Quandary
Well-Known Member
Knox anchor
Sounds as if this one will be worth waiting for.
Sounds as if this one will be worth waiting for.
Correct size of anchor - new gen against old
- Thread starter smeaks
- Start date
silver-fox
Well-Known Member
I think Craig makes a number of valid points about the ease with which both information and disinformation is available on the internet.
Where I disagree with him is that the majority of us are not naive and we can smell out these appallingly poor and shallow reviews and treat them accordingly. Frustrating as it may be for Craig this level of cynicism means that he too is not taken at face value! This cynicism results in the inertia that he wrongly attributes to old age and hardened attitudes when he should be attributing it to prudence in most cases!
The issue of near useless reviews is a major issue for the magazines although they may not realise it yet. In my eyes they are devaluing their brand names to a point where many readers are wondering if they can trust anything some wet behind the ears journalists controlled by cost conscious editors are saying. There is quality out there, but it is getting sadly rare. Writers like Nigel Calder for example are truly impressive but there aren't many of them.
Brands like Yachting Monthly and Practical Boat Owner took years to build, but are now seriously under delivering, but it is the nature of big corporations that they do kill the goose that lays the golden egg in the interest of short term profits. I subscribe to both, but each month I am disappointed that there are so many articles that I just cannot be bothered to read to the end. Frankly this forum is more vibrant and more interesting!
Turning back to Craig, I think he (mostly) acts responsibly using his position to supply good information. Everyone knows he is wearing his Rocna hat and can factor that in, so I am, on balance, grateful to him for his input and he should be encouraged to continue. But he has his challenges because having successfully persuaded the world that new generation anchors are worth the investment, he now has to win the second battle which is to persuade the world that HIS anchor represents the best value/performance.
As for me, well I saw the Sail/Yachting Monthly anchor tests a couple of years back which helped me short list - because it seemed to be the most thorough/trustworthy test. From that short list I picked Rocna.
So on board I have a 25 kg Rocna as a bower anchor (50 metres10mmm chain and 50 metre 16mm achorplait), a reserve 20kg Rocna to be laid in extreme conditions and an Aluminium "Fortress copy" made by Vetus which I picked up for Kedge use in the Med. (On a 42 ft, 10 tonne boat)
Two years later, as a liveaboard that avoids marinas, with many nights of anchoring under our belts I am completely satisfied.
Where I disagree with him is that the majority of us are not naive and we can smell out these appallingly poor and shallow reviews and treat them accordingly. Frustrating as it may be for Craig this level of cynicism means that he too is not taken at face value! This cynicism results in the inertia that he wrongly attributes to old age and hardened attitudes when he should be attributing it to prudence in most cases!
The issue of near useless reviews is a major issue for the magazines although they may not realise it yet. In my eyes they are devaluing their brand names to a point where many readers are wondering if they can trust anything some wet behind the ears journalists controlled by cost conscious editors are saying. There is quality out there, but it is getting sadly rare. Writers like Nigel Calder for example are truly impressive but there aren't many of them.
Brands like Yachting Monthly and Practical Boat Owner took years to build, but are now seriously under delivering, but it is the nature of big corporations that they do kill the goose that lays the golden egg in the interest of short term profits. I subscribe to both, but each month I am disappointed that there are so many articles that I just cannot be bothered to read to the end. Frankly this forum is more vibrant and more interesting!
Turning back to Craig, I think he (mostly) acts responsibly using his position to supply good information. Everyone knows he is wearing his Rocna hat and can factor that in, so I am, on balance, grateful to him for his input and he should be encouraged to continue. But he has his challenges because having successfully persuaded the world that new generation anchors are worth the investment, he now has to win the second battle which is to persuade the world that HIS anchor represents the best value/performance.
As for me, well I saw the Sail/Yachting Monthly anchor tests a couple of years back which helped me short list - because it seemed to be the most thorough/trustworthy test. From that short list I picked Rocna.
So on board I have a 25 kg Rocna as a bower anchor (50 metres10mmm chain and 50 metre 16mm achorplait), a reserve 20kg Rocna to be laid in extreme conditions and an Aluminium "Fortress copy" made by Vetus which I picked up for Kedge use in the Med. (On a 42 ft, 10 tonne boat)
Two years later, as a liveaboard that avoids marinas, with many nights of anchoring under our belts I am completely satisfied.
jason -and the arguenauts
Well-Known Member
Don't see why you would. People can be dispassionate about what they own.
