Anchors

[Neeves]

Any of the new generation anchors. If you are are going to store it on your bow roller I would go with whatever fits best out of the new ones.

We use an aluminium Excel, Fortress and aluminium Spade (each 8kg), 38' cat x 7t fully laden. We would add a Viking 10kg but the roll bar means it cannot fit on our bow roller. All are equivalent in size to 15kg steel counter parts.

I have tested all the anchors I mention excepting Epsilon but I am comfortable, given that it is a SHHP anchor, with the others I group as its peers.

I think you can narrow it down a bit further.

If you take the new generation anchors, Rocna, Supreme, Ultra, Excel, Spade, Epsilon, Kobra, Vulcan, Knox then each of these, comparing same weights, have similar holding capacity to each other and that hold is twice the more familiar earlier models, CQR, Delta and Bruce. The Fortress and Viking double that hold, of CQR et el, for less weight as one is made from aluminium and the other high tensile steel (so less steel is needed to achieve the same performance). So, yes, check it fits on your bow roller. If you might be moving your anchor from the bow roller lightweight might be an advantage and Fortress, Viking and the aluminium versions of Excel or Spade come into play. If you might deploy a second anchor your windlass will be unavailable, so hand deployment and hand retrieval - and both might be done from a dinghy. Light weight is an advantage. Check the price, if you live in Australia or are visiting the Channel Islands then the Excel (Oz) and Spade (CI) become significantly more competitive (or less expensive). If you seriously need a cheap anchor (Europe based) then Kobra fits the bill but they (Plastimo) have sacrificed shank strength (which is important when you get it locked under a large immovable object (rock, ground chain).

Referring back to the OPs original post then Fortress, Viking and the aluminium versions of Spade and Excel optimises that surface area weight ratio - but you need to compromise on awkwardness (Fortress), cost (the Al Excel is not cheap) and the Al Spade has a weaker shank than the steel version. Viking ticks a lot of boxes - except the big roll bar might foul your furler. Viking also allows you to give material support to Ukrainian industry - which might alter the balance of compromises.

Rocna and Supreme collect mud which at best means you need a decent deck wash, but a clogged fluke will not re-set should the anchor be tripped. Fortress is ungainly (the stock seems specially designed to catch spinnaker sheets) and along with Knox may collect weed, shells, stones or its own rode in the split toe.

Performance crudely is a function of surface area but its not that simple. Convex anchors (Excel and Epsilon) look to have a smaller surface area than, say a Supreme but the convexity pushes and compresses the seabed aside - increasing the shear strength of the seabed in which the fluke is embedded. The Mantus M1 has a exceptionally and uniquely low fluke to seabed angle and though it looks to have high surface area it looses hold because of the shallow angle at which it sets (and compared to a Delta has the same hold for the same weight - so half the hold of most new gen anchors). Mantus is a perfect example of hype over substance and the gullibility of the buying public. Viking looks to have a lower surface area, it does (its not just looks) but the fluke is very thin (but has sufficient strength because its made from HT steels. A thin fluke penetrates more easily.

Its not as simple as surface area - other factors come into play.

Ignore the rantings of TNLI - the reason you don't see Fishermans, aka Admiralty Pattern, Herreshoff and other museum pieces on yachts is because they have been replaced by, first CQR, Delta, Danforth and Bruce and then by the current anchors I list (I hope without omissions) in my second paragraph. The reason we saw Deltas on new yachts at boat shows was simple - they were part of a package and cheap. Owners soon saw the light and replaced them. Boat builder needed to supply an adequate anchor but as it was to be changed (and there is no accounting for the taste of new owners) they went cheap and cheerful.

I do accept alternative views but when those views, in this case, are contradicted by every anchor test since 2006, West Marine/Yachting Monthly, a series by Voile et Voileurs, published in YM and YW, the more recent Fortress Chesapeake tests etc etc and my own testing I can discard those, current, alternative views as drivel and without substance - no numerical data is provided to support the views expressed.

