Anchors, Yesterday's Hero?

N

Neeves

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 Nov 2011
Messages
14,070
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Visit site
I reference, YM, March 2013, page 27, I quote ''if you hate CQRs because of the moving parts buy yourself a Bruce'. If you want to read the reasoning buy the magazine (though someone will probably post a copy, of the article).

Now a couple of queries:

Where do you buy a genuine Bruce today? Has YM tested any of the clones to endorse their performance to justify the recommendation. Have any of these clones stood the test of time?

A minor statement or summary,

Sticking to product without too much controversy - we have had since the introduction of the Bruce:

Wasi's Bugel; SL's (Now Lewmar's) Delta; Fortress; Anchor Right's SARCA; Spade, Manson's Supreme; Anchor Right's Excel, Mantus; Manson's Boss to name but a few.

Are YM suggesting that nothing, since 1970, compares with the Bruce and it is the best recommendation they have the courage to endorse?

Jonathan
 
I've already made a decision even without reading the article, thats how cleaver I am!



I'm sticking to what I have.:D
 
Neeves said:
Are YM suggesting that nothing, since 1970, compares with the Bruce and it is the best recommendation they have the courage to endorse?
Click to expand...
If the engineering is right it is right. You can tweek the edges, but fundimentally its not changed. Has anybody made an improvement on the wheel in the last 5,000 years?
 
Read the small print! It's not even that small. Tom Cunliffe said "get a Bruce" That's his opinion, not a YM policy. Vyv Cox would tell you to get something else I'm sure and all the other "experts" would have their own opinions. And that's all they are.
 
I think Mr Dunlop made a significant improvement (to the wheel) and I might have thought you might offer an nod of endorsement, being a Scot, if cynical, to Mr Lyall
 
Neeves said:
Sticking to product without too much controversy - we have had since the introduction of the Bruce: Wasi's Bugel; SL's (Now Lewmar's) Delta; Fortress; Anchor Right's SARCA; Spade, Manson's Supreme; Anchor Right's Excel, Mantus; Manson's Boss to name but a few.
Click to expand...


Bruce.... Bruce? I think I'd rather have a Sheila!
 
I have responded to the item and I understand it will be taken further in a future issue. The big problem is that when most people say 'Bruce' they mean a clone. Many of these are made cheaply from brittle cast iron, unlike the original which was cast steel.
 
vyv_cox said:
I have responded to the item and I understand it will be taken further in a future issue. The big problem is that when most people say 'Bruce' they mean a clone. Many of these are made cheaply from brittle cast iron, unlike the original which was cast steel.
Click to expand...

I got one to use as a kedge from here (second one down)

http://www.mooringequipment.co.uk/anchors.html

How do I tell what its made of?

BTW I have no complaints. Paul gave great servcie and I am happy - so its just a question.
 
piperatsea said:
Read the small print! It's not even that small. Tom Cunliffe said "get a Bruce" That's his opinion, not a YM policy. Vyv Cox would tell you to get something else I'm sure and all the other "experts" would have their own opinions. And that's all they are.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. I have previously cited independent objective tests which were carried out in France by two different magazines.

Spade came out best and IIRC, Bruce anchors had a problem resetting after breaking out when there was a pull at an angle.

The tests were based on measured facts, not on opinions.
 
Given the author's apparent approval of the CQR the alternative choice of a Bruce (that you cannot buy) looks contradictory. To suggest choice of an anchor developed over 40 years ago, in the face of recommendations and results of tests (some of which were published in YM) where few of those tests would endorse a Bruce (let alone a copy) looks questionable, very. In fact I'm not sure I have seen many tests that include bruce copies (even brand name ones, Claw, Ray). So is the author actually endorsing a product, the copies - as you cannot buy the original) he has actually never used himself? Are we to believe that all the results published by YM are a load of rubbish - or is the author living in the past? Are Classification Tests, and tests conducted to similar standards, that show some anchors to be twice as good as a Bruce for example Fortress, Supreme, Excel also a load of rubbish. Are the Voile et Voileur tests, reported in YM and I think YW, that showed Spade up there with Fortress and Supreme, also a load of rubbish?

The thread could be about brands but I note a reluctance to 'go there', but surely YM can include developments in the last 20 years when they make recommendations? Surely they can introduce some consistency into their recommendations. Though I note few want to 'go there' either.

It will be interesting to see how they handle the issue after Vyv Cox raised his query, serendipity at its best.

Funny old world.

Jonathan
 
Cannot comment about other anchors but some years ago I put a 20 kg Bruce in my garden on top of course turf and attached it to my 4X4 towing ball.I then drove the 4x4 down my drive in low gear.The replica Bruce cut through the turf very quickly and set firm! I have tried Danforths similarly to great effect and CQRs to poor effect.
 
tidclacy said:
Whats wrong with a Rocna ( original spec )
Click to expand...

You cannot buy it any more, I cannot suggest someone is recommending an anchor that is no longer made (and in my humble opinion, superseded) and then suggest within the alternatives is another one (even if it is more recent) that is no longer made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top