CQR-----Delta--------Manson and price is an issue.

[stav]

An anchor can never, ever, be "too good".

With my original NZ produced Rocna I do find it sometimes reluctant to break out but always, with patience and progressively making fast and allowing the scend of the sea motion to ease it up, I can always retrieve it. But it often brings up a lot of seabed.

I really don't understand those that with a component that costs such a small fraction of what it is connected to, plus with lives at risk, can rationalise a case of "best value" in choosing an anchor.

There is only one criterion - the best for you, whatever the cost, save on something else .... perhaps a cheaper plotter or smartphone, or summat? But never your anchor.

I agree with the rational to your thought and some basic items need to take priority. For me I have already saved on the car, phone, plotter, mooring and still can not afford roller reefing for the genoa or a feathering prop. The standing rigging is also 16 yrs old but she was not used for 5 years before I bought her and inspect it each year. Other factors need to come in to the equation as well, surely, as we only anchor for 15 or 20 days per year and when on board the anchor alarm is on and I am quite fussy about what weather/tide conditions are prevailing before I go ashore. Other factors include how much effort you want to put in to anchoring, my old CQR and danforth together held whilst a F9 blew through a sheltered anchorage but it took some time to set them and we had a huge scope out with chain on both.

 

[doug748]

I really don't understand those that with a component that costs such a small fraction of what it is connected to, plus with lives at risk, can rationalise a case of "best value" in choosing an anchor.

Coo. I don't think I have posted much on this subject before but I have three in short order.



I don't think the statement attached, would be made by an engineer or, indeed by a Philosopher of the School of Argument. It happens a lot when the dread word safety comes into play. I recall the halfwit who accused a member of attempting to "murder his children" because he did not carry a liferaft. The other chap who got a baulocking for "putting his life at risk" by not fitting a radar - he sailed a Hurley 18.

It is based on a series of wobbly premises, explicit and implicit:

1 - That we know which are the best performing products and that one of the ways we can evaluate this is by cost - The more you spend the "safer" you are.

2 - That judgements of cost or convenience have no validity.

3 - That dragging anchors - put "lives at risk" in some statisically significant way

The tone implies; That new is best, That we accept what we are told by the people who know (rode out three hurricanes), That we follow the crowd. That if we can only spend a lot all will be well. Even the original poster was bullied into changing his stance.

There also seems to be a stiff dose of fashion and Toys for the Boys/Boat in a number of the replies.

Engineers and society make safey judgements all the time. Could aircraft be engineered to be more durable by (say)adding 10% more weight? Of couse they could. Why do we not do it? Cost.

Now I have no doubt given the impression that I am in some way against New Generation Anchors (how easily we fall for the coywriters wiles). In fact I do not care a rat's rectum either way. But I am against some of the bull which has stuck to the shoe of some of these passionate postings. I am also sceptical of clever marketing which has shoved a crude, basic engineering product into the same selling bracket as newest pair of trainers.

Simondjuk - My present arrangement is coming to the end and I may be looking at the same two anchors. The shank of the Delta looks feeble to me , the same for the Kobra and that is also burdened by being supplied in parts. On balance, if I do change, I might go for the Delta, it might bend but is unlikely to break.

I think that is me finished, I am all anchored out.

Unless someone else says something daft.

 

[noelex]

The risk of injury, or death from an anchor not working adequately is remote.
Occasional an anchor is needed in dire situations such as engine failure when blown on to a lee shore, but these instances are rare and in most cases the accident is survivable.

I know of only one death, in unusual circumstances, and that was from another boats anchor not holding.

However, if you anchor regularly overnight dragging it is one of the most common ways to damage a boat. A purely economic argument for a better anchor, given the reduced risk of damage can be made in some, circumstances.

This does not mean everyone needs the best anchor. If you are anchoring during the day, in settled conditions, with easy holding there is little justification for the more expensive options.

 

[Simondjuk]

Simondjuk - My present arrangement is coming to the end and I may be looking at the same two anchors. The shank of the Delta looks feeble to me , the same for the Kobra and that is also burdened by being supplied in parts. On balance, if I do change, I might go for the Delta, it might bend but is unlikely to break.

I think that is me finished, I am all anchored out.

Unless someone else says something daft.

Indeed, I'm not sure I'm keen on a bolted together anchor either, so will probably opt for the Delta. I'll go up a size to 20 kilos on a 40 foot boat if it fits on the roller. If not, I'll go for the recommend 16 kilo job, which comes at £140 vs £314 for the Manson. I'm content a 16 kilo Delta on 60 metres of 8mm chain will cope in all situations where I wouldn't already have elected to clear out.

