Best Value For Money New Generation Anchor

[noelex]

I note you are unable to support your contention that a large anchor, particularly a Mantus can be used at short scope ratios.

The "contention" that a larger anchor will hold at a shorter scope is just common sense. A larger anchor has a greater holding power than a smaller anchor of the same design, but an anchor at shorter scope has lower holding power than the same anchor deployed with a longer scope. The above is universally acknowledged apart from in very unusual substrates such as solid rock.

It is always sensible to anchor on as long a scope as practical, consistent with not interfering unduly with the anchoring room of others and with the overall size of the swinging room available and the likely wind strength. Chain in the locker does no good. However, a larger anchor gives the ability to anchor securely at lower scopes in settled conditions and this opens up a number of anchoring possibilities that would otherwise be unavailable.

The legendary Steve Dashew has reported his experiences when anchoring with large Rocna anchors much better than I could, so read his thoughts on the subject. He reports regularly using very short scopes to be able to squeeze his large boats into small anchorages. He uses very large anchors in relation to the size and windage of the boat.

Quote:
"Short Scope Anchoring:
While this high spec gear is designed for adverse conditions it has one big advantage in every day use, you can anchor on much shorter scope." End quote

It is also worth reading the thoughts of Beth Leonard and Evans Starzinger aboard Hawk. They used the same sized anchors in an almost an identically sized aluminium yacht to my previous yacht. Their experiences mirror my own showing that going up in anchor size by one or two steps has a positive benefit if you need to anchor on a shorter scope.

 

[Neeves]

The Starzingers used a Bruce, in Patagonia and Labrador and Novak a CQR (both of the same weight as your Mantus)- are you suggesting your Mantus used only in Greek waters is equivalent to their Bruce/CQR of the same weight. How do you know they are different.

However your anchor will have roughly the same hold as a 60kg Bruce (or well set 60kg CQR, actually bigger than Novak's CQR which is just under 50kgs) - so you are quite correct - you are comparing like with like.

Dashew has motor yachts with engine capacity and thus ability to set deeply factorially greater than any auxiliary engine on a sailing yacht. You are not comparing like with like - and it is dangerous and irresponsible to draw the comparisons you make. You have never experienced the conditions of either Patagonia or Labrador, you have never demonstrated use of the Mantus at short scope - yet you compare yourself, your common sense and your (lack of) experience with those that have been there and done that.

You completely ignore the evidence of video showing the shortcomings of setting a Mantus at short scope ratios. You completely ignore the evidence that a Mantus sets shallow. This is not a problem for you - that's your issue - but there are a coterie of disciples to whom you owe an explanation - not me but them. Maybe being the internet that responsibility no longer exists

Sleep well

Jonathan

 

[noelex]

This is not a problem for you - that's your issue - but there are a coterie of disciples to whom you owe an explanation - not me but them. Maybe being the internet that responsibility no longer exists

Sleep well

Jonathan are comments like this really necessary?

There is no need to direct personal attacks. This thread is about anchors, those lumps of steel that sit on the seabed.

 

[Sybarite]

Here is an actual case of somebody anchoring in a hurricane with a 105lb Mantus.

His contention is that you don't get any material advantage by using a scope of more than 7 : 1.

OTOH the fact that the Mantus can be dissassembled means that you can easily store an oversized one for those special occasions.

The video is also useful in showing how he prepared the boat by reducing windage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52vu7bbvqC0

 

[Neeves]

Jonathan are comments like this really necessary?

There is no need to direct personal attacks. This thread is about anchors, those lumps of steel that sit on the seabed.

You are the only person making irresponsible claims that you have never tested. You repeat advise from others that is totally inapplicable - but you omit to mention that you have never tested it nor that it might not work in a leisure sail yacht application. You obviously have no idea how the Mantus works, or do not want to admit same. You have constantly criticised anchors where there were faults 15 years ago that have since been corrected and of anchors you have never tried. You compare the set of anchors to a Mantus, that sets shallow (and that you say is well set, when it is not) when these anchors are possibly not 'set' at all but simply dropped onto the seabed. You constantly say a Fortress trips on a change of tension - in the face of their have sold half a million copies (the market does not agree with you) The comments are personal because you are the only one making the claims.

The answer is in your hands - stop being irresponsible.

If you stand on a pedestal making outlandish claims you cannot justify nor defend you get noticed - its the price of shouting.

Jonathan

 

[RichardS]

You are the only person making irresponsible claims that you have never tested. You repeat advise from others that is totally inapplicable - but you omit to mention that you have never tested it nor that it might not work in a leisure sail yacht application. You obviously have no idea how the Mantus works, or do not want to admit same. You have constantly criticised anchors where there were faults 15 years ago that have since been corrected and of anchors you have never tried. You compare the set of anchors to a Mantus, that sets shallow (and that you say is well set, when it is not) when these anchors are possibly not 'set' at all but simply dropped onto the seabed. You constantly say a Fortress trips on a change of tension - in the face of their have sold half a million copies (the market does not agree with you) The comments are personal because you are the only one making the claims.

