seasons.gif
V10 Rip-off? Print E-mail
User Rating: / 25
PoorBest 
Written by Rob Mousley   
Wednesday, 08 November 2006
ImageIn the last two years the surf ski market has seen a revolution in terms of ski design.  Skis have become more stable and faster.  In fact, fast, stable skis, with a single footwell and adjustable rudder pedals have become the norm.

 

How has this come about?  At least part of the reason is that Epic were prepared to invest heavily in R&D to design and develop the V10 surfski.  The very name gives a clue to the amount of effort that went into it - the V10 was the 10th version of the design

 

Surfski.info ran a story on how the V10 was developed - Epic was the first company ever to spend the money to CNC machine the plugs for hull and deck.  The single footwell drain was also an innovation, developed using new-age technology.  The story is on the website at: 

 

http://www.surfski.info/content/view/218/64/

 

And what did it cost?  Epic say that the hull and deck plugs alone cost just under R100 000 to create - the equivalent of about US$14,000.  Factor in the man-hours spent on CAD design, the development of the cockpit and the adjustable pedal hardware as well as the venturi, and you're looking at upwards of US$50,000. 

 

Since then Fenn Kayaks and Red7 have also developed fast, stable, single footwell skis.  (Red7 had their hulls tested by state of the art computer simulation systems at Intelligent Fluid Solutions in the UK.)

 

The overall result is that the surf ski community has benefited hugely: it used to be that if you wanted a top-end ski you had to have superlative balance - that's just the way it was.  Top-end ski = incredibly unstable ski.  This is no longer the case - what a pleasure - for everyone.

 

Protection

 

But companies like Epic cannot function without a measure of protection.  If other manufacturers are allowed simply to copy Epic's design, then Epic (or any other manufacturer) won't invest any more money in further development.  What would be the point? 

 

The end result will simply be that we'll never see any more innovation in surf ski design and we'll be paddling the same tired old designs in twenty years time.

 

Dean Gardiner, arguably the best surf ski paddler ever produced by Australia agrees. "There should be no rip-offs of skis," he said, "I'd like to see paddling's governing bodies ban the use of rip-offs in their events."

 

Unfortunately there are a few realities to be recognised.  Any manufacturer investing in development of a surfski proceeds in the knowledge that the manufacturing process makes his product inherently easy to copy.  He also knows that defending his copyright is a lengthy, costly and sometimes impractical process.  

 

Advantage Kayaks "Charger" Surf Ski

 

Surfski.info was sent some photographs of a ski that is being manufactured in Victoria, Australia by a company called "Advantage Kayaks".  The ski, called the "Charger" looks identical to Epic V10 - the distinctive shapes of foredeck, bow and especially the wide after deck are all there.  If fact it looks as though the company simply took a standard V10 and took moulds right off it

 

Image
Same bow

 

Image
Looks familiar?
 

 

Image
Even the rudder looks almost identical

 

Image
The V10's wide stern is unmistakeable

 

I contacted the company to ask them about the ski.  I asked for photos and the background to the ski's development.  Peter MacDonald sent back a brief reply:

 

"I am only a small 2 man operation and hope to make maybe 20 skis a year. So  I am supplying a local market only, and have no ambition to go any bigger. So at this stage I want to stay don't need to push my product into the market." (sic.)

 

Having received the photos (from elsewhere) I sent another email asking straight out whether the "Charger" was a copy of the V10.  I've not heard anything more.

 

Of course one can't be 100% sure from photos whether the ski is a copy, but:

 

  • From their website, Advantage Kayaks don't appear to have ever manufactured skis before.
  • Their first attempt at a ski looks exactly like the V10, down to the rudder shape.
  • They don't seem to want to comment on whether the ski is a copy

 

As for Advantage Kayaks hoping to make "maybe 20 skis a year", we've also heard that the Avalon Surf Life Saving Club has ordered 11 of the skis.  Does Avalon know that they may be buying a ripped off design?  [Editor: I have since heard from a very unhappy Brett Greedwood, captain of Avalon Beach SLSC.  He said, "I am disgusted by your unfounded comments in your article that Avalon SLSC has ordered 11 skis. We in fact have ordered none and wish you to clear this up along with your implications that we have been involved in replicating the V10 Ocean ski." 

 

We did attempt to confirm our facts by sending an email to the address on the Avalon website but unfortunately no-one replied until now.

 

Our unreserved apologies are therefore extended to Avalon SLS Club]
 

It's worth noting that Kayak Centre in Durban, South Africa produce the V10 under license from Epic.  Brian's Kayaks in Cape Town used to build a "Molokai" ski paying royalties for years to the Australian company that designed it.

 

What can one do about it and why should we care?

 

On the face of it this is a matter between Epic and Advantage Kayaks so why should we, the broader paddling community, concern ourselves?  Our point is that surfskis have evolved from "eye balled"  and hand shaped to CAD generated designs based on solid hydro dynamic science only because manufacturers believed that there would be an economic return on the required investment in research and development.  Clearly this will not be the case if making blatant copies of successful designs becomes a widespread practice.  It is therefore in our collective interest to actively discourage copied products.

 

Surfski.info is putting this information out in an attempt to report the facts of the situation.  We think the ski is a copy and - if indeed it is - we feel strongly that this should not be allowed to happen.

 

We encourage readers to:

 

  • Not to buy copies of products.
  • Ask Advantage Kayaks why their ski looks so much like the V10.
  • Encourage race organisers to ban participation by rip-off ski's

 

Hits: 8271
Comments (24)Add Comment
Rip off realities
written by Dale, November 08, 2006
GRP products are inherently easy to copy and defending copyright is costly and lengthy process. At the end of the day the best protection lies in the paddling community shunning rip offs. Ask yourself - Would you buy an obviously stolen radio for your car? - Is buying a stolen design that much different?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
surfski innovation????
written by john, November 08, 2006
If the Charger folks gave me this ski free of charge I would cut it in half!!! I want a REAL V10 not a shameless rip-off :upset
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Do I smell a bit of hypocracy here?
written by rumpster, November 09, 2006
What about all the European paddle designs? If people want to denegrate the ski copies, then maybe its time to look at all the paddle copies as well. How many of us can honestly say we use an ORIGINAL paddle. What's the point of looking only at skis, when we all use a paddle rip-off of one sort or another. Just asking....
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Hypocrisy?
written by robin.mousley, November 09, 2006
Good point - I have to admit, I use a blade which is a copy of a European design.

There are some manufacturers who make an original blade. Stand by for another article...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
The Fenn is also a copy!
written by wildrich, November 09, 2006
The ski that is paddled by 90% of surfski paddlers around the globe is a slight re-adjustment of a ski that was shaped nearly 15 years ago! Every manufacturer looks at what their competitors are doing. i.e. Red 7 came out with the single footwell now fenn & epic have it. The question should rather be what constitutes a copied design? If the boat is 20,30 or 40% altered from its original mould it can't be called a copy? Anyway these are big boys and they must resolve their problems accordingly. Imitation is the highest form of....,you know the rest. Peace out. See ya on the big blue
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
What is a copy?
written by robin.mousley, November 09, 2006
I think you'll always get imitation of some features like the auto-adjusting rudder lines and I don't have an issue with that. (Of course something innovative like that can be protected with a patent.) I do have an issue with taking a blatant copy of the whole hull - which gives the ski its performance.

And with the "charger" it appears, from the identical shapes of bow, forward deck, after deck, etc to be an obvious copy where the guy has literally taken a mould off a V10.

I think a good start would be to prevent obvious copies. This one looks like an obvious copy.

How to prevent it? Don't buy the product; let everyone else know that it's a copy and encourage them not to buy it.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Time to wake up
written by Trimbols, November 11, 2006
Blah blah blah what a pack of hypocrictical whingers you are ,if you supplied enough skis to the Australian market , this situation would not have occoured , for too many years Aussie paddlers have paid too much for poor quality skis from SA ,all i can say is too bad boys ,you played us for fools ,I can see why you think the charger is a copy however the quality of finnish and construction sets it apart (some times you have to look inside ),and by the way its made in Australia , with the full support of a local manufacturer,interesting how they can be produced localy for less than the imported product, must be the lack of middle men taking a cut along the way , i hope there are three more producers doing the same keeping jobs and money in our country .
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Time to wake up?
written by robin.mousley, November 11, 2006
>> if you supplied enough

We had the same issue in South Africa with the V10 - when they moved production to China, there was no stock to be had here. So what happened? A local manufacturer started making them UNDER LICENSE.
Instead of stealing the design - because that's what it is: theft - why not manufacture them under license?