Whilst I agree in part with the poster who stated that an anchor can never be too good, I would temper the statement by adding that it only needs to be good enough, plus a bit. I'm confident that my proposed set up will be just that, and at a saving of £174 to boot.

If I drag all over the shop, I'll come back and put my hands up to having made a bad call. That said, I don't hear many tales of woe about Deltas in that respect.

 

[Sybarite]

Doug748

French tests showed that the Delta sometimes had problems in resetting if the angle of pull changed. The Kobra 2 had no such problems. On the other hand, the FOB Rock which resembles the Delta and the Kobra 2 had twice the holding power on the latests tests. I have no personal experience of any of these.

 

[Sybarite]

Indeed, I'm not sure I'm keen on a bolted together anchor either, so will probably opt for the Delta. I'll go up a size to 20 kilos on a 40 foot boat if it fits on the roller. If not, I'll go for the recommend 16 kilo job, which comes at £140 vs £314 for the Manson. I'm content a 16 kilo Delta on 60 metres of 8mm chain will cope in all situations where I wouldn't already have elected to clear out.

Whilst I agree in part with the poster who stated that an anchor can never be too good, I would temper the statement by adding that it only needs to be good enough, plus a bit. I'm confident that my proposed set up will be just that, and at a saving of £174 to boot.

If I drag all over the shop, I'll come back and put my hands up to having made a bad call. That said, I don't hear many tales of woe about Deltas in that respect.

I have gone down with a mask on occasion to find that I had been in place for several days and it was only the weight of the chain holding me. I am more conscientious now about digging the anchor in.

 

[oldbilbo]

Indeed, I'm not sure I'm keen on a bolted together anchor either, so will probably opt for the Delta.

I understand that caveat and mulled it over myself, rationalising it by recalling that I flew many thousands of miles, high and low, in benign and in severely bumpy conditions ( multiple high/repeated 'G' loadings ) on wings on multiple airframes that were bolted on. There are many other safety-critical components I use from day to day that are bolted-on. The key is frequent critical inspection.

I was tempted by the rugged simplicity of the Delta. A 'senior' person in a reputable chandlery offered the opinion that Lewmar had done very nicely indeed out of their prices for the Delta compared with its competitors over the years. Then my attention was directed by him to the 'D-Type', which seemed very similar indeed, but was much cheaper. "What about the metallurgical composition", I hear..... Well, I inquired, and here's what I was told...

I understand, from one who knows, that that recipe seems fine. One didn't know owt about any 'treatment', however. I was unable to glean similar info about other anchors. I'm also advised that the next batch of 'D-Types' will have even thicker shafts - as recommended apparently by Lloyds Register Type Approval people - but price should remain just as competitive. When the 'new model D-Type' becomes available AND if Type Approval is verified, I suspect I'll look very hard at one as a successor to my venerable and battle-hardened CQR.

As for....

"....In over 1500 nights at anchor with a new generation anchor I have never had any difficulty...."

...an idle mental calculation suggests that equates to over 4 years' continuous anchoring without break, nearly 10 years' worth at 150 nights per year, or 25 years' worth at 60 nights per year. That's one heck of a length of successful experience, presumably in all sorts of places/bottoms, in all sorts of weathers, and in all seasons, and I take my hat off! Perhaps the good poster might share with us the boat type, anchor type, the rode and scope, and the practices used so I can follow in t'footsteps.

...Even if it's a typo, 150 nights at anchor without 'any difficulty' still represents a considerable depth of experience. The above request still applies.....

 

[Neeves]

Noelex

+1

Doug 748, I have heard of few, actually no, Deltas bending but I have heard of them breaking at the weld and Simondjuk, there are enough cases of Deltas dragging.

Maybe buy a decent anchor is like yacht insurance, actually most people never need insurance, or a decent anchor, (because nothing untoward ever happens) but when something untoward does happen either (or both) the insurance and the decent anchor was quite a cheap decision. In the interim (with both the insurance and the decent anchor), you can sleep soundly. I suspect the anchor costs less than the insurance (and certainly less over the lifetime of the anchor).

Contrarily - despite the rhetoric of the 'buy the better anchor faction' of which I would be part, the insurance companies are not in the least bit interested (nor swayed by the arguments of the anchor makers) - which must underline the idea that losses due to an anchor dragging are not significant.

