I am glad to report that the hype is clearly unfounded. Resolutes are extremely expensive, and if they made such a huge difference we would suddenly see crews from poorer countries, colleges, and clubs unable to compete with their richer competitors. As things stand now, poorer clubs still have to cut corners, but the difference is usually not huge. The better crew will usually prevail, even if it is not rowing in the best equipment. A two length difference, however, would be virtually impossible to overcome.
The last technological breakthrough of this magnitude which we have seen in this sport was the introduction of the hatchet blade. But in the case of hatchets, they were no more expensive than an old macon blade. While the poorer clubs took longer to buy hatchets as they replaced their old blades, they nevertheless could buy hatchets as part of the normal equipment replacement. But buying a shell that costs twice as much as some other popular brands would be prohibitively expensive and would condemn some clubs to perpetual mediocrity. I welcome innovation in this sport. I am only worried about an innovation that will be so prohibitively expensive that poorer clubs (the majority) will simply not be able to compete.
I watched Orange Coast race in its Resolute at Henley. It was the first time I had seen the boat, so I biked alongside the race against Eton. It was a close race, but Eton prevailed. Orange Coast looked reasonable, and it would be hard to believe that given any other shell it would have been wiped out by Eton. I could see no sign of a two-length advantage.
The Resolute shell was quite interesting, though. It did not decelerate as much between strokes, so it must feel quite different to row in. While not decelerating as much is certainly a good thing, it does indeed make the catch harder to lock, and so I imagine would be more difficult to get accelerating during the drive as well. I know that some crews can handle this, and they would prefer to row in a Resolute. For others, this might be uncomfortable, and rowing in another boat would actually be faster.
My novices ask me "what's the best boat?" My answer is that it depends. Most international-class crews seem to prefer the Empacher. Empachers are fast, if expensive, but they are not right for everyone. Before expending that much money for them, it is important to ascertain if having one will really make a difference. If you are a rich club, then get one and put in on your racks - someone will be able to use it and if not it can sit there and wait until next year. But most of us are not that fortunate.
Empachers have little rudders. They are not meant to steer, because they are designed for 2000 meter straight courses where the cox only needs to do minor adjusting. If a club trains on a river where steering is necessary, then either forget about it or put on a bigger rudder (which would defeat the purpose of the boat's design, though). Empachers are also more difficult to set and not as durable as some boats. So some crews may be very uncomfortable in them, and if they are being shared by more than one crew or are getting reasonably heavy use even by only one crew, then they will not remain in good racing condition like some brands will.
For most college crews, then, an Empacher would be an extravagance. There are other hulls which can be used to achieve just as much speed, and which would probably be better suited to the average (even good) college or club crew.
In the US, my brand of choice would definitely be a Vespoli. These are durable boats made by a reputable company, and they go quite fast. There are several hull shapes - I guess the main difference is which one the crew in question prefers. For a program without unlimited resources and with boat-sharing, the standard ultralite mold is just fine.
A Vespoli shell is a cousin of the British brand Aylings. Aylings is as commonplace in Britain as Vespoli is in the US, and the two shells are used for similar purposes. However, it is interesting to note the difference. Both the standard molds are descended from the old British company Carbocraft (now defunct). In their day, Carbocrafts were exceptional boats, and the sport owes Carbocraft for the breakthroughs the company made in carbon-honeycomb shells. The problem, of course, was the wooden supports inside the shell tended to rot from the inside. Most Carbos still in service today are pretty sad. Carbocraft's agent in America was Mike Vespoli, and in the mid-1980s he started to produce boats on his own. He kept the basic design, but improved the construction techniques. He now makes several hull shapes (I even rowed in a "Vespacher" in college - an Empacher hull design constructed by Vespoli using Vespoli materials and techniques), but his standard shape is the most versatile.
On the other side of the pond, Aylings bought out Carbocraft's British operations. I have personally been displeased with the development there. Mostly, Aylings does not seem to understand how to mold a boat. Aylings boats get soggy after three years of normal use, if not faster. This is not a recommended boat to buy - although cheap and relatively durable and easy to repair, it does not have a long shelf life, and averagely rich boat clubs might be stuck with some on their hands for a while.
A good British alternative is Janousek. I understand why these never caught on in the US. The only ones I had ever seen before moving to Britain reminded me of porcellin bathtubs in shape and weight. I was surprised when I got to the UK to find that they weren't that way at all. Then I came across some older versions which certainly were. Obviously, this company got its act together, but too late to overcome its bad reputation in the US market. Janouseks are more expensive than Aylings, about as durable, and certainly age better. Like an Aylings, they can take lots of use (provided they are cared for properly), but unlike an Aylings they hold their shape for a long time. The problem is, though, that they are much harder to set than Aylings, and not good for most college or club crews. A reasonable college should have no problems, and nor should a respectable second eight by racing season. Other than that, though, crews would be happier and better off in a more stable boat.
One word of caution about a Jani, though - the metal rudder usually found on the 8+s tends to break off randomly, due to poor quality metal.
Raymond Sims makes good racing boats, and he is especially good at taking into account custom preferences, should a club have any. His coxswains' seats tend to be some of the most uncomfortable around, and his experiments in rudder mechanics don't always make sense (yes, Ray, I still remember the Everard). I have also been pleased with Eton Racing Boats' Phoenix desing, although like a Jani it is difficult for many crews to set.
If a British club has a chance to buy a Vespoli from a visiting American crew which has shipped one here for Henley, I'd recommend it. It would probably too expensive to import.
America also has some other fine boat builders. Many people swear by Schoenbrod, a company which made early strides producing composite boats and which now touts the Dirigo. I don't really have much experience with Dirigos - except to note that very few top collegiate programs seem to own any. I have inspected them but never rowed in one.
The most beautiful boats I have ever seen are made in New Hampshire by Graeme King. Hand-made wooden boats are beautiful, and for the small boats are not uncommon. But King makes racing 8+s - all hand-made, all out of wood. Looking at a boat that big made in that way is a joy. Kings go fast, too. But they are extremely fragile (as expected given their material and thin-ness), and are precarious to set. Every so often they surface in top programs. A few years ago, King started experimenting with placing the fin (fins, actually), in unconventional places along the hull. Crews seemed to go fast in those boats, but I haven't noticed this innovation catch on with anyone else.
I have spent most of this article discussing eights, because buying an eight is quite an investment and has to be right for so many different needs. The smaller the boat, the more variety there is. When buying a single, it is a matter of personal preference. The single scull I have been happiest with was a Kaschper, a Canadian make. It was ultra-lightweight (designed for lightweight women, actually) and worked for me (once I changed the shoe size to something a lot larger). But that was a personal feeling. I'm not sure I could recommend any particular brand of scull to anyone.
So, now that I have discussed eights, which one should be used? If a program has the luxury of having several eights, buying a new one every so many years, then it should not be in a rush to use its best eight. Every time a boat gets used, it ages. Since the idea is to go fast in the racing season when it counts, then the boat used in the racing season should be in the best possible condition. Sometimes the best boat is also not the ideal boat for a given crew. If a crew is not up to snuff - even if it is during the racing season - it might actually go faster in a more stable boat. Even if a crew is up to snuff, it might still go faster in a theoretically slower boat. Every crew is different. That's why the big programs will often own several equivalent boats of different makes, so that when the crew gets set it can take its pick. As an undergrad, I even switched boats in the middle of racing season in three of my four years (Schoenbrod to Vespoli, Vespoli to Schoenbrod, and Vespacher to Vespoli).
Even small college and club programs can preserve their boats in this way, even if it means doing a lot of boat-sharing in the old boats. When the Wolfson women's first 8+ shell, the Sir Raymond Hoffenberg (a Janousek), turned three years old this past February, it had been used a grand total of barely more than three months and was appraised as new. When it was called into service, it was able and ready (aside from that damned metal rudder).
My advice: buy a boat which can flexibly serve the needs of your club. Think of who is going to use it. Does it need to be shared by crews of different levels or sizes? Can you afford to buy a boat which can be kept on a rack and only brought out for the racing season and other special occasions by crews of sufficient standard to use it, or will you need to have every boat you own available for constant use? When the boat you buy does get old, will it still be usable? Will it get old and start to fall apart quickly? If it is to get passed down from your top crew to your second boat, will those who use your second boat be able to handle it? Is it good value for the money?
And then there's a question I'll get to another time: do you own enough small boats? Even programs which race in eights need to stop and think here about the benefits of small boats for training.