Personally I havent got a preference amongst the 4 different anchor types I have accumulated but I wouldnt for a moment pretend that I have given them any sort of scientific test. Not least because I dont believe that a scientific test is practical because of the almost infinite variability in the sea bed. The only true method would be a very large number of comparative tests in a large random range of bottoms - sufficient in number to give a statistically sound result.
When instead you have people doing limited tests in one or two sea bed areas you end up with inconsistent data which is why near every anchor test ranks different anchors differently and often end up with a different winner. In other words, the differences between test results in different mags can be commercial interest or different test methods or simply random variation.
I'm a great beiever in technical progress and quite prepared to believe that the generality of modern anchors are a step forward. But at the moment it's a belief not a hard fact IMO.
NormanS
Well-Known Member
I'm amazed to see that people still use anchors. When I get to where I want to be, I just pull out the pin securing my "Thru-tube" mounted mast, and it nails the boat to the seabed. 
BrianH
Well-Known Member
Sorry if the 'tongue-in-cheek' part of that was not clear, I know I am dating myself by quoting Mandy Rice-Davis but I thought it had passed into the lexicon of contemporary parlance ... Of course I can be objective about what I have bought, even such things as my expensive Rocna. In fact, I can sometimes be downright abusive about them when they end up as not 'fit for purpose' as I am beginning to think my in-boom reefing system is. But that's another story and subject for an entirely different thread.
With reference to the test I quoted, I think Craig's comments are entirely valid. For such a highly regarded publication (in German-speaking countries) to publish such results with little or no explanation of how they conducted their tests is bordering on irresponsibility and disinformation, which entirely invalidates their results. Especially when, in the case of the Rocna, they are in contradiction of the many published opinions of blue-water cruisers and their real-world experiences. And not to mention the exhaustive and well documented tests conducted by West Marine on behalf of other yachting publication which came to some very different results and which I found infinitely more compelling. In fact, enough so to convince me to order my anchor.
I was tempted to quote Miss Rice-Davies again there but now realise that it can be misinterpreted, so better not.
Last edited:
Chris_Robb
Well-Known Member
I bought a copy of the october addition to read on the train. Its the first one I have bought since last December.
I left it on the train.
jason -and the arguenauts
Well-Known Member
Well you would say that, wouldnt you?
What I was trying to say is that the variability of the possible test sites and methods is such that only a statistical approach has value. Anchor holding is not something that you can test like a bolt with just a few pulls on a machine. So I dont think any amount of explanation of the German tests would make a difference.
Twister_Ken
Well-Known Member
I was interested to read, in the ST 'article' that 'scoop' style anchors could jam-up with substrate, making them difficult to reset. Also that they come to the surface with a fair old divot attached. True or false?
srm
Well-Known Member
Unless, one is very silly most anchors will hold most of the time.
However, I use an overweight anchor all the time, and devise ways to handle it easily because just once every few years I have found myself anchored and conditions have got worse and worse. By the time its bad enough to think about deploying a storm anchor its too bad to lift the normal anchor, put the big one on the cable, and relay it - so if staying overnight I drop the big hook first time, every time. If it gets bad I can motor up towards it and drop a second big hook on its own cable.
Over 99.9% of the time I know my gear is far too heavy - but I have stayed put at anchor with winds in the 60 to 80 knot range (in UK waters) on two occassions in the last 30 years. To my mind that justifies my 'overweight' gear. It also means I can sleep soundly through a normal summer blow or leave my boat unatended at anchor for a few days without worries.
However, I use an overweight anchor all the time, and devise ways to handle it easily because just once every few years I have found myself anchored and conditions have got worse and worse. By the time its bad enough to think about deploying a storm anchor its too bad to lift the normal anchor, put the big one on the cable, and relay it - so if staying overnight I drop the big hook first time, every time. If it gets bad I can motor up towards it and drop a second big hook on its own cable.
Over 99.9% of the time I know my gear is far too heavy - but I have stayed put at anchor with winds in the 60 to 80 knot range (in UK waters) on two occassions in the last 30 years. To my mind that justifies my 'overweight' gear. It also means I can sleep soundly through a normal summer blow or leave my boat unatended at anchor for a few days without worries.
srm
Well-Known Member
The first time I used a big Bruce it failed to dig in, on lifting it had a herring barrel hoop over the middle fluke. Next time it came up with a slab of rock like a tomb stone wedged in its mouth by a smaller rock! 50kg anchor on 50 ft MFV. These were the only problems in many years of using real Bruces, except for dragging a toy one with a catamaran. It was genuine Bruce anchors that held in the 60 knot plus winds mentioned in my post above.
