Anchors. I hate to do this but...

[Pye_End]

A kedge is an anchor. It may or may not be smaller than the bower but it serves the same purpose, i.e. to attach the boat to the bottom.

If it makes you happy, where I said: 'Have yet to read of an owner who has been disappointed with a new gen anchor, but plenty disappointed with old ones.' please read as: 'have yet to read of an owner who has been unhappy with the switch from a CQR to a Rocna/Spade/Manson Supreme, but plenty who have been unhappy with the performance of a CQR'. Hope that clears it up.

Kedges and bowers are used generally in different ways, and to say that they are both anchors is too simplistic.

Next question - when most of the 'new generation' anchor makers advise going up a size from previous recommendations for older anchors, is it the design or the extra weight that makes them perform better?

Design.

 

[vyv_cox]

A fair question, and I believe you are right.... one or maybe more of the new generation manufacturers are not advising, as a rough example, to "replace your 35 lb CQR with a 35 lb Rocna," they are advising you to "replace your 35 lb CQR with a 45 lb Rocna" or maybe even larger.

On the other hand, if you had simply sized up your old generation anchor, then you could certainly expect a performance improvement by the added weight and larger surface area.

As another rough example, sizing up from a 35 lb CQR to a 45 lb CQR should translate to better performance from the new larger / heavier CQR.

That is definitely not true in my case. I went from a 35 lb (=16 kg) Delta that replaced a 35 lb CQR to a 15 kg Rocna. I was advised that Rocna size their anchor advice for the worst predictable conditions such that it is not necessary to increase to a size up 'just in case'.

 

[Brian@Fortress]

Hello Brian, I wonder if you could quote more specifically on where you have seen this printed or perhaps you could copy onto these pages. I'm sure it would be of interested to all who have posted on this thread
thanks
S.

Scotty,

I'd have to dig around to find text, but I did check their selection guides (CQR & Rocna attached). If I am reading the charts correctly, below is an example of where Rocna is recommending a larger anchor for a smaller boat compared to CQR:

Rocna 20kg / 44 lb model for boats 30 - 46 ft (boat weights listed)
CQR 20kg / 44 lb model for boats 47 - 61 ft

Of course, there's overlap of boat sizes and anchor models in both guides. In the Rocna guide, it appears that you can drop down the model size or even two if you have a lighter boat of a specific length.

 

[cliff]

I wonder why?

BTW - WTF is an "Anchorsmith"

 

[Allan]

I wonder why?

BTW - WTF is an "Anchorsmith"

Some sort of rhyming slang?
Allan

 

[cliff]

Some sort of rhyming slang?
Allan

PMSL

 

[snowleopard]

Not sure where you've seen the info regarding going up in size for 'new generation' anchors??

Read about it here. Also post #123 above.

 

[Scotty_Tradewind]

Rigger mortice ???

Quote removed

From what I've read, most of the comments by anchor manufacturers, either to the general forum or to each other, even though put strongly at times... have been backed up by some form of sensible discussion, fact or professional opinion.
Your offerings Rigger are becoming more than a bit offensive and perhaps if you don't have facts and sensible criteria to offer, you should keep quiet. ???

 

[Scotty_Tradewind]

That is definitely not true in my case. I went from a 35 lb (=16 kg) Delta that replaced a 35 lb CQR to a 15 kg Rocna. I was advised that Rocna size their anchor advice for the worst predictable conditions such that it is not necessary to increase to a size up 'just in case'.

That fits what I've read and discussed with others.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

.
if you don't have facts and sensible criteria to offer, you should keep quiet. ???

We'll have to disagree. It is a fact that Smith has posted 650 odd times; solely pushing his wares and making no other contribution. It is also a fact that he consistently attacks his competitors with missleading information. He has also consistently refused to answer direct questions which have been put to him.

I agree wholeheartedly that the other manufacturers have handled themselves admirably.

I have no desire to cause you offence, but I have no qualms about telling him what I think of his approach. I suggest that you interpret it as what Thatcher called "robust debate".

 

[Twister_Ken]

We'll have to disagree. It is a fact that Smith has posted 650 odd times; solely pushing his wares and making no other contribution.

To disagree mildly - on many occasions his views have been helpful in areas like rode length, chain vs rope, etc. It's only when it comes to a shoot-out with another anchor that reverts to his default fight-dirty mode.

 

[Scotty_Tradewind]

To disagree mildly - on many occasions his views have been helpful in areas like rode length, chain vs rope, etc. It's only when it comes to a shoot-out with another anchor that reverts to his default fight-dirty mode.

......and if anyone has read the Rocna website thoroughly you cannot fail to see a great deal of interesting and helpful information generally.

 

[Quandary]

I want to be Craig's friend (and I own a Manson)

Another supporter, what is wrong with the guy being forthright and stating his case bluntly.
I do find his bluntness offputting but that is how he is, I am certain that he believes what he says. His credentials to pontificate on the subject are better than most and I still want to read them, the information and the debate around it are more important than the way of expressing it. This is a forum for debate or do you want only one post on each subject. And some of his posts such as the recent series of Chilean cruise photos are well worth seeing and are a significant contribution.
There is plenty of room for him on this forum, do you want every poster to be like Brian, whose smugness irritates me even more.

 

[Chris_Robb]

Quote removed

I remember one of the early spats when they were running Manson down diabolically. I emailed Manson a link to the thread - bang. A big spat followed and the thread was pulled PDQ.

Manson's private reply to me was very interesting - but unfortunately could not be copied here.

