Anchoring with a CQR

[DaveNTL]

Re: Curious.

My anchoring technique is essentially the same as you describe.

It has been used in every kind of ground and weather available from the Canadian border down to Florida. I have seen F8 once on the gauge in a thunderstorm at anchor, and lots of F5-6's. I estimate I have anchored 500 times in the last 3 years.

I have a 35kg CQR, all chain, I always snub it - on an 11 ton, 38 foot motorsailer i.e. lots of windage. I tend to use the mizzen reefed to keep her from yawing about at anchor if the wind is strong.

I have a Delta as a second anchor and a Danforth as a kedge - only used the kedge a few times in Georgia creeks. Never used the Delta.

I have dragged once, in grass, in Nantucket harbor, in calm weather and little tide movement after it had sat happily all night.

I was so surprised that I actually thought the yacht next to me was heading out until I did a double-take when I realised he couldn't be moving out when his anchor was still out and the skipper was on the roof drinking coffee! Thats the price of over confidence or familiarity breeding contempt.

My conclusion is I that couldn't have a better anchor and I hope my Delta is as good. It might be better, because if I used it I'd be less relaxed and therefore less likely to make a mistake.

 

[jimbaerselman]

Re: Curious.

[ QUOTE ]
Please, responses to anchoring with a CQR only, thank you.

[/ QUOTE ] Perhaps you should have ticked off ladyjessie then, for slagging off a 'modern' anchor based on one observation of someone probably using a very questionable anchoring technique?

 

[LadyJessie]

Re: Curious.

I think I can handle a bit of ticking off, Jim. But if you read my comment, I was not “slagging off” the modern anchors. They are probably just as good as a CQR. What I was commenting on were the unreasonable claims that has been made by their designers and marketers that they are so good that technique is irrelevant. Claims like “sets anywhere anytime” gives the anchoring novice the wrong and potentially dangerous message. As the posts above shows, how you set an anchor is far more important than anchor design. Anyone with a different message is trying to delude you.

 

[trouville]

Re: Curious.

Ive read through posts hear and i think there great!I say that becouse my laptop was struck by lightning and wont now connect to the internet so im useing a very old spare and its very hard to read post as i have to scroll back and forth

I just want to say that the CQRs never let me down and id never be without one albeit just a small 25lbs one I want to mention my Danforth which is my main anchor cos i like it and it hold well.

As for weed i have had succsses with a fisherman but it seems best in heavy weed as the weed itselfs well planted and not easy to tear away so holding depends on the bottem but also the weed!For me at least so far.

When i had my old boat which was a 40 footer i think i would have needed a very very heavy fisherman to anchor to it with full confidence,now with only 2.5 tons to hold my anchors can manage but with 10 tons plus and far more windage perhaps if enough chains laid out a fisherman might work

One point about the fisherman its to easy to wrap the anchor chain around the flukes or rather "a" fluke and end up laying to a heavy weight and chain.Thats happend to me twice!! The first time it was blowing not to bad or long thankfully or i could well have found myself on the sand that night and its not that easy to kedge off!

Ive seen boat blown ashore that couldent get off then it could be expensive!

Wish it would stop raining!Turkey sounds a very nice place to be just now but perhaps to hot in the long term??

Ate carre de pork aux quetshes (pork with plumbs)and drunk a heavy cote du rhone then the rain dident seem so bad from a crowed cafe.Im very thankful i havent got a time table to keep!!Some that want to get to the med are more than a bit fed up with the rain this year

Good post and stick with the CQR they really are a very good anchor never ever let me down i just have a problem with the swinging head at times so i use my Danforth which once its fangs are down dosent try to bite me anymore while i stow it

Ive just read page 2!Its a real pain reading post sooner i can get a replacement laptop the better i may have to take a tgv to nice where there seems to be a good second had shop IBMx40 420 euros?? For example? First have to put a plastic cup out with a sign please help??

I agree exactly with simon cr that exactly how i do it i let the chain out untill the anchor touches then as i drift back i lay the anchor and chain letting it pull up as the chain goes out,then get the motor going and give a pull though mostly i push the main out if theres any wind to back it in.My CQR has always dug in.

As i said i use a danforth of course that never lays on its side its large sharp fangs dig in.I also go below to pour another glass of good French wine or in summer(when will it start) i pour a white sparking wine and look about then finnish the anchoring.If its blowing and a swell comeing in i do things a bit quicker!But never so fast that the boat lays side on to the swell.I still pause to let the beast dig in before putting out full scope

Tea should only be drunk untill 8.30am!Water can be bad for you even when boiled!

 

[bluedragon]

Re: Curious.

"Tea should only be drunk untill 8.30am!Water can be bad for you even when boiled!"