Over the last few years I have used a 15 kg Oceane which digs in instantly, and takes a bit of getting out. Chain tight up and down, leave it for five minutes or so, then haul up. Always came up with a biggish sample of bottom and often the lower strata but this was removed with boat hook and anchor just below surface, or buckets of water with anchor hanging at stem head. Never had it jam, but anchoring is a lottery, even if you can see a nice clean sandy bottom it may only be a thin veneer over stones or silty mud.
BrianH
Well-Known Member
Well, it would if we knew exactly how they tested so we could compare with other tests.
I'm sure Craig will be back to make it all clear better than I can
Chris_Robb
Well-Known Member
Yes they do come to the surface with a good divet, so good that we got some decent clams a few weeks back!
roblpm
Well-Known Member
Thought i would resurrect this thread rather than starting yet another anchor thread!!
I have a Parker 275 (28 feet, about 3000kgs) and want to replace the copy plough anchor it came with.
So I got my daughter to make a cardboard 15kg spade, and it wont fit in the anchor locker as it is quite shallow.
What is weird is that if you look at 3 anchor manufacturers websites, you get the following recommendations for my boat:
Spade 15kg
Rocna 10kg
Manson Supreme 6.8kg (15lbs)
Weird eh!!
Anyway the only one that will fit is the Manson Supreme so assuming this is only for the occasional overnight in fairly benign conditions I will try that I think as two others on this thread seem to be happy with it for similar size boats.
On another related topic the bow roller is tiny and doesn't seem to be there for the purpose of temporarily mounting the anchor, so assume the drill is take it out of the locker, dangle it over the biw, and run the chain through the roller! At which point the light anchor will be a blessing!
GHA
Well-Known Member
Possible suppose. Though I spent months in a muddy river with a convex resetting 4 times a day and didn't budge an once from the transits so doesn't seem to be too much of an issue. It's come up with a fair bit of mud before. But works every time so will stay on the boat.
alahol2
Well-Known Member
On a similarly sized but slightly heavier boat I've been perfectly happy with a 10Kg Delta in strongish winds and quite strong currents. Our anchor lives in the anchor well and is only lifted onto the bow roller as we come in to anchor. When leaving, it comes onto the bow roller until we are in clear water then it's lifted into the locker.
I'm not sure I would want to go down to 6.8Kg even if it is new generation.
I'm not sure I would want to go down to 6.8Kg even if it is new generation.
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Golly. I use a 25lb genuine CQR on my 26', 3,000kg boat, and that's one size up from the recommended. Those Spade and Rocna sizes are surprisingly large; the Manson one sounds far more plausible.
noelex
Well-Known Member
Wow an old thread.
The Spade, Rocna and Manson supreme are all excellent anchors. They have very similar holding power for identical sizes, which shows how stupid and inconsistent the anchor sizing charts can be.
One factor to take into account is the Rocna lifetime warranty that covers bending is null and void if you select an anchor smaller than recommended. However both the Spade and Manson have no such warranty no matter what size you select.
The Spade, Rocna and Manson supreme are all excellent anchors. They have very similar holding power for identical sizes, which shows how stupid and inconsistent the anchor sizing charts can be.
One factor to take into account is the Rocna lifetime warranty that covers bending is null and void if you select an anchor smaller than recommended. However both the Spade and Manson have no such warranty no matter what size you select.
Neeves
Well-Known Member
I suppose as the Manson Supreme is made from high tensile steel, as designed, then it is less likely to bend. A guarantee is not much use at 2am in the morning on the west coast of Scotland. An anchor made from high tensile steel, for which there are no reports of bent shanks, is something that engenders a bit of sleep. One could buy the product with the lifetime guarantee - and no mention of steel quality - but why bother?
Jonathan
Jonathan
Last edited:
GHA
Well-Known Member
Just noticed
westernman
Well-Known Member
Probably the single most important thing which determines how well any reasonable anchor design will hold is quite simply its surface area. Do not expect a modern anchor with less surface area than a CQR to hold better - it won't.
Area for area a modern anchor will be lighter than a CQR and will almost certainly have more weight on the tip so it will dig in easier.
If you want to stay put, there is no substitute for size - whatever kind of anchor you choose.
If you want something to dig in easily, there is no substitute for a large amount of weight on a small point and an arrangement to ensure the point is pointing in the right direction. The best for digging in of course is a big fishermans anchor.
Area for area a modern anchor will be lighter than a CQR and will almost certainly have more weight on the tip so it will dig in easier.
If you want to stay put, there is no substitute for size - whatever kind of anchor you choose.
If you want something to dig in easily, there is no substitute for a large amount of weight on a small point and an arrangement to ensure the point is pointing in the right direction. The best for digging in of course is a big fishermans anchor.
Last edited: