1. Credibility

You should never trust fishing kayak reviews posted by an anonymous person, under alias, a user ID, etc. That review may have been created and published by an individual who’s involved in a business relationship with certain fishing kayaks manufacturers, distributors, or retailers. Such relationship can include being a member of a kayak fishing ‘Team’, and getting paid by the manufacturer to promote their product directly and indirectly – both in an overt and covert manner. In fact, such review may have been posted directly by an employee of a kayak company, if the website on which it was posted allows posting without full and true identity disclosure. Unfortunately, some websites featuring kayak reviews in great numbers encourage such anonymous postings, which in its turn spurs kayak manufacturers to compete among themselves in posting countless favorable reviews of their own products, and sometimes even post unfavorable reviews of their competitors’ products.
Generally, you should be aware that many participants in online kayak fishing discussion forums are affiliated with kayak manufacturers and vendors, but they seldom disclose their affiliation, and most of them use multiple online identities. Kayak fishing websites often encourage users to post under multiple identities, because it increases the activity on their website, and generates more ‘action’ and interest for visitors, and potentially more revenues from advertising.
In other words, only a kayak review stating the author’s full name and state is worth your attention. A review posted by a kayak dealer who fully disclose their identity may be worth your consideration, since that dealer buys the kayaks before offering them for sale, which goes to show that they put their money where their mouth is. That dealer may be biased, but theoretically they could resell other brands of fishing kayaks, so at least they are sincere in their recommendation, and possibly know what they’re talking about.

Good fishing kayak reviews need to be written by regular customers, and based on their personal experience with the product. A good, reliable fishing kayak review should be the product of an unbiased mind, as much as possible. Therefore, you should look for the author’s full name and state of residence, and preferably for pictures as well, if possible.
Unfortunately, certain websites who publish kayak reviews won’t allow posting pictures, yet they allow posting reviews under an alias, or a User ID that hide the true identity of the person who posted the review. Both things undermine these websites’ credibility to a point where nothing published on them may be trusted.

The credibility criterion also goes directly to fishing kayak reviews written by fishing and paddling magazine staff writers. You, the reader, should realize that such magazines depend on advertisers’ dollars to survive, and therefore would never publish a negative kayak review, nor would they even highlight serious design or manufacturing flaws. This is especially true for fishing kayaks made by companies that are known to spend big bucks on advertising. A typical flaw in such reviews is the assessment of the reviewed kayak as being both fast and stable, which in sit-in and SOT kayaks are in fact two contradictory terms, due to the laws of physics.
As for the writers themselves, they are sometimes affiliated commercially with certain kayak vendors, whether directly or indirectly.

As for reviews of fishing kayaks posted on a manufacturer’s or vendor’s website, the reader should obviously apply critical reading, and even try to see whether the individual who wrote the review isn’t a member of that business’ official kayak fishing team… Reading between the lines is always a good rule to follow.

2. Relevance

You should always ask yourself whether the review, or the perspective of the individual who wrote it is of any relevance to you personally. Some fishing kayaks may get enthusiastic reviews by people who have fishing styles that are totally different from yours, and benefit from a physical condition and skills that are considerably different from yours.
For example, a kayak fisherman of small stature and light weight has a noticeable advantage in using kayaks for fishing, compared to bigger and heavier kayak fishermen. When fishing from kayaks is considered, age and physical condition also play a critical role in the overall user experience.
Some flats kayak fishermen in the South use their fishing kayak just to get from one spot to another, and fish standing in the water once they get there. If you don’t like wading, or if you fish in deeper water, or if you’re planning to take your kayak on long fishing trips, a review from such a kayak angler might not be relevant to you.
Senior kayak anglers should be particularly aware of such issues, as well as anglers who big and heavy, or suffer from a back condition that could increase their suffering from back pain.

Kayak anglers who fish in colder regions, where both water and air temperatures are less pleasant and favorable, and can even be hazardous, should take these factors into consideration, and try reading reviews contributed by anglers like themselves, who fish in such colder climates.

It is equally important to make the difference between a review written by a novice and one written by a seasoned kayak angler, sine such different writers’ perspectives are likely to be totally different, and may not even be applicable to you. For example, if you’re a beginning kayaker, or kayak angler, you shouldn’t necessarily be impressed by a review posted by another angler who’s been fishing from kayaks for years, as they have long ago passed the stage called ‘learning curve’ that you should be prepared to go through.