...trouble is that if I swap the tea for vin rouge then I fall asleep before the CQR has dug-in /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif ...though as I'm now using a Delta as the working anchor, maybe I'll re-think the choice of beverage /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Seriouly, it's a bit difficult to totally dissociate the topic of anchor choice from technique. As a previous (and still occasional) CQR user I do know that they need a bit more time to "bite", but I have also found that once they're in, they're in, in spite of what the tests lead one to believe. I do also believe that the modern anchors probably hold better and set more easily, and when the costs come down I'll probably try one...but with the right technique CQRs are holding thousands of yachts quite safely around the world as we speak, so long as the owners don't just chuck them over the bow and think that's it.

 

[jimbaerselman]

Re: Curious.

[ QUOTE ]
I was not “slagging off” the modern anchors.

[/ QUOTE ] Point accepted - I was looking at the paragraph rather than the sense of your whole post.

I completely agree your thesis that the nut on the helm is the most important part of the anchoring equation. Only if he is performing well does the anchor type come into play.

 

[heerenleed]

What a relieve!

I can't tell you what a relieve your comment is! After having read all the posts and tests which invariably told the CQR off as out-of-date I was wandering why we never have a problem with our 65 lbs CQR on Heerenleed. I almost started to think it must be my ignorance or sheer luck. Maybe we have got it right after all.
Thanks again
cheers

 

[GMac]

Re: Curious.

[ QUOTE ]
As the posts above shows, how you set an anchor is far more important than anchor design. Anyone with a different message is trying to delude you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or you have read a post written by someone who has never tried a new one, as there major big advantage is they do outset most others. It is well proven fact but only one part of a anchor purchase decision.

Note - no specific designs mentioned. Yes I sell anchors, inc CQR's, but none of you have any idea who I am. It's staying that way on purpose and always has been. No associations, agendas or sales pitchs, the way it should be here. Only a well informed opinion.

Note 2 - nothing wrong with CQR's if set-up and used well.

I do completely agree with your “sets anywhere anytime” comment, it could easily give the wrong impression to a new boater. It should be made to go away.

Here's a thought. Buy one and the first time it doesn't set ping them for a pile of dosh and chuck it in the cruising kitty /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif Could be easy money if done right.

 

[LadyJessie]

Re: Curious.

[ QUOTE ]
written by someone who has never tried a new one, as there major big advantage is they do outset most others. It is well proven fact

[/ QUOTE ]

I risked my reputation last night by bringing up "the anchor question" in a well frequented yottie bar in Orhanyie, Turkey, with three fellow cruisers. We had three CQR's and one Bugel among us, which is a fairly typical population of cruising anchors in the Med. Our best estimate was that we had done something like 6000 anchoring days between us and we had collectively dragged 10 times. Now, are you going to tell us that another anchor design could have significantly (meaning enough to spend money) improved that performance?

 

[Richard10002]

Re: Curious.

Notwithstanding what I have said previously, having had 10 attempts to anchor in thick weed and sand in P. Andraitx, Mallorca, when we set once because the anchor found a small patch of weed free sand and, having been moved on by The *&^%ing Police, we have sat on it not dug in for 2 nights in light winds.

I may be doing it wrong, but where we are there isnt room to let it drag much until it finds a bite, so I'm now going to buy a ROCNA ... whatever anyone says, and however hard it is to get one.

I suppose I'll have to use the Hi-Blade Plough, (CQR Copy??), for the rest of the summer and get a Rocna delivered to Malta.

Cheers

Richard

 

[ChrisE]

Re: Curious.

Ah, now you know why we have a Spade /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Seriously, your expereinces of anchor not setting in weed and hard sand mirror ours and with no electric windlass, taking 5 or 6 attempts to set the CQR became too much like hard work. Once set the CQR was as safe as houses but we just got fed up with arriving late at an anchorage and then spending an hour or so looking for a place where the CQR would set.

The Spade just sets, even in weed (much to my surprise and delight) although I'm sure that in the pathological case of thick kelp it would struggle.

Best of luck with your Rocna.

 

[craigsmith]

I find it ironic to see such blind faith in something, and the desire to defend it to the point where it is necessary to start, unsolicited, such a thread...

...when, in the space of the same thread, there are a number of reports of the exact problems which drive the development of new and better technology. Most from these same Luddites. /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

My conclusion is that some simply exhibit extremely good brand loyalty and have a lower "bar" than others for what constitutes acceptable performance. In that multiple attempts to set the anchor, and the odd dragging incident, is quite acceptable.

Others expect more. From our enquiries over the last few days, some typical comments...:

"The CQR is driving me crazy. It has always been a good anchor for us, but the typical bottom was mud or loose sand. Here in Mexico we encounter packed sand more often than not. I find myself having to haul up the chain and try resetting on average 3 times in any given anchorage."

Yeah yeah we know Mexico isn't in the Med. But actually the bottom is quite comparable. Still...

"Last year a friend of mine here in malta purchased one of your anchors to replace his CQR, a wise move."

And more Med stuff...

"You can't sell a CQR anchor for 1 euro anywhere in the Med. No one wants them."

/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Just thought I'd bring back a bit of balance. C'mon GMac you can do better than this /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[jimbaerselman]

Re: Curious.