Jonathan

Oldbilbo,

I think you will find that Noelex has been living on his yacht for the last 6 years, so the 1,500 nights seems like a conservative figure. We do not try to compete, different priorities - but we manage 90-120 continuous nights per annum + minor 10 day trips - we too have little aggravation with our new gen anchor - but our anchoring ideas are poles apart from that of Noelex (we agree to differ) which might underline there is no one answer.

Jonathan

 

[noelex]

...Even if it's a typo, 150 nights at anchor without 'any difficulty' still represents a considerable depth of experience. The above request still applies.....

Yes no mistake I have had a Rocna 55 for nearly 5years (other anchors before that) and on average anchor 330 days a years (usually 365 one year then a haul out bottom paint etc for a couple of months every alternate year.
The boat is a 48 foot one design.

I have dragged the Rocna once. I suspect it was thinnish sand over rock.

As well as as my own anchor it gives me an opportunity to observe other anchors at work. In just the last two hours I have seen the following boats anchor.

Lagoon : Large Kobra terrible technique (going backwards much too fast) but set with a bang.
Hanse : Small Delta good drop but no significant reverse so no idea if it set well.
Marlo: Large Plough (looked like a genuine CQR) didn't set well. Skipper went for a look at the anchor decided to relocate. Good technique for the second try with lots of scope, but the anchor did not set at all. Skipper inspected the anchor and has just rowed out a large Bruce as well (or claw couldn't tell)

On many of these anchors I also go or a snorkel and have look. I think this is the best way of all. For example the anchor can jam on a rock and look from the surface like its set well. (But dinner ashore tonight, so probably not on the above)

My observations do not have the more precise control of variables of the anchor tests, but I always try to offer my opinion on anchor threads FWIW.

 

[snowleopard]

An anchor can be too good. I set a small Fortress kedge in English Harbour when the delta wouldn't hold in the soft mud. Weighing after 3 days it took me half an hour to fight it out of the mud. Had it been my big Fortress FX37 storm anchor it would still be there.

The OP did say cost was a consideration. It's all very well saying spend another £400 on something that might be slightly better but some people don't have that option.

 

[sailorman]

An anchor can be too good. I set a small Fortress kedge in English Harbour when the delta wouldn't hold in the soft mud. Weighing after 3 days it took me half an hour to fight it out of the mud. Had it been my big Fortress FX37 storm anchor it would still be there.

The OP did say cost was a consideration. It's all very well saying spend another £400 on something that might be slightly better but some people don't have that option.

have you experienced any problems with change of wind / tide direction. either not re setting or fouling the chain

 

[Quandary]

To address the original question, I carry both a 11kg. Manson supreme and a 10kg Delta (I also have a 20kg genuine Bruce, but let's ignore that) The Manson is marginally better at setting than the Delta though it once took half a dozen goes in Tobermory, not regarded as a difficult anchorage. The Manson is a lot more awkward to manouvre through the double rail pulpit, (otherwise I would have bought a 16kg). I would probably score the Manson about 6 for holding against 5 for the Delta but to be honest I would prefer a Spade to either. If your anchor is kept on the bow roller then the Supremes awkwardness is not an issue but if like me you prefer to stow it, the Delta might be handier, even at a heavier weight.
The Spade is the most expensive but it depends how much value you put on a good nights sleep.

 

[onesea]

An anchor can be too good. I set a small Fortress kedge in English Harbour when the delta wouldn't hold in the soft mud. Weighing after 3 days it took me half an hour to fight it out of the mud. Had it been my big Fortress FX37 storm anchor it would still be there.

Or it might of carried on dragging in the soft mud on top that the smaller anchor sank through to get in to the clay below? Or been the wrong size to slide under the stones on the mud etc etc... I am not convinced anchoring is as scientific as some would make it...

 

[Neeves]

Or it might of carried on dragging in the soft mud on top that the smaller anchor sank through to get in to the clay below? Or been the wrong size to slide under the stones on the mud etc etc... I am not convinced anchoring is as scientific as some would make it...

My belief is I think anchoring is very scientific, we just do not know what the science is yet. An anchor failure is nearly always blamed on the anchor, techniques, as Noelex describes, leaves something to be desired and some anchor do work 'better' in some bottoms. As someone said - we want anchors that work well 'on average' not ones that are superb (stunning even) in one seabed.

