system, then a constant-thickness Santoprene grip is wrapped around the gripping regions to yield a softer textured gripping surface. As shown in Figure 9 (top view) and Figure 10 (side view), the shaft itself forms the shape of the gripping areas. Torque is borne by the paddle shaft itself rather than trying to rotate a shaped grip around a substrate. Muscle strain is reduced by giving the hands an improved gripping surface. The end result is the best of both types of grip without the liabilities of either.
 |
| Figure 11 |
Figure 11 shows a closeup of the grip/shaft interface much like Figure 8 did for the blade. The relationship between the Santoprene wrap and the underlying shaft is readily apparent. Also note the cleanliness of the resulting assembly.
Enough laboratory analysis - how do these paddles perform on the water?
To test that as objectively as possible, we did A:B comparisons in real time across several paddlers on multiple types of water. Any paddler was able to "call for an exchange" at any time so they could do direct comparisons on specific playspots or through specific sections of rapids. We even included a Waterstick Zen since that's been my favorite stick for several years now.
I'll cut right to the chase: The favorite among every paddle available was the H2O-2 (blue blades). Without exception, every paddler preferred it for every form of water and paddling. Running rapids, hole play, wave work, it didn't matter. Everyone wanted the H2O-2 even in preference to their own personal paddles.
That's not to say that the H2O-Team isn't a great paddle. It was everyone's second choice, and if the H2O-2 hadn't been available it would have been first.
Frankly, the H2O-2 was my first choice too. I didn't expect that; I figured the H2O's would be "really good paddles" but that I'd still prefer my Waterstick Zen. I might even have convinced myself of that were it not for the ability to A:B compare them in real time (old habits die hard). For me personally, I'd say the Zen is an even match for the H2O-Team - not the "same", of course, just equally good for different reasons. But the H2O-2 is better than both of them.
This seems odd, since I mostly playboat these days, my preferred paddle length is 191 cm (the H2O-Team was 191 cm while the H2O-2 was 194), and the H2O-Team has been specifically designed for playboating. Logic would say that I'd prefer the H2O-Team. But that's not how it turned out for me or anyone else. Perhaps this is because none of our testers are anywhere near the caliber of H2O's team paddlers; we're humble enough to admit that we may just not be good enough to prefer the H2O-Team in the environment for which it was designed. Perhaps that will change as we spend more time with both H2O's. Whatever the reason, the H2O-2 just felt better everywhere doing everything for everyone.
The general consensus was that both H2O paddles have a "great feel" to them. That's an elusive characterization; how do you quantify something that is based on purely personal interaction with a product? Still, all but the newest of kayakers know what other boaters mean when they say that a paddle "feels right". The H2O's have that.
The shafts have a stiff feel to them. Some like stiffer paddle shafts while others prefer a bit more "give". (If you're in the latter category and are still using a straight non-ergonomic paddle, I recommend you try a stiff ergo paddle... you may find that your comfort issues are resolved by the proper grip design.) I don't care for softer paddle shafts because they feel like loose power steering on a sports car; too many details of the interaction with the water is lost to flexing of the paddle.
The Santoprene grips work as advertised and are a distinct improvement over the bare carbon composite on most bent-shaft paddles, including my old Waterstick Zen. The Santoprene delivered a welcome locked-on feel, particularly while wearing gloves in the snowmelt season during which this testing took place. Bare-hands testing was similarly comfortable.
(A thought: In addition to the stiff-shaft-versus-ergo-grips idea above, it may be that the Santoprene grips would further lessen the "impact" of stiffer paddle shafts. Less stress on the forearm muscles might reduce the shock conducted into the arms. I'm not bothered by "paddle shock" so I cannot test this theory personally, but it would be interesting for someone who prefers softer paddle shafts to do some comparisons and share their results with the paddling community.)
The H2O-2 blades have more power than other paddles. That's a strong statement coming from me, since until now I considered the Waterstick Zen to be tops in the power department. It's even more remarkable when you consider that the H2O-2 blades have 17% less surface area than the Zen's Revolution blades. A smaller blade yielding greater power - that's good design.
Both H2O blade designs also have noticeably less flutter than other blade designs. That's a HUGE issue for me - after power and swing weight, flutter is number three on my list of important considerations in paddle performance. If I like stiffer paddle shafts because they preserve a more accurate feel between me and the water, imagine how much I don't like it when the paddle starts waving about with a mind of its own. Even the Waterstick Zen fluttered once in a while. The H2O's? Never. Not once. I specifically asked all of our test paddlers about flutter and every one reported zero. Very impressive.
The H2O paddles are exceptional, all the more so because they are the first products released under a new brand name from a company new to the paddling industry. I'm usually hesitant to consider first-year products because I don't like spending my time and money to be someone's beta site. But there are the occasional exceptions, and this is one of them. Steve Horvath has been designing some of the best whitewater paddles in the sport for years, and his association with this otherwise "newcomer" is a powerful package.
Steve made a point of mentioning that Dynaplas is committed to the paddle industry for the long haul, something to which he's likely to be quite sensitive given the whole Waterstick/BayComp experience. If the 2006 H2O paddles are any indication, we in the paddling community are going to be far better off for their participation.
The H2O paddles should be hitting local dealers soon. Check their website and if you have access to these paddles, you owe it to yourself to demo one. You may not think you're in the market for a new paddle just now, but your opinion may change once you try what H2O has to offer. Mine certainly did.
Richard L. Hartman is an Engineer and freelance reviewer of whitewater equipment whose articles appear in a variety of online and print media. To provide equipment for review or inquire about hosting Richard's reviews on your site, send email to online [at] richardhartman [dot] net. Article and photographs are Copyright 2006 by Richard L. Hartman, Spokane WA USA. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. This article may be referenced by a web hyperlink if done so in its entirety.