Or better yet design your own. Australia has the most surf ski paddlers in the world after South Africa (and some of the best) - you can't say there's no market.
But this is a GLOBAL ISSUE, not South Africa v Australia (look mate - the bloody V10 isn't a South African design, it's American - with input from a South African).

Copying is BAD for the sport. Help stop it.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Flaming
written by Alain Jaques, November 11, 2006
I have removed two comments that added no value to the discussion. Please keep to the topic and keep politics out of it. :sigh
Alain.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by latman, November 12, 2006
Why don't you run a story on South African copies of Australian Spec ski designs !I have seen Hayden,Gibbons and Spectrum copies here in OZ how many more exist?? How many SA paddlers can say they never owned one Latman
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
copies, theft, borrowing,...
written by AlanC, November 12, 2006
I am a strong supporter of intellectual property right and as far as I am concerned, the people who put in all the effort to design, test, re-design and re-test products are a huge resource to the paddling community.

They are also the ones taking the big risks financial and otherwise with any new product or idea.

The issue of hull piracy has been around for a long time in flatwater, and outrigger and sea kayaks, and... Every time a new hull appears that has an advantage of some sort over its competition it becomes a target for imitations.

The same for paddles.

As a paddle sports coach, I see many training programs and coaching tools exploited the same way. Sadly, this appears to be the accepted standard to many participants in paddle sports.

Maybe those in the community who are concerned need to set up an anti-piracy movement and recognize / identify suppliers who have originals and / or licences.

I won't offer more than the idea...

Alan
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
SA HYPOCRISY
written by PARKSY, November 12, 2006
GUYS LETS BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES HERE IN SA HOW MANY AUSSIE SURF SKI,S HAVE WE COPIED FROM BURTON,S TO HAYDENS TO SPECTRIM,S.WE ARE THE WORST AND NOW THAT IT HAS HAPPENED TO ONE OF OUR DESIGNS WE ARE ALL UP IN ARMS.WHILST NOT AGREEING WITH KNOCKING OFF DESIGNS WE MUST ALL REMEMBER THE GREATEST COMPLIMENT A MANUFACTUERE CAN BE PAYED IS TO HAVE HIS DESIGNED KNOCKED OFF.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
SA hypocrisy?
written by robin.mousley, November 12, 2006
I'm glad you agree that knocking off designs is bad.

And that's the point of the article. It just happened that a company in Australia was the one to make what appears to be a blatant copy.

It's not a SA v Aussie thing.

If South African manufacturers are making copies of Australian skis then jeez, let's highlight that. COPYING IS BAD FOR THE SPORT.

And it can be done honestly - e.g. Brian's Kayaks making the Molokai under license.

SA Hypocrisy? I wrote the article and I don't feel like a hypocrite! I think the article highlights a problem that *should* be brought under the spotlight, especially now that ski design is no longer a one man in a garage hand-shaping exercise but requires big bucks to finance.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Constructive suggestions requested
written by robin.mousley, November 12, 2006
This debate seems in danger of becoming a hate-fest between Oz & SA. Let's keep that for the rugby field :-)

But all the comments we've had, flaming or not, have had a common theme. Everyone agrees that copying is bad.

AlanC made a great suggestion - instead of trying to identify manufacturers who have copied other's designs (which is difficult and gets everyone's blood boiling), can we rather identify those manufacturers who have put time and effort and money into original designs? We have stories on the site about Red7 & Epic, both of whom have broken new ground in terms of R&D.

This might encourage manufacturers to become "certified" as non-copiers. Then paddlers can make up their own minds where to buy their equipment...

