Is Epic V10 outdated ?

Wally wrote: Very interesting that you think the V10 is outdated, they are still copying it!

Very few other brand have been copyied to my knowledge, paddles included.

Epic are also one of the only manufacturers to have 7 models in their line-up with another 2 comming out before years end, that is for surf skis only. All are for different purposes and ability levels.

Wally:

I own an Epic so I am a fan. Just curious; are you referring to Stellar when you say Epic has been copied?
On that line, what ever happened to the legal action between Epic and their first factory in China? Did they get the molds back?
I am assuming that many boats that are of identical length and beam have similar rocker etc. I also would imagine that if the Epic were copied via a mold every angle etc would be identical, no? If so wouldn't computer overlay of the boats prove this and in that case give Epic a pretty good case for patent infringement?

Of course this assumes you were referring to Stellar in your original comment.

Not looking to start a war and as mentioned I am an Epic owner. I'm just looking for clarification.

Thanks.

Drjay

interesting thread i feel the v10 is very current and a great ski. Looking forward to seeing the v14.

drjay google search and found this

www.stellarkayaks.com.au/flyingeagle.html

From my understanding the V12 was actually an earlier incarnation of the V10 in development.

Epic did get their molds back after the case but it still cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and all of the molds were re-made by that time.

Stellar were not the first to copy and yes they changed the deck and a small part of the hull, unlike the others who just flopped it directly. Even though the hull was registered it is still difficult to proove. BMW just lost a case in China where the X5 was coppied, even they can`t win.

As for the V12 being an incarnation of a previous design, you might know more than I do!, it was made a few years after the V10, it sounds odd to bring out a slower ski first. It also is nothing similar to the V10, other than it floats and is white and has a rudder system being the same as do all Epics.

As for Stellar copying Epic, Oscar made that comment to me at his paddling clinic in South Carolina recently, but having owned/paddled/raced both an Epic V10L and a Stellar SE, I haven't found an identical line or component between the boats, other than the fact they're both composite skis of similar length and width (but not identical). They fit differently, paddle differently, and really are noticeably different. I like both, but I don't see any evidence that Stellar copied Epic.

I own a legend but have tested Stellar SES and SEL and V10. All good skis and I certainly did not think the V10 was outdated, though the SEL would be better in terms of speed/stability ratio for me. People still go on about Stellar copying from Epic. I suggest examining them side by side. If can see any similarities in any part of the hull, then I would suggest halucinagenic substances may be responsible. Not that is a bad thing of course!

Cheers

Simon

Wally wrote:
As for the V12 being an incarnation of a previous design, you might know more than I do!, it was made a few years after the V10, it sounds odd to bring out a slower ski first. It also is nothing similar to the V10, other than it floats and is white and has a rudder system being the same as do all Epics.

From the Epic website

THE IDEA BEHIND THE V12
When we designed the V10 surf ski, some of the earlier versions were actually faster than our final design. We opted to de-tune the faster versions to increase the stability of the V10 and make it appeal to a wider range of paddlers.

With this in mind, I always thought – what if you had a skilled paddler in small to moderate conditions? Wouldn’t it make sense to sacrifice a small amount of stability for increased speed?

Thus the goal of the V12 was to make the fastest surf ski possible. The target would be for flatter water, or moderate conditions that are encountered in many parts of mainland USA and Europe where surf skis are paddled. Going back to the drawing board, I decreased the water line width and played with the cross sectional shapes & rocker profile to create a faster hull. I kept in mind that many races are a combination of flat and rougher water (such as the Mayor’s Cup in NYC that is typically flat for 75% of the race, but conditions pick up considerably the last 10 km; or the US Surf Ski Champs held half in San Francisco Bay and half out in the open ocean.) I wanted the V12 to have enough reserve buoyancy and secondary stability so that it could handle rough water when necessary.

After several iterations, our calculations showed the V12 to be approximately 2.4% faster than the V10 on flat water – a significant improvement. Further, for an 80 kg (176 lb.) paddler, the V12 is faster than an ICF sprint racing K-1 between speeds of 9.7 to 16.5 km/hr. (6 to 10 mph), while being significantly more stable and capable of handling rough water.

Wally the SE is nothing like a V10. When i paddled one it is noticably wider (more stable) and the shape of the hull is a lot different, have you actually paddled one?

Why did Epic pay money if they were an innocent party?

May I suggest people start reading the forum correctly before making stupid comments. I have no link to epic or Wally and have never met the man. It's no secret on this site who Wally is and his link to epic. I always find the information he offers on this forum to be valuable and helpful and never bias towards the epic brand. Regarding this topic he stated others have copied the V10 and it's clear other brands have, however he never mentioned or named stellar as being one of the brands.