A major problem is that much of the time we have no idea what the bottom is like and even if we do then it is very difficult to define to someone else. Many anchorages are a thin layer of sand over something else, so even when we 'know' we have little idea. Noelex idea of diving to view anchors is good, but its not a very attractive proposition when the water is cold or murky.

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

An anchor can be too good. I set a small Fortress kedge in English Harbour when the delta wouldn't hold in the soft mud. Weighing after 3 days it took me half an hour to fight it out of the mud. Had it been my big Fortress FX37 storm anchor it would still be there.

The OP did say cost was a consideration. It's all very well saying spend another £400 on something that might be slightly better but some people don't have that option.

There has been an interesting debate on this, or a vaguely related, topic on other forum. I would suggest, with no great evidence, that maybe the big Fortress would not have set so deeply and thus have been easier to retrieve. The thought being a small anchor (of the same design) will have a smaller area (or volume) and for the same load will set more deeply, it has less resistance to diving, than a larger version. They might have a similar holding capacity, because holding capacity is measured in or near the horizontal, but different breakout loads (which I have never seen measured, in the vertical) because the upper layers of seabed tend to less consolidated than lower ones.

A Kobra is cheap, it will save that £400, and as long as the owner appreciates the downsides to saving money, the weaker shank - its a great option (better than a Delta and getting up there with a Spade). I suspect most purchasers have no idea of the weakness of the shank - and that, to me, is a problem.

Jonathan

 

[oldbilbo]

Yes no mistake I have had a Rocna 55 for nearly 5years (other anchors before that) and on average anchor 330 days a years (usually 365 one year then a haul out bottom paint etc for a couple of months every alternate year....The boat is a 48 foot one design. I have dragged the Rocna once. I suspect it was thinnish sand over rock.

Right. Now I'm listening....

 

[BrianH]

I agree with the rational to your thought and some basic items need to take priority. For me I have already saved on the car, phone, plotter, mooring and still can not afford roller reefing for the genoa or a feathering prop. The standing rigging is also 16 yrs old but she was not used for 5 years before I bought her and inspect it each year. Other factors need to come in to the equation as well, surely, as we only anchor for 15 or 20 days per year and when on board the anchor alarm is on and I am quite fussy about what weather/tide conditions are prevailing before I go ashore. Other factors include how much effort you want to put in to anchoring, my old CQR and danforth together held whilst a F9 blew through a sheltered anchorage but it took some time to set them and we had a huge scope out with chain on both.

Believe me, as a retired pensioner I know about sacrificing and prioritising to keep sailing. I cannot afford to, but I am told by just about everyone, to replace my 33-year-old VP MD17 engine for which no longer are replacement parts available, especially my local mechanic who keeps it running by canibalising all the old stored ones he has replaced, bless him.

Probably my anchor obsession comes from where I sail, the northern and central Adriatic. A season does not pass without at least once, often more times, finds me grimly hanging on in some remote anchorage as the vicious, gusting to hurricane-strength, bora blasts out of the adjacent mountains on its eastern seaboard.

After fifty years of anchoring with genuine CQRs, Danforth, Bruce and a Bügel I have learned to love the latest of the new generation anchors - in my experience they really do perform better where I sail - setting and holding.

So I can appreciate your dilemma if you anchor so rarely and only in settled conditions, which is quite different to my situation of taking off for the summer and anchoring anywhere and everywhere. And you certainly don't read like you have been "bullied" into making the decision that is not right for you.

 

[Neeves]

But Barnacle - what do you use now and size, + yacht (size)? + chain?

If it appears earlier, my apologies

Jonathan

 

[BrianH]

An anchor can be too good. I set a small Fortress kedge in English Harbour when the delta wouldn't hold in the soft mud. Weighing after 3 days it took me half an hour to fight it out of the mud. Had it been my big Fortress FX37 storm anchor it would still be there.

When I anchored there I had no trouble retrieving a Bügel (an early new generation style) but I was warned about the mass of chain and debris that has collected on the bottom from years of naval usage. As I had to await a delayed crew change I moved to a mooring off the Jolly Harbour marina, which was more convenient - especially for provisioning from the supermarket there.

 

[BrianH]

But Barnacle - what do you use now and size, + yacht (size)? + chain?

I have a 1981 HR94 - the only motor-sailor Hallberg-Rassy ever made. At seven tons cruising trim she is heavy for her 31' but sails surprisingly well.

I have a 16Kg early (NZ-made) Rocna (€400) bower with the original CQR (that came with the boat) as a backup plus a Danforth (works well here) with 60m 8mm chain with another 50m nylon warp for emergencies.