What do you think?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
For your info
written by Trimbols, November 13, 2006
Just letting you know i have canceled my order for Letthemann paddle also the Bratcha 4 both made in SA Both blatant coppies, I will now be ordering an Aussie copy of both see ya
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Copied paddles
written by robin.mousley, November 13, 2006
If you had said "I've canceled my order for the copied Lettmann and Bratcha 4 to buy GENUINE EUROPEAN ones" I'd have said "great!".

But your saying that you're going to buy Australian copies instead means our article has not had the impact we were hoping for - that ALL copying is bad.

It also means that you seem to have a grudge against us as South Africans which completely misses the point.

I guess we can't please everyone!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Lets stay with the real issue
written by Dale, November 13, 2006
It is a little sad the way this discussion has degenerated. The article made a simple point that rip-off products are bad for the sport and should be discouraged (whether it be in South Africa, Australia or anywhere else). There are some good counter arguments such as the fact that copying is already widespread and forces manufacturers to ensure that their products remain competitive in terms of price, quality and service. What a pity petty nationalistic sentiments have clouded the issue.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Check Patent Law(s)
written by wildrich, November 13, 2006
If somebody has an idea he/she can patent that idea by proof of certified drawings or a working model. i.e. Because a legend eastern cape paddler did not patent his single footwell system he can not lay claim to it. Therefore Epic-Red7 and FennK can all use the single system without punishment. If Epic-Red7 and FennK have not patented their ski designs both locally and internationally, in a way what charger is doing is not against the law.(The same for Surf Lifesaving skis, European paddles etc.)I stand to correction, local patents cost around R10k without drawings and extras. Int. cost around $200k with hidden extras. Somebody must phone the following law firm to get the total low down. After that the article must be withdrawn.
http://www.bowman.co.za/
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
V10 re-engineering
written by Martin, November 14, 2006
In a nutshell, your work and business ethic will dictate what kind of operator you are.

The Charger V10 copy has had a portion of the top deck changed slightly and hints at the re-engineering angle of copying a ski, making a slight change and then marketing it.

I phoned the business to enquire about the ski price and was told they are not taking any (more?)orders for the charger. The comments at Advantage Kayaks hint at them being a bit embarassed about this commotion and attention.

If the ski was a new bona fide design I would think they would be only too happy to volunteer information about it....and take orders.





report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
CAD programs
written by Mako, November 18, 2006
Around 3 maybe 4 years ago a ski was sent to the USA from Cape Town for evaluation (May have been to Patrick Hemmens) To the local manufacturers surprise (Johan Loots) it was reported that the ski was already available in the USA. There was great consternation at the time regarding rip offs or copying and how it could have happened. Once the dust settled it seems that two people on either side of the Atlantic had sat down at their computers and using the latest, newly available naval architect design program (Read same CAD package) entered the same design criteria into the required boxes such as, paddlers average weight, overall ski length, width, seat distance from bow and other variables, closely enough so that very similar ski?s popped out when the enter button was pushed. Now I?m not sure of the exact ski model names but I think it was the HukiS1XA? To the West and to the East it was the PY Hurricane later renamed the PY Adjustor?

I?m not suggesting this is the case in the ?Charger? issue but it can, and has happened in many design fields and will happen more often as ?out of house? programs are used rather than the grizzly ?Waterman? from your local beach.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Keep your prices low and keep dropping t
written by AussieGazza, December 05, 2006
Welcome to the Global Economy! As long as new designs are produced they will be under price/performance pressure from copies. The Japanese became hugely successful at this. So what can the original manufacturer do? Well, keep prices as low as possible at the retail end and this will hopefully make it economically unviable to copy the product. Why do items that are so cheap to produce have such a large retail price? Because of greed! Keep the prices low and there is no advantage to buying a copy.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by Mark Bata, April 21, 2007
A copy is an exact replicate. If it has innovations and has been improved or altered, then its no longer a copy. Innovation should be encouraged so we always get the best product. Example is the venturi drain with the bulb by Red7.

Its now up to buyers to judge it has been an innovation or just an altered copy to benefit from another designer's original idea.

I use an original Brasca II paddle. This design has obviously been copied and innovated on. Even the adjustable shaft originally designed and used by Braca Sports has been innovated on.