 

[RichardS]

I've stated before that I have absolutely no issue with Craig's posts or, indeed, anyone else's, provided that they are not gratutitously offensive.

You do not have to read what people write, far less believe it!

Richard

 

[Trop Cher]

Offensive post

The most offensive post on this thread has been #128.
I also enjoy Craigs contribution to this forum, and Brians and the chap from manson...

 

[Brian@Fortress]

I don't think anyone has issues with a manufacturer offering tips or more information about their product, i.e. features & benefits. That is all positive, meaningful, and worthwhile.

However, when a manufacturer attacks a competitor with malicious and fraudulent intent, with no basis in fact whatsoever, then obviously that is an entirely different matter.

Therein lies the issue with young Craig Smith of Rocna. While he might occasionally provide useful advice, that is not his main purpose of being in the forum, it is to promote Rocna at the expense of his competitors, and by whatever means necessary.

As a manufacturer who has been in business for over 20 years, getting involved in a forum when someone like Craig Smith is disparaging your product is a "lose, lose" proposition. If you don't defend yourself, then there are those uninformed readers who might actually believe him.

If you do decide to defend yourself, then you sink down into the cesspool with him. Reminds me of the saying, "Never argue with an idiot, bystanders will not know the difference." You become a bad guy, right alongside him.

To their credit, Manson has taken a heap of abuse for a hell of a long time, and as Rigger pointed out, they simply had enough, and who can blame them? They have been in business for 40 years and that would not be possible if they weren't making a quality product. The points Manson raised about Rocna and their manufacturing process, certification, welding, and so on should certainly be a concern for those who have or are considering buying Rocna's product. To this point, Manson's messages to Rocna are worth re-reading.

Yes, there might be some good information on Rocna's web site, and while there, be sure to check out the most fraudulent misrepresentation of the West Marine test imaginable. Among other things, it made our product look like, at best, one of the middle of road performers, which is ridiculously false. This isn't an opinion, as I have all of the original test documentation that was sent straight to me by the gentleman at West Marine who conducted the test.

I recently sent a message to the Rocna CEO pointing out the fictitious nature of the chart they posted, and I am awaiting a response. Will the Rocna CEO respond with class & professionalism, and make the obvious changes.....or will he tell me to go to hell, since that is the one & only anchor test that has been conducted over the past 5 years in which the Rocna was a top performer?

If a competitor of yours was lying to the world about your company, then how would you respond? And believe me, if you decide to turn the other cheek, at some point your neck will get tired.

Regards,
Brian

 

[craigsmith]

If a competitor of yours was lying to the world about your company, then how would you respond? And believe me, if you decide to turn the other cheek, at some point your neck will get tired.

This unmitigated slander you're involving yourself in does no credit to your brand Brian. If a competitor of yours is engaging in a vicious little smear campaign, egging on whatever other competitors with an axe to grind that it can manipulate, how would you respond?

 

[Mansonanchors55]

DIRECT QUESTIONS Craig, why don't you man up and give the readers some honest answers.

Again I must apologise to readers and hopefully this will be our last post which should expose Craig's inadequacies.




Craig I am glad that you have admitted that nor have you ever welded anything or know anything about welding. Peter is a boatbuilder and hasn't got 40 years of metalworking experience has he Craig? Be honest with the readers.



Who in Holdfast or Rocna has this mythical experience? Enlighten the readers as to the credentials of your acclaimed expertise.



Fair enough, so, you're RINA "approved" do you have an RINA approved welders under the employ of Rocna, Holdfast or at the facility in China? Whilst we are fixing mistruths, it isn't "your" production facility, merely the company you get to build your product. Is the facility RINA approved, as, since it is a casting facility, your anchors aren't individually approved unless the facility is RINA approved, which it isn't is it Craig.



Ah, like the "sensible measures" behind welding a plate steel shank onto a cast fluke. That Craig is Metallurgy 101, you simply don't weld plate onto cast steel.



Then Craig, why don't you enlighten all these seasoned sailors with extensive cruising experience and anchoring experience exactly how old you really are. Be honest now.



Yawn, why then Craig when we tested Manson anchors three weeks later, on the same tug using the same equipment none of our anchors bent? and you call Manson product inferior yet you freely admit you know nothing about welding? By the way, you still owe Thomson the second half of your bill that you never paid because you were so unhappy with the test results and blamed them.



You again so freely display your ignorance. Please explain how this is remotely true? We use a higher grade/mpa of steel to build the Ray Anchor than the cast Bruce. Our product is actually stronger than cast product. You are just a liar Craig. What are these massive compromises?


Hopefully I don't have to reply again as you will be honest, and when you're honest about our product there is nothing negative to say which will render you speechless which will give everyone on this site a little rest from the bile you spread.

 

[Brian@Fortress]

This unmitigated slander you're involving yourself in does no credit to your brand Brian. If a competitor of yours is engaging in a vicious little smear campaign, egging on whatever other competitors with an axe to grind that it can manipulate, how would you respond?

First off young lad, you need to go back and respond to Manson's last post before anyone should seriously consider your dad's anchor. May I remind you that your company is manufacturing safey equipment, and questions about welding the wrong materials together and false certifications need to be addressed.

Your company has only been around since when, 2004? Obviously not nearly long enough to have built a trusted reputation for quality manufacturing.

Secondly, address that fraudulent misrepresentation of the West Marine test on your web site, or maybe the good people here on this forum would like to see the chart I am referring to and the back up data.....and we can let them decide who is the con artist? Shall we?