Rob1: No one is condemning Wally - he seems to be a great guy and a very welcome addition to these forums, and Epic is a great brand and one of the true innovators in the world of surf skis. However, Stellar was mentioned in his last comment: "Stellar were not the first to copy and yes they changed the deck and a small part of the hull, unlike the others who just flopped it directly..." That's what some of us were responding to (the accusation of Stellar copying Epic has been made before by others as well). Not a big deal - just clearing the record.

barrypaddle1, you have seen the Epic / Flying Eagle settlement? Don't keep it to yourself, most of us on this forum have always been interested in what was actualy agreed to at the end of the case! Epic paid Flying Eagle?

Flying Eagle lost the case, it however cost Epic to fight it. All the molds and stock were returned to Epic.

As for the copy ski from Stellar, I personally did the comparison test by measurment, not eye. We are talking about the first ski they bought out. They have subsequntly added a bathtub for a foot-well and changed the deck. The hull change was minimal.

Wally - glad to hear Epic won the case (surprising to hear from a Chinese court).

Which Stellar ski are you referring to (as being a copy)? I may not be familiar with it if it preceded the SE. Comparing the current SE/SEL from Stellar vs. the V10/V10L & V12 from Epic, I see things like a greater, more rounded sweep on the bow of the Stellars, a sharper stern (vs. the flat stern of the V10), different bailer, and there's more secondary stability to the hull (and some variation in length/width). Of course, the deck, foot plate, & cockpit are significantly different as you noted.

Thanks Wally. That's exactly what I had heard as well. I was surprised that barrypaddle1 seemed to have knowledge that Epic had lost the case. As much as anything, I'm surprised that some paddlers still bang on at Epic about the dispute with Flying Eagle. In one corner we have a ski manufacturer who helps to innovate the sport that we all love, and also sponsors a LOT of ski races around the world. In the other corner we have a Chinese manufacturing facility. I'm definitely not saying that the latter is evil, but if fence-sitting I would think that most of us would give the benefit of the doubt to Epic.

Now, to show that I am unbiased here, I note that (i) I own a couple of Epics and (ii) the claim that Stellar copied Epic just does not seem like it can be right to me. There is zero similarity across any of their boats. I think that Epic was always going to be pissed off at any manufacturer that ended up in what Epic saw as "their" purpose built manufacturing facility. So, Epic can claim that Stellar is perhaps benefiting from technology / plant that Epic helped develop, but there can't be any suggestion that Stellar is using Epic molds or antyhing of the like. Personally, I think that Stellar is clean in this dispute. Epic and Flying Eagle had a falling out, Epic vacated the Flying Eagle facility and Stellar moved into what was then a vacant facility. One way to look at it is that everybody wins - Epic is still producing great boats and with Stellar we now have another high quality boat to choose from.

As we have discussed earlier in this thread, other manufacturers certainly have flopped Epic boats. Again, opinions differ on flopping. I find it generally distasteful, but when I buy a boat (and I own a couple of Fenns along with my Epics) I am not just buying a hull shape. I am also buying an expectation of quality and after-purchase support should something unexpected go wrong. These are expensive toys after all. So for my money, I would not purchase a flopped boat.

I've paddled every Epic ski & owned 2 of them. I've also paddled every Stellar ski and owned 2 of those. Otherwise I have no association with either company, nor with anyone else in the sport/industry. I'm just an average, slow, midpacker, who loves downwind paddling.

However, my bullshit detector is ringing alarm bells reading some of these posts. If your only source of information on this topic was from Wally, you would think Epic was related to Mother Teresa, & Stellar is born of Satan. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story...

Greg Barton doesn't think Stellar copied any designs from Epic. He has been quoted stating that many times, including his own blog. here is the reference on this forum: www.surfski.info/forum/1-general/5635-fl...-to-every-story.html

It would be interesting to know exactly what Wally measured. As many others who are familiar with both Epic & Stellar have noted, there is no similarity in plan outlines, lengths, or widths. L/B ratios are obviously different, as are the bottom shapes & rocker. they also paddle & steer very differently, and they have very different "seats", and humps.

As far as innovation goes, surely the small Stellar SES is the most innovative design we have seen in the last 5 years. relative stability vs speed for a smaller paddler, and that terrific foot plate system.

and finally, did Flying Eagle actually 'lose' the litigation? Still searching for the reference, but I recall that enforceable orders were made to the effect that Epic had to pay Flying Eagle the moneys owing, allegedly the reason Flying Eagle took possession of the moulds in the first place, and Flying Eagle had to release all property belonging to Epic.

To quote Greg Barton's blog again: "Nobody wins in a legal settlement". That may be correct, but it appears Epic certainly won the PR fight.

No idea if Stellar copied Epic but even if the case I personally see this as a bad reflection on Epic. I have owned new Epics and Stellars and if Stellar is a copy then it just shows how much Epic got it wrong! Finish is about the same with both brands but from my experiences Stellar are better built, mostly better engineered/designed and paddle much better than the Epics I had (V10 and V12).