The case of Advantage is different. It seems to be an exact copy. What can epic do now? Is there a governing body to protect their property?

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
California Paddler
written by John Dye, June 27, 2007
You get waht you pay for.

I used to race slalom kayaks in the 1980's. It was the same product protection issue there, only worse. It had been the standard for many years and probaly still is. The biggest form of flattery was when the other team would buy the winner's boats at the worlds, take them back to where ever and start pulling copies. I work in the design field - I see it all the time.

Where ever they are, the good manufacturers with the long view take a close look at the competition's products and then try to improve on them. other's just copy what seems to work. for example, Joe Sedavic Designed the first low volume slalom K1, called the Equipe in the mid seventies and it won the worlds. 6 months later everyone was training in warmed over Equipes. How many flat water designs are there that look like the Cleaver? I don't know who penned it, but it influenced designs for 15 years. It was a pretty good boat - so people copied it. It took a lot of head scratching to get beyond it. It's the same with any sport, and very little enforcement of intellectual property rights in sports that do not have the big dollars at stake.

Technically, if you change a few things on a Mako 6, it is something different, but if it still fits in the mould of the parent boat, well, it's pretty obvious where it came from.

It's great you raised the issue and we need to keep looking at it. innovators behind innovative boats like the S1a and the V10 (to pick 2) need to be recognized for the contributions they make to the paddling world. they are the making the big steps. It is natural that people will look at the winning boats and initially try to copy them until a new way to improve is found. it's what pushes the sport forward.

Folks who are selling blatent copies often have taken a few other shortcuts in construction too. And while they are spending time making the copies the innovators are moving onto the next big thing.

Like I said, you get what you pay for.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
First to produce a CNC manufactured ski?
written by Tom Mason, November 23, 2008
Just a historical correction regarding ?the first ski to be machined by CNC?.
You say in the intro to this piece that Epic were the first to do this.
Not so! I made two surfski models, designed on a computer, performance evaluated with software and CNC machined mould plugs, this was back in 1999.

These were the Tomohawk and the Scout Ski?s (I don?t claim that this was the first either, somebody may have beaten me to it?) but it was long before Epic made any ski?s. For me it was a part time hobby, the exercise was funded by Des Carr, the moulding and glass work was done by Colin Bell in Cape Town under the Cape Town Kayaks name. They were not a commercial success due to a myriad of other problems that are not relevant to this discussion.

I had been hand making ski?s since the 70?s and was asked by Des to design him a fast but stable ski and a very stable ski for beginners. We discussed methods and I proposed trying this method, he was game.

I designed the hulls in Prolines and ran them through the Michlet fluid flow analysis, also using its partner package Godzilla for tweaking the hulls drag coefficient. I then created the seats and final shape with the Rhino 3d design package. I then got a Cape Town 3D machining wiz to produce my tool path plan with Solid edge. I designed the cutting tool and had it made. We then machined the plug from high density polyurethane foam in lengths of approximately 1.2m long with locator teeth to ensure 100% accurate linking on assembly (done on a Cinch 25 CNC mill in "off time" to make it cheap).

With the first plug (the Tomohawk) a few errors crept in which spoilt its performance in the end but with the second model we got it 100% bang on and perfected the system.

We had plans to continue the range and keep on updating the designs, but in those days the market was very small and both Des and I were busy with our real careers and the previously mentioned problems crept in and forced the closure of the factory.

Surprisingly it was not extremely expensive! I still have videos, photos and the records of the entire process, it was a great learning exercise and great fun.

I showed these two models to Oscar in 2001 in the UK (after the world canoeing championships) and explained my development method to him, at his request I sent emails with photos and descriptions of the system I?d used, to Greg Barton, he was very interested and said they were developing their own designs.

The history of the surfski's development is an intesting subject with very many contributers, what many maybe dont realise, is that in the "old days" we mostly made our own ski's, copied good ideas and developed new ones for each PE-EL.

The little known "father" of all the current skis was the "Challenge Craft Ski" made in small numbers by Rob Welsh and Anton Erasmus - 6.5 m long, unitary footwell, venturi bailer - and that was decades ago!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3

Write comment
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
< Prev   Next >