6,000 anchoring days, 4 people, that's 1,500 anchoring days each. A very busy sailor may visit 150 places a year, but some of those will be marinas . . . OK, so the average of your group was 10 years or more experience of full time living aboard, predominantly using anchors.

With only ten drags - say, less than two drags each.

Obviously, you all test your anchor set very thoroughly using full astern before going to bed. Good technique.

What you didn't mention was how many efforts it took to dig the anchors in each time. And this is the point of improvement claimed by modern anchors compared to older anchors.

I actually count failed 'sets' as drags . . . puts a different light on it?

As for dragging comparisons, my test bed was a fleet of 50 yachts mooring stern/bows to for an average of 120 days a year over 15 years. That's quite a bit of hooking. Anchor set was checked by nervous flotilla leaders. Need to re-set was common with CQR and Bruce, rare with flat anchors.

As I've mentioned before (excluding setting problems), the drag rate of CQR and Bruce compared to Britany and Danforth (we had mixed equipments in the fleet) was so high that we re-equipped throughout with flat anchors of the same weight(1988 or so).

The limitation of flat anchors (a liability to trip when pulled at a new angle) did not arise stern/bows to.

OK, this is only a 'bows to' case, but it was enough to make me discard my CQR when I bought Rapaz in 1997. We use it as a 'chum' to sink the stern line below the props of passing traffic . . . I'm beginning to think that was a big mistake . . .

 

[demonboy]

Re: Curious.

[ QUOTE ]
some simply exhibit extremely good brand loyalty and have a lower "bar" than others for what constitutes acceptable performance

[/ QUOTE ]

You just couldn't resist in the end, could you Craig?

I quite clearly started this thread as a 'this is my (limited) experience and this is my conclusion' as a new live-aboard. I also said I do not have the budget for a new anchor and perhaps I didn't make it clear that we inherited the CQR when we bought our boat. We didn't choose it, so I take personal offence to your comments. Your lashing out at potential customers will win you no favours.

We tried to find a Rocna in Bodrum/Marmaris last year, couldn't, and so spent our budget on other things for the boat. Since then we've made do with our CQR, without incident. Nothing to do with brand loyalty, nothing to do with a 'lower bar'.

To make up for this though please could you ship a Rocna over to Turkey for us to try out? I would happily give it a go and, if successful, shout from the rooftops on it's amazing performance within this forum and beyond. A new, inexperienced and clearly uneducated liveaboard singing your anchor's praises could be a good marketing spin. You could phrase it "idiot liveaboard who knew no better has suddenly seen the light".

Re-read my original post and ask yourself 'really, was he having a dig at modern anchor designs?'. I think you'll find the answer is no. And perhaps you'd like to re-read the subject of the thread. No mention of modern anchor designs there either.

Perhaps you could PM me for our postal address in Bodrum for that Rocna? We're back there end of July and could have it hanging over our bow in time for the autumn/winter season, which will be spent at anchor.

 

[FullCircle]

Re: Curious.

Hear Hear. Nice reply.

 

[Phoenix of Hamble]

Re: Curious.

well said...

Yet another unpleasant anchor thread.

I will never buy a Rocna anchor.... not because they aren't any good, I have no bloody idea whether it is any better than my current Delta without trying it.... its just that it is now impossible to discuss anchors on this forum in anything approaching a mature manner.... which is a sad loss to a powerful and useful support environment... and this is the only easy way for me to register my contempt.

Maybe a selection of the above contributors might like to reflect on the fact that I am unlikely to be the only one to hold that view.

 

[Barr Avel]

Re: Curious.

Morgana, I think the point is that the different types of anchors have been endlessly discussed, trials compared to real-life experiences, and all the arguments posted here have already been posted several times over. What else can be said about anchors in a "mature manner"?

Anyway I didn't see anything commercial in Craig's post...

Marc.

 

[demonboy]

Re: Curious.

But he didn't contribute to the subject in hand, 'anchoring with a CQR'. He just had a go at those of us who have never had the chance to try an alternative to it, thus turning this very pleasant thread into a nasty one. To be expected though.

 

[Chris_Robb]

Re: Curious.

Also try the Manson Supreme - Its great and looks nicer!

 

[LadyJessie]

Re: Curious.

[ QUOTE ]
OK, so the average of your group was 10 years or more experience of full time living aboard, predominantly using anchors.

I actually count failed 'sets' as drags . . . puts a different light on it?


[/ QUOTE ]

Jim, I always enjoy exchanging ideas with you.

Yes, I knew that it was a mistake to admit to our number of anchoring days. It kind of dates us, doesn't it? You are very correct that we have been sailing for a lot longer than ten years and we all come from countries where anchoring is the norm when mooring (thus neither of us are British). But we have decided to not admit to our real age. We feel that could seriously diminish our chances of getting on the Alinghi team next time around.

I will not comment on your second point. Let's drop that. We would just get back to the "setting anywhere everytime" argument and I think we have covered that extensively.

Hope to see you sometime in the Med for a nice refresher aboard the Lady.