SkiChampeenNOT wrote: I've paddled every Epic ski & owned 2 of them. I've also paddled every Stellar ski and owned 2 of those. Otherwise I have no association with either company, nor with anyone else in the sport/industry. I'm just an average, slow, midpacker, who loves downwind paddling.

As far as innovation goes, surely the small Stellar SES is the most innovative design we have seen in the last 5 years. relative stability vs speed for a smaller paddler, and that terrific foot plate system.

and finally, did Flying Eagle actually 'lose' the litigation? Still searching for the reference, but I recall that enforceable orders were made to the effect that Epic had to pay Flying Eagle the moneys owing, allegedly the reason Flying Eagle took possession of the moulds in the first place, and Flying Eagle had to release all property belonging to Epic.

To quote Greg Barton's blog again: "Nobody wins in a legal settlement". That may be correct, but it appears Epic certainly won the PR fight.

I would like to help you clarify by listing some chronological facts:

1. Flying Eagle says to Epic they have to increase production prices with 25%.
2. Epic says this is not going to fit the business model we will have to find a new place to manufacture.
3. Epic rents space and declared they want to make their own factory
4. Epic asks Flying Eagle for final invoice.
5. Flying Eagle sent an invoice that exceeded 5 times the amount Epic would normally have to pay. Epic's accountant sent estimation of Epic's own calculations demanding that Flying Eagle gives the normal price.
6. After no verbal agreement about the final payment Flying Eagle locked all the space with moulds and stock and Epic filed law suite.
7. Epic rebuilt a new factory from scratch.
8. After 2 years court case was resolved and court ruled Epic had to pay the amounts that Epic's accountant had proposed at the very start.
9. Flying Eagle started their own kayak brand with the intention to "bankrupt Epic" quoted one of Flying Eagle owners.
10. Flying Eagle made their first surfskis which resembled V10 in overall look with facelift on deck parts and using some of their rowing boats fittings.
11. There was some outrage from loyal Epic fans and Flying Eagle stopped the manufacture of initial models and started making their own designs in attempt to improve their PR fail.
12. Epic moved on and created a number of new models including the game changing V8 (which to me was the biggest innovation in surfski in the last 5 years) which has grown the sport more than any other surfski created by any other brand. This boat has sold 30-50 times more than any Flying Eagle model anywhere in the world.
13. Flying Eagle created their first double surfski (the first boat they had no reference to base their design on) which was nicknamed in Germany "the submarine". There are a number of design flaws (I will not clarify so I don't help them get it right) but the main reason is that no one in Flying Eagle knows anything about surfski not do they ever paddle one. Yes the hulls are efficient and stable on flat water but surfski is a boat that has to find a balance between performance and ability to deal with all sorts of weather conditions.
14. Current Flying Eagle production of kayaks is about 30-40 boats per month with production capacity of 500 boats per month if there is demand and because of the initiation of this project they lost a major market share form their core business - rowing boats.

I hope it helps.
Cheers
Boyan

Now let's not get all crazy here guys, especially if somebody has the bullshit meter out. Agreed that Stellar looks to be a well made small market ski. If one of their rides works for you - awesome. But, "the most innovative design in five years"? "Better engineered and paddle better than Epics"? How are we measuring this? I am not aware of any Stellar ski being anywhere near the pointy end of any major ski race ever in Australia, South Africa or the USA. In Australia, perhaps you see a handful at a given race, but no more than that. Not what you would expect from, "the most innovative deign in 5 years". Perhaps that award goes to the Fenn Swordfish, which is revolutionizing the sport?

Point is - great if you have found a ski that really works for you. Most of us will always be searching. But if you are going to make the sort of claims that are being made about Stellar, show us the results or, in the alternative, the numbers on the start line. For instance, very few of us can really paddle a V12 - but it has won Molokai three years in a row. Can't ignore that. The Swordfish will make up perhaps 1/3 of a downwind start line. Can't ignore that.

Boyan:

Is Flying Eagle making skis under a pseudonym? I have never seen a review for a "Flying Eagle" ski?

Just wondering.

Thanks

There has been some significant races where Stellar paddlers and boats have done well,not to mention all the local races where regional paddlers are enjoying Stellar boats worldwide.
At this years Molokai 2012, Tim Altman placed 10th in an Stellar SEL, Matt O'Geary placed 16th. An SE2 was paddled also. My friend Richard Germain of Canada paddled an SEL as well and had his best time ever with no capsizes. Richard is a mid pack racer and has done the Molokai 4 times. Stellar was the one of the Major Sponsors of the Molokai along with Epic.
Reid Hyle placed 18th in the US Surfski Championships in an SES ultra. Reid along with 2 to others crushed the Blackburn Record, the biggest race on the East Coast of the US.

Wesley Echols, SurfskiRacing.com and Stellar Northeast