Any real world problems with a genuine Bruce?

[siwhi]

I've used a 15kg Bruce for the last few years around the west coast of Scotland. It came with the boat. I've probably used it about 50 times without any trouble on various types of seabed including some weed (Canna) and pebbles. I tend to leave it to sink for 10 mins then throttle back a fair bit so I'm sure it's bitten in. Only tested up to a F7, but fine so far.

 

[Neeves]

I was going to suggest if you were to make a long passage, or passages (which is your intent) that you carry at least one other anchor and that it be of a different design. People do lose their anchors, they become irretrievably stuck and need to be abandoned (for later retrieval) and as no anchor is perfect a different design might suit when the primary is defeated. But I'd be suggesting the second anchor is for the same size vessel - then you effectively have 2 primaries. The ideal is an alloy anchor - simply because they have less of a weight penalty, can be deployed by dinghy, if you need a stern kedge, and the alloys (of the same surface area), are at least as good as their steel equivalents. But if you already have a Danforth, of a reasonable size, - it will be fine.

Jonathan

 

[oldharry]

I have taken my Bruce with me when I changde boats, ever since I bought it in the 1980s, on a range of boats 22 - 26ft, and only once had it drag, which was my fault for not putting out enough scope compounded by dragging in to deeper water. Even then it was only dragging very slowly even with a very short scope in weed, and a gusty F6.

Of course, I dont have anthing to compare it with, but then it works. So if it aint broke, dont fix it, is my view. I am concerned at the accounts above, because a number of manufacturers tried to copy the Bruce, and gave it its bad reputation. It seems only a genuine Bruce works properly. Bruce look alikes just dont cut it. Or maybe Im just a reactionary old git - butI have no need to try anything else. As I said - it works fine for me

 

[Arcady]

I have a 36ft moderately heavy ketch, sailing on the West Coast of Scotland. She has a 20kg genuine Bruce, with 10mm chain. I make every effort not to anchor in weed, (Fishfinder, eyeballs etc), but in the usual West Coast sand or mud, I have found it excellent. Beware of anchoring off piste, the Bruce can pick up a boulder, and clutch it to its bosom. Moral, don't anchor in big round boulders. I have every confidence in my anchor gear. I have to, as the boat is often left at anchor for long periods. I would think that in East Coast mud, you will be fine.

Precisely so. We have experienced the same scenario - our 10kg anchor dragged through an anchorage and I pulled it to the stem head (but not inboard) whilst we motored back up wind. It was only when someone else was gesticulating wildly that I looked over the bow to see a boulder perfectly filling the Bruce claw.

 

[Neeves]

A well impaled boulder can be a real challenge to remove from any anchor.

Jonathan

 

[DennisF]

I have taken my Bruce with me when I changde boats, ever since I bought it in the 1980s, on a range of boats 22 - 26ft, and only once had it drag, which was my fault for not putting out enough scope compounded by dragging in to deeper water. Even then it was only dragging very slowly even with a very short scope in weed, and a gusty F6.

Of course, I dont have anthing to compare it with, but then it works. So if it aint broke, dont fix it, is my view. I am concerned at the accounts above, because a number of manufacturers tried to copy the Bruce, and gave it its bad reputation. It seems only a genuine Bruce works properly. Bruce look alikes just dont cut it. Or maybe Im just a reactionary old git - butI have no need to try anything else. As I said - it works fine for me

Yes, a mate and I were looking at a copy claw in the marina a few weeks ago and there are quite a few differences in the angles, flare and profile of them. The side flukes seemed quite blunt in comparison.

 

[Neeves]

Which is why it is important when people denigrate 'Bruce' to ascertain whether they are talking about a genuine model or one of the very many, supposed, copies. Similarly other anchors - small difference in 'design' can make a huge difference in performance.

Interestingly Evan Starzinger - who sails in some hostile places rejected his 'new gen' anchors and replaced them with 2 x Bruce.

The OP stated he had an original Bruce, lucky man!

Jonathan

 

[noelex]

The Bruce anchor is a hard anchor to classify. It looks, and works quite differently from any other anchor design.

Despite being a very old design, I have a bit of a soft spot for the Bruce. It does not have the holding power of modern designs, nor the versatility to work well in a large range of substrates, but with a suitable bottom it sets well. Unlike some designs, it manages reasonably at very short scopes.

Here is a photo of Bruce doing very nicely:

 

[Neeves]

Great photo

I have to ask - what makes the Bruce 'work differently' to all other anchors?

Which anchors do not work at short scope? and what is 'short' - 2:1, 4:1?

Jonathan

 

[BrianH]

Which is why it is important when people denigrate 'Bruce' to ascertain whether they are talking about a genuine model or one of the very many, supposed, copies.
[ ... ]
The OP stated he had an original Bruce, lucky man!

As did I in my post.

denigrate · v. criticize unfairly; disparage.

I did not consciously "denigrate" but objectively described my experiences, recognising that not all anchors are good everywhere and that my Bruce (genuine) was excellent in the soft silt of the local Italian lagoons.

Nor am I inexperienced with anchoring, having spent the past 35 years cruising the Adriatic as far as the Ionian and practically always anchoring, many times in the >50 knot bora gales that we can get. Before that, for 12 years, I cruised the NE coast of Britain from the Humber to the Forth from my Whitby base and anchored extensively throughout the area. I have owned and used genuine CQRs (still carry as backup), Danforth (also carry as backup), Fisherman (for kelp off Holy Island), Bruce and Rocna (current bower). In 2009/2010 I delivered a friend's Jeanneau 44 from Grenada to the Dominican Republic equipped with a Bügel, anchoring extensively throughout the Windward Isles and with which I was most impressed, ranking it every bit equal to my Rocna.

 

[Neeves]

Barnacle - I detect you might think my post was aimed at you - it was not. Please do not take offence.

I was trying to make the point that people denigrate a product when they are actually referring to something that might look like the original but in reality is but a shadow of the branded design.

Bugel, CQR, Delta, Danforth are all subject to the same problem. As an example people, in the UK or Australia, often say their Danforth performs poorly - how many genuine Danforths are actually on yachts in either country? There are countless anchors that are distantly related - but how many are exact and precise copies - I don't know, partially because I have seen so few originals. I visit UK and Australian chandlers - I have never seen a genuine Danforth for sale. I am sure it is possible to buy them - but not so easy for the numbers of people who might, imply they are discussing a real branded 'Danforth'.

I can assure you my comment was totally unconnected to anything you posted.

Jonathan

 

[NormanS]

Well, I've got a genuine 20kg Danforth sitting here doing nothing, since it was superseded by a Fortress of roughly the same dimensions, but a third of the weight. Anyone interested, get in touch.

 

[BrianH]

Barnacle - I detect you might think my post was aimed at you - it was not. Please do not take offence.

I was trying to make the point that people denigrate a product when they are actually referring to something that might look like the original but in reality is but a shadow of the branded design.

Bugel, CQR, Delta, Danforth are all subject to the same problem. As an example people, in the UK or Australia, often say their Danforth performs poorly - how many genuine Danforths are actually on yachts in either country? There are countless anchors that are distantly related - but how many are exact and precise copies - I don't know, partially because I have seen so few originals. I visit UK and Australian chandlers - I have never seen a genuine Danforth for sale. I am sure it is possible to buy them - but not so easy for the numbers of people who might, imply they are discussing a real branded 'Danforth'.

I can assure you my comment was totally unconnected to anything you posted.

Jonathan

No problem Jonathan, I suppose, having voiced a criticism of the Bruce, I may have been oversensitive and thought that I should state my credentials to do so.

You raise a valid point about copies - I have no idea if my Danforth is genuine, only that it looks like it is and it replaced the Bruce as soon as it failed to set on hard sand with a sparse growth of covering sea grass ... and then continued as my bower anchor most satisfactorily until I took delivery of my Rocna in 2007 - from the only European supplier in those days, in Holland. Even now it is in the cockpit locker of a heavier ship as backup number 3.

Somewhere in my cellar there lies a now unused IWC chronograph watch that I bought a lifetime ago in the covered market in Phnom Penh. Of course it is a fake, although it cost almost ten times what the average fake watch costs in SE Asia, and a knowledgeable friend (every second Swiss here is a mechanical watch connoisseur) informs me it is in a class that normally has to be sent to the manufacturer in Schaffhausen to be verified. My point is, if such a sophisticated product can be so perfect in every visible detail, what chance to know the provenance of a simple anchor?

Supplier and price, perhaps. I would never be tempted to place my ship and life at risk with a cheap copy of an anchor, although I have seen many for sale so some clearly do. Probably the majority are just used as lunch hooks but one never knows what can happen at sea.

 

[Neeves]

Barnacle,

The OP asked for real world experience - yours is as valid as the next man's. You have used a genuine Bruce, you found it wanting and described why. I thought your comments useful and perfectly valid. If a Bruce was perfect we would all use them!

They had gone out of production when we needed to choose our anchor wardrobe - so the choice was not there for us. I see them, but have never used one (a genuine one) but have used Lewmar's and Manson's interpretations -- but that is of no use to the OP

If they are still on bows after 45 years (and are much copied) then they have merit - but anchors are a compromise.

Jonathan

 

[DennisF]

Barnacle,

The OP asked for real world experience - yours is as valid as the next man's. You have used a genuine Bruce, you found it wanting and described why. I thought your comments useful and perfectly valid. If a Bruce was perfect we would all use them!

They had gone out of production when we needed to choose our anchor wardrobe - so the choice was not there for us. I see them, but have never used one (a genuine one) but have used Lewmar's and Manson's interpretations -- but that is of no use to the OP

If they are still on bows after 45 years (and are much copied) then they have merit - but anchors are a compromise.

Jonathan

Yep, it's a conundrum! I don't want to just blindly shell out in excess of £300 for a Rocna which may not even fit my bow roller, but do worry about the reports of the Bruce, hence my post. I'm going to try to spend the early part of the season anchoring overnight on the Bruce in a river, and see if I can build up some confidence (or alternatively enable me to decide to change) before the big trip. Thanks to everyone for all the advice.

 

[rob2]

I'm always surprised at the idea of getting a good night's sleep at anchor. I never thought of myself astoo much of a worrier, but I choose to satisfy myself that the anchor has set and then sleep in the forecabin. I sleep fitfully amidst general snoring and pop my head up through the hatch from time to time to check the transits (so that's why he does them from the foredeck!) and assess any neighbours proximity - after all they may drag down onto us. The change of tide is unmissable as the chain drags across the seabed, amplified in the forecabin like an old gramophone. The bow roller is the stylus and the forepeak the horn.

I have indeed got a cheap immitation Bruce "type" 7.5kg, which is specified for my bower, but I only use it as a lunch hook - OK, I've only used it to drag myself off after an accidental careening... Set well enough in the sand (beach) off the Hamble entrance. I can't bring myself to consider an anchor I can carry so easily in one hand as big enough for a bower.

Breakfast is OK at anchor but I need a nap by lunchtime and though I've never had to rouse the crew to reset the anchor (yet) I have spent a good few hours in a Greek marina in a storm adjusting the lines of the rest of the charter fleet to stop them grinding their transoms against the quay, whilst their occupants slept - meeting the flotilla lead crew coming the other way doing the same, so maybe I'm not paranoid.

Rob.

 

[Kelpie]

You sound like me a few years ago. Sleep is important, it's not nice to be lying awake worrying about the anchor.
I got a HH GPS with drag alarm and left it on my pillow, problem solved.
(In conjunction with the engine being left with seacock open, key in ignition).

By the way, I have a 10kg genuine Bruce that came with my boat... from the sound of this thread I a, wondering if it might be worth something?

 

[sailorman]

You sound like me a few years ago. Sleep is important, it's not nice to be lying awake worrying about the anchor.
I got a HH GPS with drag alarm and left it on my pillow, problem solved.
(In conjunction with the engine being left with seacock open, key in ignition).

By the way, I have a 10kg genuine Bruce that came with my boat... from the sound of this thread I a, wondering if it might be worth something?

Mebe £75

 

[noelex]

Great photo

I have to ask - what makes the Bruce 'work differently' to all other anchors?

Which anchors do not work at short scope? and what is 'short' - 2:1, 4:1?

Jonathan

The Bruce is a rather unique anchor. If we take just one aspect of the design the large tri-lobed fluke: this has both advantages and drawbacks. On the plus side the anchor still has some grip when on its side as the anchor will still have one fluke at least partially buried. On the down side it is tough to get these three large flukes past weed roots so the anchor is relatively poor in weed (as others have already mentioned). It is a pity that no other manufacturer has taken the design of Bruce and tried to develop it further. The only other anchor that is remotely like the Bruce is the Max, and this is marketed as a specialist soft mud anchor rather than a general purpose design.

As far as the anchor is concerned, it is the angle of pull on the anchor shank that is important so "short scope" varies a bit with anchoring depth (assuming chain rode), but at common anchoring depths I would be thinking of around 3:1, or less. All anchor designs will have less grip as the scope is shortened, but some models lose a higher percentage of grip than others.

The best short scope performers appear to be the concave roll bar anchors, the Bruce and the Spade. The worst performers in my view are the fixed convex plow anchors. Most anchors are somewhere in between.

The ability of an anchor design to set at short and even very short scopes is not a vital characteristic, but it is a useful attribute that opens up anchorages and anchoring opportunities that would otherwise not be available. It also gives some confidence that at slightly greater scopes (say 3:1-4:1) that the anchor has some reserve capability.

 

[Seajet]

I have used a genuine 7.5kg Bruce on my 22' medium displacement boat for 37 years on and off.

It's been frankly brilliant, the only time it let go at an awkward moment was in the old anchorage opposite Salcombe town, when I was unaware of the strong eddy which goes along the beach unsetting anchors.

I use it with 6 metres of fairly heavy chain and 30 metres of nylon; it has held us in severe gales at Studland and other places on several occasions.

AS a double precaution I carry a 7kg folding grapnel too on holidays; this is mainly to lower in smooth folded state halway down the bower warp as an angel, this seems to work well for me.

The grapnel will also hopefully grab a toehold on rock and weed, ie in emergency situations where I haven't chosen to be anchoring - but it is of course weak at the hinge pins and just a temporary breath-getter...

Another very good thing about the Bruce as well as being a good shape for stowing on bows or in my anchor locker, is that it has no moving parts to nip fingers, a good thing especially with novice crew.

I have used my chum's Rocna from his Centaur foredeck quite a few times; it's a fine anchor, but Jeez, trying to get it through the pulpit past the forestay with that ruddy roll bar is like doing one of those metal puzzles !