The answer is in your hands - stop being irresponsible.

If you stand on a pedestal making outlandish claims you cannot justify nor defend you get noticed - its the price of shouting.

Jonathan

I think that it's worth me pointing out that this is just an internet forum, nothing more and nothing less. It's not a learned treatise nor a scientific hypothesis.

I reckon that 50% of the recommendations that I post up on here, based on 50 years of personal experience, will be denounced as rubbish by several forumites. However, although I know that they are mistaken or misled, I would not accuse them of being irresponsible and ask that they refrain from posting their views, even though the subject under discussion is often a critical safety matter.

It's up to other forumites to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff on the basis of what I and the others have written. Anyone who takes anything written on this forum, or indeed the entire global internet, as the gospel truth most definitely needs to have their head examined.

Richard

 

[Neeves]

Thanks Richard,

It good to have a sane voice of reason occasionally - advice accepted with humour.

Jonathan

 

[GHA]

I think that it's worth me pointing out that this is just an internet forum, nothing more and nothing less. It's not a learned treatise nor a scientific hypothesis.

I reckon that 50% of the recommendations that I post up on here, based on 50 years of personal experience, will be denounced as rubbish by several forumites. However, although I know that they are mistaken or misled, I would not accuse them of being irresponsible and ask that they refrain from posting their views, even though the subject under discussion is often a critical safety matter.

It's up to other forumites to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff on the basis of what I and the others have written. Anyone who takes anything written on this forum, or indeed the entire global internet, as the gospel truth most definitely needs to have their head examined.

Richard

Add to that noelex has a point, neeves will never miss an opportunity to have a dig at him. Odd, noelex has posted so much really useful photography of a multitude of different anchors, neeves just has a bee in his bonnet for some reason. About many things...

 

[GHA]

Anyone who takes anything written on this forum, or indeed the entire global internet, as the gospel truth most definitely needs to have their head examined.

Ain't that the gospel truth..


Hmmm., gone dizzy now...

 

[Neeves]

Add to that noelex has a point, neeves will never miss an opportunity to have a dig at him. Odd, noelex has posted so much really useful photography of a multitude of different anchors, neeves just has a bee in his bonnet for some reason. About many things...

The photography is excellent - this has never been in doubt. It is subject to different interpretation.

Actually much on this forum is of excellent value - maybe its the exception to rule - and long may it last.

Jonathan

Edit - and Richard, you do yourself a gross injustice, the advice I see you giving (and I don't read everything you post) always seems very sound to me. close edit

 

[robertj]

I think that it's worth me pointing out that this is just an internet forum, nothing more and nothing less. It's not a learned treatise nor a scientific hypothesis.

I reckon that 50% of the recommendations that I post up on here, based on 50 years of personal experience, will be denounced as rubbish by several forumites. However, although I know that they are mistaken or misled, I would not accuse them of being irresponsible and ask that they refrain from posting their views, even though the subject under discussion is often a critical safety matter.

It's up to other forumites to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff on the basis of what I and the others have written. Anyone who takes anything written on this forum, or indeed the entire global internet, as the gospel truth most definitely needs to have their head examined.

Richard

youre talking rubbish Richard!! lol

 

[robertj]

I wanted a Mantus but settled on a second hand Rocna which was a bit oversized but beggars can't be choosers as it were.
I hear the benefits of the Mantus being able to dismantle but I have to vouch for the Rocna I have as it folds away in the anchor locker just right! lol
I would still want a Mantus, the tests you see online shows their holding power is much better than all their competitors.

 

[Saguday]

Not convinced about the Mantus, especially after the recent dragging reports, although the break-down-ability is attractive.

Knox and Spade are my shortlist, find it difficult to choose between the two so may have to buy both eventually to replace our current CQR and Bruce. I've always liked the Spade, should have bought one 10 years ago when I was first chatting to Alain about it, and the Knox appeals because of it's brute performance and being made locally.

 

[MM5AHO]

I wanted a Mantus but settled on a second hand Rocna which was a bit oversized but beggars can't be choosers as it were.
I hear the benefits of the Mantus being able to dismantle but I have to vouch for the Rocna I have as it folds away in the anchor locker just right! lol
I would still want a Mantus, the tests you see online shows their holding power is much better than all their competitors.

It would be interesting to see a comparative test between the Knox and the Mantus. Knox fares well against all those mentioned, but as far as I know, not tested against a Mantus.

 

[Flica]

It would be interesting to see a comparative test between the Knox and the Mantus. Knox fares well against all those mentioned, but as far as I know, not tested against a Mantus.

I think there are few independent comparative tests of the Mantus.
Neeves has a bee in his bonnet about it never setting @ better than 16 degrees to the seabed, a setting attitude that neither I or 3 other Mantus users have been able to duplicate.
I personally think that there is little to choose between modern concave anchors (at risk of being shouted down by those who have a vested interest).
For me, the Mantus' lighter weight than comparable fluke-area anchors, is its over-riding benefit.
It certainly starts its set at a smaller angle than many other concave anchor but, providing you have enough power, sufficiently heavy a rode and a correctly sized anchor for your boat, it always buries, to hide (in my experience) its roll bar in sand.
As they say, you pays your money and takes your pick.. (intentional pun)
I'd agree the Knox shows great promise, IMHO better than Excel, or any of the plough anchors (and I wore out a CQR over 15 years of intensive use).
But it does cost 30% more than the comparable weight Mantus.
However I'm of the opinion that the most critical factor in anchoring (apart from the anchorers' competence) lies in the nature of the sea-bed - so I carry 4 different anchor designs, only one being a concave one - the Mantus.

 

[Neeves]

Neeves has a bee in his bonnet about it never setting @ better than 16 degrees to the seabed, a setting attitude that neither I or 3 other Mantus users have been able to duplicate.

Only because on the Mantus demonstration videos underwater, Noelex aka John Smith underwater video etc and all the still shots of a Mantus show the portion of the shank to which the shackle is attached, the longest section of the shank, as being horizontal. It you measure the angle between fluke and that same section of the shank - it is oddly enough 16 degrees, or thereabouts. Consequently if the section of the shank to which the shackle attaches is horizontal then the fluke is at 16 degrees to the seabed.

Its not evidence I have concocted, its evidence purporting to show the Mantus in a good light.

Now - quite happy to accept all Noelex images, all Mantus promotional videos are not typical thus rubbish - but show me the correct attitude.

Now if this is too complex for some, apologies - but I have limited interest access currently.

 

[Flica]

Only because on the Mantus demonstration videos underwater, Noelex aka John Smith underwater video etc and all the still shots of a Mantus show the portion of the shank to which the shackle is attached, the longest section of the shank, as being horizontal. It you measure the angle between fluke and that same section of the shank - it is oddly enough 16 degrees, or thereabouts. Consequently if the section of the shank to which the shackle attaches is horizontal then the fluke is at 16 degrees to the seabed.

Its not evidence I have concocted, its evidence purporting to show the Mantus in a good light.

Now - quite happy to accept all Noelex images, all Mantus promotional videos are not typical thus rubbish - but show me the correct attitude.

Now if this is too complex for some, apologies - but I have limited interest access currently.

Not too complex - the correct attitude of a properly set Mantus is with the roll bar @ 90 degrees to the seabed - as you so rightly say, many (not all) noelex's shots of his Mantus were with the roll bar at a more acute angle. Quite easily explained when you include the fact that his Mantus was oversize (I believe 2 sizes too large) and he would neither have the boat weight or the available power to fully bury this vast area of fluke. In your case, I believe, you prefer to use lightweight chain, which means that the catenary angle will be greater (less acute) as you pull the anchor to set. Hence a shallow burying angle. Nothing inexplicable, no smoke and mirrors, just a natural concomitant of changed parameters.

I hate to sound patronising, but some of those early Mantus videos were truly amateur!! I certainly ignored them in my original purchasing decision in 2012.

 

[Neeves]

The fluke angle is largely a characteristic of design, not on the weight of the rode.

The 15kg Mantus I have has been used with 8mm chain, Goldilocks chain, not to heavy, not too light, just right. My images are the same as Noelex. Panope's images are the same as Noelex, except he shows the Mantus continuing to move in the seabed - something you would expect of a shallow fluke angle. Part of Noelex mantra is that a big anchor is 'better' than a small one - you seem to be saying a small one sets better. Noelex has said, I paraphrase - modern anchors set with the shackle and toe engaging together - all the videos contradict this, the shackle does not get near burying until all of the shank is buried. Noelex also says that you can use a mantus at short scope - you are suggesting that rode angle will reduce setting angle - which would mean at short scope the anchor would not set deeply - and safely.

Too many contradictions - you and Noelex cannot offer opposite conclusions of the same product - its a nonsense.

Fluke/seabed angle is primarily a function of design - which is why all the videos, all the still shots from a variety of sources show exactly the same characteristics. Without except the fluke angle is 16 degrees - I have yet, in all the images available, to see anything as high as 20 degrees.

Search and find me an image of the Mantus with toe and shackle burying together - and that will show a fluke angle of 30 degrees - which is how a Rocna, Supreme, Excel, Bruce, Delta, Spade set. Its a brave designed who steps outside the norm.

 

[NormanS]

I reckon that choice of anchorage for the conditions, and choice of suitable seabed, are far more important than the choice of anchor. Tens of thousands of boats anchor successfully with a huge variety of anchors. All this argy-bargy about the perceived benefits of different designs owes more to marketing and fashion, than it does to cold reality.
(Ducks, and runs for cover)

 

[GHA]

I reckon that choice of anchorage for the conditions, and choice of suitable seabed, are far more important than the choice of anchor. Tens of thousands of boats anchor successfully with a huge variety of anchors.

Thousands of cruising boats don't have that choice of anchorages, take what you get. Which is why more and more switch to the better all round new gens. Of a size on the big side.