Finally - buy the anchor of a size recommended by the anchor maker, there is no need to go oversize. If using the size recommended were inadequate we would have a string of threads on the failures - it simply does has not happened. Anchor makers have already included safety factors or they would face fierce litigation - it does not happen. Insurance companies would soon note and correlate failure due to dragging of inadequately sized anchors - it does not happen.

It does not happen - if you argue with this - post links where a recommended NG anchor dragged ...... as result of being too small.

In view of the vocal complaints from members on the lengths of my posts - I'll take a break.

Jonathan

 

[IanCC]

Assume you mean the Manson sizing chart Here mansonanchors.com/us/anchor-calculator/ The Kobra from Force 4 quoting Plastimo.

While not everybody agrees with me size (or rather oversize) is overrated, particularly with NG anchors. These have typically twice the holding power of old style anchors like the CQR and yet the size recommendations are similar. So your Nic would have a 35lb CQR when new and a 16kg NG has twice the holding power, so why would you want a 20kg? Manson would recommend a 16kg for boats up to 11m and 8 tonnes before the recommendation would shift up to 20kgs.

All the development of anchors has been to improve the performance for a given weight (assuming steel) and yet many still think that additional weight is beneficial. There is a strong argument to go down in size/weight with a NG anchor. My Golden Hind is very similar in size to your Nic but a bit lighter at 5.4 tonnes design and had a 35lb CQR. I have just downsized to a 10kgs Epsilon and 6mm chain. I had a 10kgs Delta on my last boat which was similar displacement but much higher windage and never had any problems. Remember if you read the empirical data from tests windage is a major factor in the loads placed on anchors so low(er) windage boats like yours (compared with modern AWBs) put far less load on the anchor when wind increases to the point where you could not fully load even the recommended size, never mind the next size up.

The Kobra comes out reasonably well in the various tests and really difficult to make a reasoned case for replacing it.

Golden Hind mmm, nice boat.

Main reasons for thinking of manson supreme 20kg.
1. It fits
2. Reading says not the most amazing of NG anchors.
3. A good friend of many miles experience, here to aus single handed, upped his manson supreme from 16kg to 20kg.
4. Reading the fine print of most recommendations, usually says something like "these are for up to force 9, otherwise heavier."

Thanks for thoughts

 

[IanCC]

You're off your rocker, m8.

My 40' boat came supplied with a 15kg Bruce - in my opinion that is undersized for my boat, but nonetheless it has held me in gales, probably in excess of 50 knots.

The Bruce is an old-style anchor - just use an NG anchor of the right size. Going twice the weight that it should be is madness - I wouldn't be surprised if it caused you more problems.

Good to know. I have a 10kg Bruce somewhere in the bottom a locker.

 

[IanCC]

We use an aluminium Excel, Fortress and aluminium Spade (each 8kg), 38' cat x 7t fully laden. We would add a Viking 10kg but the roll bar means it cannot fit on our bow roller. All are equivalent in size to 15kg steel counter parts.

I have tested all the anchors I mention excepting Epsilon but I am comfortable, given that it is a SHHP anchor, with the others I group as its peers.

I think you can narrow it down a bit further.

If you take the new generation anchors, Rocna, Supreme, Ultra, Excel, Spade, Epsilon, Kobra, Vulcan, Knox then each of these, comparing same weights, have similar holding capacity to each other and that hold is twice the more familiar earlier models, CQR, Delta and Bruce. The Fortress and Viking double that hold, of CQR et el, for less weight as one is made from aluminium and the other high tensile steel (so less steel is needed to achieve the same performance). So, yes, check it fits on your bow roller. If you might be moving your anchor from the bow roller lightweight might be an advantage and Fortress, Viking and the aluminium versions of Excel or Spade come into play. If you might deploy a second anchor your windlass will be unavailable, so hand deployment and hand retrieval - and both might be done from a dinghy. Light weight is an advantage. Check the price, if you live in Australia or are visiting the Channel Islands then the Excel (Oz) and Spade (CI) become significantly more competitive (or less expensive). If you seriously need a cheap anchor (Europe based) then Kobra fits the bill but they (Plastimo) have sacrificed shank strength (which is important when you get it locked under a large immovable object (rock, ground chain).

Referring back to the OPs original post then Fortress, Viking and the aluminium versions of Spade and Excel optimises that surface area weight ratio - but you need to compromise on awkwardness (Fortress), cost (the Al Excel is not cheap) and the Al Spade has a weaker shank than the steel version. Viking ticks a lot of boxes - except the big roll bar might foul your furler. Viking also allows you to give material support to Ukrainian industry - which might alter the balance of compromises.

Rocna and Supreme collect mud which at best means you need a decent deck wash, but a clogged fluke will not re-set should the anchor be tripped. Fortress is ungainly (the stock seems specially designed to catch spinnaker sheets) and along with Knox may collect weed, shells, stones or its own rode in the split toe.

Performance crudely is a function of surface area but its not that simple. Convex anchors (Excel and Epsilon) look to have a smaller surface area than, say a Supreme but the convexity pushes and compresses the seabed aside - increasing the shear strength of the seabed in which the fluke is embedded. The Mantus M1 has a exceptionally and uniquely low fluke to seabed angle and though it looks to have high surface area it looses hold because of the shallow angle at which it sets (and compared to a Delta has the same hold for the same weight - so half the hold of most new gen anchors). Mantus is a perfect example of hype over substance and the gullibility of the buying public. Viking looks to have a lower surface area, it does (its not just looks) but the fluke is very thin (but has sufficient strength because its made from HT steels. A thin fluke penetrates more easily.

Its not as simple as surface area - other factors come into play.

Ignore the rantings of TNLI - the reason you don't see Fishermans, aka Admiralty Pattern, Herreshoff and other museum pieces on yachts is because they have been replaced by, first CQR, Delta, Danforth and Bruce and then by the current anchors I list (I hope without omissions) in my second paragraph. The reason we saw Deltas on new yachts at boat shows was simple - they were part of a package and cheap. Owners soon saw the light and replaced them. Boat builder needed to supply an adequate anchor but as it was to be changed (and there is no accounting for the taste of new owners) they went cheap and cheerful.

I do accept alternative views but when those views, in this case, are contradicted by every anchor test since 2006, West Marine/Yachting Monthly, a series by Voile et Voileurs, published in YM and YW, the more recent Fortress Chesapeake tests etc etc and my own testing I can discard those, current, alternative views as drivel and without substance - no numerical data is provided to support the views expressed.

Finally - buy the anchor of a size recommended by the anchor maker, there is no need to go oversize. If using the size recommended were inadequate we would have a string of threads on the failures - it simply does has not happened. Anchor makers have already included safety factors or they would face fierce litigation - it does not happen. Insurance companies would soon note and correlate failure due to dragging of inadequately sized anchors - it does not happen.

It does not happen - if you argue with this - post links where a recommended NG anchor dragged ...... as result of being too small.

In view of the vocal complaints from members on the lengths of my posts - I'll take a break.

Jonathan

Thanks Jonathon.

You include Kobra as new gen? I have a fortress fx-11 for the soft stuff. Be nice not to need a deck wash.

 

[IanCC]

Assume you mean the Manson sizing chart Here mansonanchors.com/us/anchor-calculator/ The Kobra from Force 4 quoting Plastimo.

While not everybody agrees with me size (or rather oversize) is overrated, particularly with NG anchors. These have typically twice the holding power of old style anchors like the CQR and yet the size recommendations are similar. So your Nic would have a 35lb CQR when new and a 16kg NG has twice the holding power, so why would you want a 20kg? Manson would recommend a 16kg for boats up to 11m and 8 tonnes before the recommendation would shift up to 20kgs.

All the development of anchors has been to improve the performance for a given weight (assuming steel) and yet many still think that additional weight is beneficial. There is a strong argument to go down in size/weight with a NG anchor. My Golden Hind is very similar in size to your Nic but a bit lighter at 5.4 tonnes design and had a 35lb CQR. I have just downsized to a 10kgs Epsilon and 6mm chain. I had a 10kgs Delta on my last boat which was similar displacement but much higher windage and never had any problems. Remember if you read the empirical data from tests windage is a major factor in the loads placed on anchors so low(er) windage boats like yours (compared with modern AWBs) put far less load on the anchor when wind increases to the point where you could not fully load even the recommended size, never mind the next size up.

The Kobra comes out reasonably well in the various tests and really difficult to make a reasoned case for replacing it.

Just reread your post. No, i was meaning the Kobra. I can find recommend re boat length but not displacement. Well, i can, on some obscure site but it is illegible on my phone.

 

[TNLI]

You're off your rocker, m8.

My 40' boat came supplied with a 15kg Bruce - in my opinion that is undersized for my boat, but nonetheless it has held me in gales, probably in excess of 50 knots.

The Bruce is an old-style anchor - just use an NG anchor of the right size. Going twice the weight that it should be is madness - I wouldn't be surprised if it caused you more problems.

The Bruce is a very good anchor and popular with educated boaters in the USA in particular. Lewmar who are the best anchor company around make a version called the Claw. The only disadvantage of the Bruce is that it does not like weeds, so if you are in an area with weeds, I would use a Herreshoff, (The Luke copies are sort of OK if you can't afford the real thing), or admiralty pattern fishermans, although a Lewmar delta or Lewmar CQR also work fairly well in heavy weeds.

Weight matters, as small heavy anchors will penetrate weeds better. That's why a real big ships anchor is a very compact and incredibly heavy anchor. The only question is can you rover a heavy anchor without any difficulties like a fried windlass or bent arms.

 

[TNLI]

Some of the best advice for this thread. If any novice reads this thread, please go and read the INDEPENDENT anchor tests and make your choices sensibly. Steel or forged CQR anchors are no longer even in the same league as Spade, Rocna etc. Fishernan type anchors perform very badly except in dense weed but who cares.

Yes, if you read my links, Steve of SV Penope did some real good tests comparing a genuine CQR with a Lewmar Delta, (Lewmar also make a genuine and stainless CQR), Watch the clip and think about what he says at the end when he says the genuine CQR without a worn hinge was the winner. The Lewar Delta is used by the RNLI, but the educated boater who thinks about why nearly all the fishermens and rag and stickers of the Pacific North West carry a CQR and a copy of a Herreshoff, those 4000 boaters are not wrong.

The genuine Lewmar CQR and Delta will never be in the same legue as modern NG anchors, as they are far too tough, too well designed, weed resistant, 180 degree veer proof and certified to a higher standard than any of the NG anchors, although the Spade is a good design. Just a pity that the yellow paint falls off and they rust, also they are still not as tough in shank bend terms as a good storm anchor should be.

 

[Close hauled]

Not to forget of course that it is the anchor / anchor rode combination that is of paramount importance. Perhaps this needs further discussion?

 

[NormanS]

The Bruce is a very good anchor and popular with educated boaters in the USA in particular. Lewmar who are the best anchor company around make a version called the Claw. The only disadvantage of the Bruce is that it does not like weeds, so if you are in an area with weeds, I would use a Herreshoff, (The Luke copies are sort of OK if you can't afford the real thing), or admiralty pattern fishermans, although a Lewmar delta or Lewmar CQR also work fairly well in heavy weeds.

Weight matters, as small heavy anchors will penetrate weeds better. That's why a real big ships anchor is a very compact and incredibly heavy anchor. The only question is can you rover a heavy anchor without any difficulties like a fried windlass or bent arms.

I don't know what size these "cobblestones" are you anchor among, maybe you can tell us? What I do know about the generally good genuine Bruce anchor is, that its major flaw is that it can pick up large stones and hold them, preventing it from digging in and getting a proper grip. Obviously, I try to avoid anchoring in stony ground but, have been caught out a couple of times.

 

[vyv_cox]

Yes, if you read my links, Steve of SV Penope did some real good tests comparing a genuine CQR with a Lewmar Delta, (Lewmar also make a genuine and stainless CQR), Watch the clip and think about what he says at the end when he says the genuine CQR without a worn hinge was the winner. The Lewar Delta is used by the RNLI, but the educated boater who thinks about why nearly all the fishermens and rag and stickers of the Pacific North West carry a CQR and a copy of a Herreshoff, those 4000 boaters are not wrong.

The genuine Lewmar CQR and Delta will never be in the same legue as modern NG anchors, as they are far too tough, too well designed, weed resistant, 180 degree veer proof and certified to a higher standard than any of the NG anchors, although the Spade is a good design. Just a pity that the yellow paint falls off and they rust, also they are still not as tough in shank bend terms as a good storm anchor should be.

Why should we be influenced by what is practised in the Pacific North West? People all over the world do strange things for inexplicable reasons. I met a man who bought a new French 38 ft boat in France. It came with a Britany, Ancre Britany PLASTIMO - Mouillage, ancre, chaîne & bouée pour bateau - H2R Equipements a very cheaply made Danforth copy. They refused to change it for a better anchor, stating that it was perfect for the area.

Most of us know what works in the areas we sail. It has been proven time after time that NG anchors work best in European waters.

 

[TNLI]

We use an aluminium Excel, Fortress and aluminium Spade (each 8kg), 38' cat x 7t fully laden. We would add a Viking 10kg but the roll bar means it cannot fit on our bow roller. All are equivalent in size to 15kg steel counter parts.
Ignore the rantings of TNLI - the reason you don't see Fishermans, aka Admiralty Pattern, Herreshoff and other museum pieces on yachts is because they have been replaced by, first CQR, Delta, Danforth and Bruce and then by the current anchors I list (I hope without omissions) in my second paragraph.
Jonathan

Alloy anchor top the bent shank tables, BUT if you are weight critical they might be necessary. The 3 anchors listed are all good if you need light weight anchors. The Excel and Fortress combination on seperate rodes will work in any type of bottom. The Fortress is bad news in weeds, but the plows are not, although the heavier more solidly built ones will work their way down to the sea bed more easily.

THE IDEA THAT THE HERRESHOFF HAS BEEN REPLACED BY A CQR IS NOT CORRECT, and the RNLI still use an Admiral pattern fishermans. The main reasons for using both anchors is their abilty to set in deep water on very short scopes, in addition to their very good performance in cobblestones and rocks. The only other anchors that will hold with a short scope of 2 to 1 of rope, are the grapnels, but they are really dreadfull in sand or mud, The Herreshoff works well in mud and not so well in sand due to lackl of surface area.
Nothing will ever replace a genuine Herreshoff, that design was perfected over many, many years and alas no one will ever beat it. Not keen on cheaper bar fishermans, even though I do carry one, in addition to a Herreshoff copy.
The only thing I've learnt from this forum is just how good the CQR and Herreshoff are as a pair in a storm with an anchorage marked as mixed holding, (So rocks, weed, sand and mud). The Herreshoff does not need setting, but the CQR sure does, so the 2 work well if conditions are so bad they result in dragging.
If you are a tad too close to other boats, set the CQR or Delta using max continuous astern several times, then you can deploy the Herreshoff by just dropping it and leaving the coiled line on deck clipped to a pull alarm, (A Peg with 2 terminals and buzzer below), to wake you up.

Deep water all bottom type anchors are real boat saver if you can't get into a crowded anchorage and are frced to anchor outside the main area. There are always limits t the amount of scope available.

 

[TNLI]

Why should we be influenced by what is practised in the Pacific North West? People all over the world do strange things for inexplicable reasons. I met a man who bought a new French 38 ft boat in France. It came with a Britany, a very cheaply made Danforth copy. They refused to change it for a better anchor, stating that it was perfect for the area.
Most of us know what works in the areas we sail. It has been proven time after time that NG anchors work best in European waters.

The Pacfic North West is like Scotland and Ireland, and to a lesser extent the Canary Islands, (No kelp beds), lots of Iffy holding due to cobblestones and rocks. Plenty of deep, (Up to about 50m), spots to anchor up. Some folks like to explore beaches with unprotected anchorages and I used to stop to catch bait fish, (Mackerel and Scad), or sardines whilst at anchor only 50 to 100m away from cliffs and rocks. I did bend a few grapnels and a rusty Danforth fluke, but never dragged because we used 2 anchors selected for the mixed bottom types. I only used a rusty old CQR and a Danforth when in a normal anchorage of mud and sand.

 

[vyv_cox]

The Pacfic North West is like Scotland and Ireland, and to a lesser extent the Canary Islands, (No kelp beds), lots of Iffy holding due to cobblestones and rocks. Plenty of deep, (Up to about 50m), spots to anchor up. Some folks like to explore beaches with unprotected anchorages and I used to stop to catch bait fish, (Mackerel and Scad), or sardines whilst at anchor only 50 to 100m away from cliffs and rocks. I did bend a few grapnels and a rusty Danforth fluke, but never dragged because we used 2 anchors selected for the mixed bottom types. I only used a rusty old CQR and a Danforth when in a normal anchorage of mud and sand.

Exactly my point. Nothing like where I have sailed for most of my life.

I have sailed a good part of my cruising life in Scotland and Ireland and do not recognise your statement.

 

[Neeves]

Accepting alternative views and opinions.

TNLI

Maybe you can define the names of these anchors and add them to your recommendations.

This first image I thought to be impossible but I think the ring at the crown was meant to be for the stock, which might have been wooden. I had thought the anchor to be simply a museum piece.


But like the Herreshoff such anchors are still in use today. This is a Chinese, PRC, Tuna boat in Suva harbour. I may do the crew a disservice it may be something else, but it looked like a tuna boat, and it had the self same (well almost) anchor, as above, on the bow.




So - its good enough for a Chinese vessel far from home - and the Chinese are not fools - as good as the anchors you champion?

Jonathan

Thanks Jonathon.

You include Kobra as new gen? I have a fortress fx-11 for the soft stuff. Be nice not to need a deck wash.

Yes - it develops hold significantly higher than Delta, CQR and Bruce. It is easy to deploy, it engages quickly and it sets and holds reliably. Its not quite as good as the 'others' but it is very cheap (compared to the others). If it had a more robust shank it would be almost excellent (or given that you never use the full potential of any anchor - it would be excellent). I'm not keen on the folding mechanism - I bought one, carried from UK to Oz in our luggage (we had planned this) and had the shank welded to the fluke.

If you don't want to use a deck wash - don't anchor in mud but drop Supreme and Rocna from your list they both compress and retain the compressed mud (and weed). The Fortress is also excellent in clean sand - in fact in a predictable straight line pull its unbeatable. If the wind is going to move through 180 degrees and become much stronger and there is a chance of tripping - they can clog and not reset. (We would not be without ours).

Jonathan

 

[doug748]

Good to know. I have a 10kg Bruce somewhere in the bottom a locker.

You can take all sizing charts with a pinch of salt in my view. Often anchors that seem to perform worst, recommend the smaller sizes, probably a marketing wheeze. There is an interesting page at Jimmy Green's:

What Size Anchor Do I Need? | Knowledge Centre

Alas it does not include the Kobra but, on the other hand, there is nothing very unusual about the design. My advice would be to buy a 15Kg Rocna/Manson (high roller) or similar sized Epsilon (cheapskate) and keep it below decks in place of the Bruce.
You then have your back up ready to go if you lose the Kobra- or it rusts - or it starts to let you down - or if you just get fed up of it. Even with an 9ton boat in cruising trim, I can't see much justification for a 20kg anchor and one day you may have to pull it up without the windlass.

.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Yes, if you read my links, Steve of SV Penope did some real good tests comparing a genuine CQR with a Lewmar Delta, (Lewmar also make a genuine and stainless CQR), Watch the clip and think about what he says at the end when he says the genuine CQR without a worn hinge was the winner. The Lewar Delta is used by the RNLI, but the educated boater who thinks about why nearly all the fishermens and rag and stickers of the Pacific North West carry a CQR and a copy of a Herreshoff, those 4000 boaters are not wrong.

The genuine Lewmar CQR and Delta will never be in the same legue as modern NG anchors, as they are far too tough, too well designed, weed resistant, 180 degree veer proof and certified to a higher standard than any of the NG anchors, although the Spade is a good design. Just a pity that the yellow paint falls off and they rust, also they are still not as tough in shank bend terms as a good storm anchor should be.

Your posts are becoming more and more like those of conspiracy theorist supporters. You ignore arguments that disprove your opinions and cling onto anything that appears to support your opinions or in some way twist or interpret to support you.
And what is one to make of idiotic statements such as “The genuine Lewmar CQR and Delta will never be in the same legue as modern NG anchors, as they are far too tough,”. There’s no logical connection in the statement at all.
You often trot out your opinion that only your chosen anchors have tough shanks and then quote tests that contradict your claims. The Practical Sailor test you have quoted several times actually contradicts your argument.
You also keep referring to Storm anchors as if there is such a thing. There’s no such thing. There are lots of designs of anchors and some are proven to be better than others.
Your claims about sailors in the Pacific North West (are we talking about China/Siberia?) holds no weight on at least a couple of grounds.
Firstly weight of numbers is not a good measure. Anchors aren’t changed very often on the vast majority of boats so citing numbers used is not necessarily a good argument for claims about its superior powers. For example, if you sail around France you see a lot of cheap Danforth style anchors. They got supplied with the French boats because they are cheap. No one in their right mind would suggest they’re outstanding anchors.
Secondly sailors and fishermen and boaters are conservative. If the anchor is working most of the time why spend money? The fact that NG anchors haven’t penetrated the market (according to you) in this one area of the world is no reason to dismiss independent tests of NG anchors.
Turning to another topic you keep harping on about which is anchoring in ‘deep water’. Two things. When fishermen anchor in deep water with a grapnel type anchor all they are doing is trying to get the boat to stop drifting while they get on with their work. They use cheap grapnels because they often anchor in rock etc and either bend the grapnel to pull it clear or they lose it. They intentionally use a rubbish anchor because they’re cheap and replaceable.
You need to mug up on scope as you keep making silly claims about 2:1 in deep water. Scope ratio required actually changes, the deeper the water. There’s nothing so special about 2:1 in deeper water.
You’ve finally started to admit the Spade is a good anchor but harp on about its poor paint and galvanising and allegedly weak shank. We anchor a lot with our Spade. We’ve had it over 15 years. As I write this, we’ve been anchored on it in various places in the Caribbean continuously for nearly a month. I used it in Scotland for a couple of years in 2012-2014 and around much of UK and Europe. I wish I could show you a photo of its paint and galvanising but it’s dug into the seabed in front of us atm. It’s still got most of its yellow paint and although the tip’s galvanising has worn away, the rest of it us still fine. The shank is still straight too.
The world needs the occasional radical thinker. The world doesn’t need deluded conspiracy theorists who claim that most anchor testers are in the pocket of the manufacturers.
Edited for clarity

 

[Neeves]

Alloy anchor top the bent shank tables, BUT if you are weight critical they might be necessary. The 3 anchors listed are all good if you need light weight anchors. The Excel and Fortress combination on seperate rodes will work in any type of bottom. The Fortress is bad news in weeds, but the plows are not, although the heavier more solidly built ones will work their way down to the sea bed more easily.

THE IDEA THAT THE HERRESHOFF HAS BEEN REPLACED BY A CQR IS NOT CORRECT, and the RNLI still use an Admiral pattern fishermans. The main reasons for using both anchors is their abilty to set in deep water on very short scopes, in addition to their very good performance in cobblestones and rocks. The only other anchors that will hold with a short scope of 2 to 1 of rope, are the grapnels, but they are really dreadfull in sand or mud, The Herreshoff works well in mud and not so well in sand due to lackl of surface area.
Nothing will ever replace a genuine Herreshoff, that design was perfected over many, many years and alas no one will ever beat it. Not keen on cheaper bar fishermans, even though I do carry one, in addition to a Herreshoff copy.
The only thing I've learnt from this forum is just how good the CQR and Herreshoff are as a pair in a storm with an anchorage marked as mixed holding, (So rocks, weed, sand and mud). The Herreshoff does not need setting, but the CQR sure does, so the 2 work well if conditions are so bad they result in dragging.
If you are a tad too close to other boats, set the CQR or Delta using max continuous astern several times, then you can deploy the Herreshoff by just dropping it and leaving the coiled line on deck clipped to a pull alarm, (A Peg with 2 terminals and buzzer below), to wake you up.

Deep water all bottom type anchors are real boat saver if you can't get into a crowded anchorage and are frced to anchor outside the main area. There are always limits t the amount of scope available.

You have no idea what you are talking about and simply spout absolute nonsense with not an iota of data to back your contentions.

The aluminium Excel has a shank made from the aluminium 7075 alloy of over 500Mpa. The shank thickness is increased (from memory) by around 50% over the steel version making the shank as strong as the steel Excel with its Bis 80 shank. There are no reports of the steel Excel shank bending and importantly no reports of the aluminium shank bending. I cannot be more accurate as I am in Suva and I don't carry all my technical date with me . I have been using this anchor for 10 years now as a primary - it has no bent.

On galvanising - Of the new gen anchors Spade is the oldest having been introduced in the 90's. It made no inroads in Anglo Saxon or Celt markets for many years but if you visit the French Pacific Islands or French marinas you will find anchors that are almost 30 years old - of course they have lost galvanising - its typically 70 microns thick, no wonder older Spade anchor rust. You simply do not see Rocna of that age - as they were only introduced in 2006 and took a few years to become popular.

I took this image of an original Spade in 2016 - not much sign of rust there (unlike the rode)


Basically you are trolling, disparaging product without a shred of evidence. and are doing so repeatedly.

Manufacturers might be upset (I wonder what manufacturers do to force a cessation in continued trolling?)

Jonathan

 

[john_morris_uk]

I suspect that this thread is heading to be closed due to TNLI’s trolling.

 

[Neeves]

I suspect that this thread is heading to be closed due to TNLI’s trolling.

Surely this is punishing everyone for the repeated misdeeds of one person. It effectively means anchoring threads are doomed to failure unless a more focussed penalty system is introduced.

Jonathan

 

[Tranona]

Just reread your post. No, i was meaning the Kobra. I can find recommend re boat length but not displacement. Well, i can, on some obscure site but it is illegible on my phone.

By implication a 14m boat is likely to displace 14 tonnes+ - although as I suggested I think the Kobra recommendation is optimistic. However your 6 tonne boat is way smaller than that.

Displacement is only one measure in determining the size of anchor and it is only recently that makers have started adding this to their tables to show that just LOA is a crude measure. What they are trying to do is estimate the loads that are likely to be placed on the anchor by the boat. Size/weight are key variables but also windage, that is area of boat exposed to wind is a major factor. However difficult to measure this in a way that buyers can apply to their boat so is not included. Tests have shown that this is a much bigger factor than size using the other measures (think multihulls vs monos, AWBs with high topsides, biminis and gantries compared with sleek low freeboard traditional boats).

The upshot is that a boat like yours is both towards the lower end of the common recommendation band for a 16kgs anchor (whether it be a Manson, Rocna, Epsilon etc) and is incapable of generating load on the anchor even in extreme conditions that would get near its potential holding power., never mind the approx 35% greater holding power of a 20kg. In fact a 10kg would still have greater potential holding power than your boat could generate, hence my decision to use a 10kg on my GH.