3. Breadth and Depth

By Breadth we mean some comparison with other types of fishing kayaks, other watercraft, etc., and by Depth we mean a long personal experience in kayak fishing in general, and with the reviewed kayak in particular. Preferably, the fishing kayak reviewer should have both prior experience in kayak fishing, and experience with other fishing kayaks and other small watercraft, if possible. However, there is also an interest in reviews by ‘first timers’, since such customers are less likely to be affected by their prior knowledge and personal experience, and could report their raw impression. If this is the case, the reviewer, or editor, should put the review in perspective. For example, a seasoned canoeist who’s never been in a kayak before could write an interesting review of his or her new fishing kayak, but they should also explain where they’re coming from.
Similarly, a seasoned kayak fishermen who’s never been in a W kayak prior to buying it, should also remember to put his experience and report in the right perspective.
In principle, an experienced kayak fisherman can write an interesting review, based on comparative study of different brands and models. Such quality would be enhanced if the writer has been fishing out of other small watercraft as well, such as canoes, dinghies, jon boats etc. A broader perspective that’s not restricted to human powered watercraft is potentially more interesting in view of recent advancements in motorizing fishing kayaks.

Of particular interest are all changes and improvements the reviewer may have introduced in their kayak, whether it’s the way they rigged it for fishing, or outfitted for other applications, or for use in particular environments. The reader can often learn a lot from such details, especially if the review includes pictures. In some cases, a good review can and should include a short movie showing the kayak, preferably in action.



For comparison purposes, you should know I am 6’3″, 220 pounds. I mess about in boats year round thanks to the mostly mild South Mississippi winter. I have circulation problems, and also a history of occasional low back pain. In consequence, while I love small paddle boats, until now every one I’ve owned and/or tried (quite a few) has presented me with serious drawbacks to their use and enjoyment. Sea kayaks cause my legs to fall asleep, thus rendering graceful exits not only impossible but occasionally highly embarrassing. Recreational kayaks’ large cockpits, while facilitating entry, exit, and leg movement, are at risk of swamping in the Mississippi Sound where I normally paddle, as are canoes. Sit on top kayaks are wet, and due to their high center of gravity typically have shallow seats which are even less comfortable than those of a sea kayak. All the aforementioned boats also create issues for my lower back after a few hours of paddling.

The W boat has effectively addressed all these problems. Within 5 minutes of taking delivery I was able to launch it at the local ramp and enter dry shod in my office clothing. A half hour of paddling later I exited the same way without even a damp, far less wet, rear end to show for it.My second trip I tried paddling standing up. After ten minutes of careful experimentation I was paddling around in 1 foot waves and 10 mph winds with no problem.

Since then I have had the boat out several times in 20 mph winds and 2.5 foot waves, albeit seated, without taking any water either head on to the waves, or traversing them laterally. Entering the local harbor with its flat protected water I have been able to paddle standing with no issues.

Paddling standing feels remarkably natural, and while the ability to do it is not why I bought the boat, it has been a revelation. There is a qualitative difference to paddling standing, perhaps due to evolution having designed us to take in and process the world from a vertical position. Beyond any qualitative difference the higher standing perspective is also useful to pick out channels, spot fish, retrieve snagged lures from low hanging branches, or simply to see over the marsh grass. Equally important the standing position furnishes a welcome break for one’s muscles and circulation.

The ability to stand also allows one to simply step in and out of the boat without wading in many situations. In the interest of objectivity I must note, however, that one will have to wade if confronted with a shallow shelving beach. Steep banks, boat ramps, finger piers and the like allow one to remain absolutely dry while embarking and disembarking.

The high seat and split hulls so far have kept waves from entering the cockpit. I have now been out without shipping a drop in waves I know would have swamped my 9′ Critter SIK, and which would have been problematic in my 14′ [brand name] SIK.

The same high seat which raises one about 14 inches higher than one’s seat in a SIK necessarily increases one’s torso’s windage. Fortunately, the Wavewalk’s seat is actually a long center bench, almost five feet in length. By sliding fore and aft one can effectively eliminate the boat’s tendency to weathercock due to windage on almost every course. Thus, the Wavewalk is actually less affected by wind than a lower profile SIK, at least one – like the Wavewalk, that has neither skeg nor rudder.

The ability to slide fore and aft also allows one to access the storage in the four (4) hull tips while under way. This was for all practical purposes impossible in any of my other kayaks and canoes. It also allows one to lift the boat’s bow to take on waves, or to facilitate landing and exiting with dry shoes by raising the bow to slide ashore a little distance before grounding
I do not have a GPS, but the boat feels fast for its size. I have been unable to compare it to other paddle craft because – being late November – there are none. This alone is a testament to the Wavewalk’s user friendliness.
I waited a long time to purchase the boat due to its differentness, the lack of dealers where I could try it out, and a few unfavorable reviews (very much the exception) out there on the web. Having used it a few times now I think the few unfavorable reviews resulted from the reviewers’ lack of familiarity with the boat. Paddling the Wavewalk feels very different from a normal yak, in some ways more like riding a horse or bicycle. In this connection the manufacturer calls one’s normal paddling posture the “riding” position, a very apt description. Additionally, one leans into turns, not out as in a traditional hull, and the more experienced one is as a paddler, the more off-putting this feels when one initially experiences it. As one grows accustomed to the boat and its stability characteristics it all starts to feel natural and predictable.

If the boat has a drawback it is its weight. 56 pounds is a lot for a 10’6″ boat. Still, its short length makes it easier to pick up than larger boats of equal weight. Additionally, its twin hulls allow one to center oneself between them when moving it on a dolly, just like pushing or pulling a wheel barrow ( In this connection my dolly was easily modified to accomodate the Wavewalk in 30 seconds by attaching a PVC cross piece with a bungee cord). I think the extra weight is primarily due to the heavily reinforced bench seat, and is probably a good thing inasmuch as it reflects the boat’s heavy duty quality construction.

I now have no reason not to paddle, and have been out each weekend since getting the boat. I am being careful since due to the cold water I have not been able to practice reentry techniques, but the website shows that re-entry is more easily accomplished than in a standard SIK. I look forward to some less extreme weather to try out the boat in “normal” ocean conditions.

No boat is perfect, and the Wavewalk, as a forerunner of what will hopefully be a fleet of progressively refined and specialized designs, may be capable of improvement. I wonder for example whether an inch or two more width in the hulls would not increase stability and decrease draft, and whether a few inches of rocker would decrease resistance. The answer is I don’t know, and that any design change is a compromise with costs as well as benefits. What I do know is that the Wavewalk has made a great improvement to the quality of my boating life, and – as described above – has a number of unique, useful, and enjoyable attributes. Try it, but be careful, you may just find you have to have one.

If you are on the Mississippi Gulf coast and would like to try mine out, shoot me an email at jeremydeisler@gmail . I’ll be happy to take you paddling.

Scott tells: -”I paddled the Maple river in nice calm waters with good depth, my Pepsi was riding securely in front of me along side my camera.”

Well, if you can keep a soda can securely on your kayak’s deck without using a cup holder while you’re paddling down a sinuous river, it says something about your boat’s primary (initial) stability…

Jeff writes: -”The brands I’ve been using are “Fishbites” (Carr Specialty Baits, St Augustine, Florida) and the more widely distributed “Gulp” (Berkley). They are very different in composition, but achieve the same purpose for me: live bait results without the hassle of storing or keeping bait alive in my W. Whenever I’m fishing saltwater flats, both products are onboard and ready to catch fish.”



When an adhesive’s label says it bonds plastics it normally doesn’t mean Polyethylene.

3M is offering a an adhesive called 3M Scotch-Grip TM 4693 H Plastic Adhesive, and the company states it works for various plastic materials, Polyethylene included.

We tested this product and found that indeed it bonds with Polyethylene, and apparently a little better than other adhesives we know.
However, in our opinion the bonding is not sufficiently strong to allow use in structural repairs or for attaching accessories to a Polyethylene kayak, except maybe a fish finder, a decal etc., which are not required to support weight or resist even weak pulling forces at any time.

This adhesive could be used to seal rivet and bolt holes above waterline (E.G. with carry handles, rod holders, eyelets etc.). We would not recommend using it for sealing holes below waterline because we’re against drilling holes in kayak hulls below waterline in any case…

We would not recommend to use it for fixing cracks anywhere in the hull, and as far as filling gashes (such as those created by oysters) we don’t see the benefit of it, and we don’t see how the adhesive would stay in its place if it had to resist abrasive forces.

All in all, we found that common, general purpose adhesives such as the popular ‘Goop’ perform reasonably well too in such light duty tasks.

In sum, this adhesive cannot replace ‘hard’ methods such welding, riveting and bolting, but it can be useful in other ways.