Does anyone here have any advice to give about anchors?

I tend to set the anchor by going astern when there's nothing else to influence things (ie wind or current). No great digging the thing in, just gently astern until the chain goes tight and the boat stops. That's with a Rocna. When I had a CQR, there used to be much entertainment as we gently motored astern trying to get the thing to set before hauling it up to try again. And again........ Horrid useless lump of scrap. I kept it on the foredeck for the rest of the season as a spare. When it slipped into the ogin in Sant Carles no one mourned its disappearance.
 
duncan99210 said:
I tend to set the anchor by going astern when there's nothing else to influence things (ie wind or current). No great digging the thing in, just gently astern until the chain goes tight and the boat stops. That's with a Rocna. When I had a CQR, there used to be much entertainment as we gently motored astern trying to get the thing to set before hauling it up to try again. And again........ Horrid useless lump of scrap. I kept it on the foredeck for the rest of the season as a spare. When it slipped into the ogin in Sant Carles no one mourned its disappearance.[/QUOTE

The best use of a CQR


Click to expand...
 
NormanS said:
Can anyone explain to me how an anchor knows whether it is being "set" by an engine in astern, or just by the wind.
With a sailing yacht, I frequently anchor under sail, and my ***** anchor works fine. When did it become compulsory to "set" an anchor using 'x' engine revs?
Click to expand...

No-one is suggesting it to be compulsory. It is clear from the number of boats we all see dragging across anchorages that plenty do not. If the wind is at the top end of force four and above I rarely bother to run the engine astern, as the action of the boat in sliding sideways during the anchoring usually sets it perfectly well.

There have been quite a few experiments designed to compare wind and engine pulling strengths. For me, 2500 rpm is equivalent to about force 6. A man who runs a sailing school on the west coast of Scotland produced graphs using an Anchorwatch load cell comparing somewhat more scientifically. I have a large spring balance on board with which I intend to do the same thing, when I get around to it.
 
Neeves said:
There is a suggestion that a grossly oversize anchor cannot be set sufficiently deeply (because the available engine power is insufficient) and the anchor simply sits with the fluke in the soft top surface.
Click to expand...


charles_reed said:
Noelex uses an anchor 2 sizes larger than recommended by Mantus a point that Jonathan keeps on making - heavier anchors ALWAYS perform better than their less weighty brothers in the maker's range.
Click to expand...


Wow we have some diverse views on this topic :).

Jonathan and I have very different sized anchoring gear. His 15kg anchors on a 38 foot catamaran are, on my reading, two sizes smaller than Rocna would recommend. My own 57kg Mantus (or previous 55Kg Rocna) on an aluminium 48 foot monohull is two steps over the Rocna recommended size. Most boats will be somewhere in between, although it is rare to meet a private cruising boat, that has been out for any length of time with an anchor smaller than the size recommended by the Rocna tables.

My advice for a cruising boat is to fit the largest anchor you can comfortably manage. This is not an original idea. It was heavily promoted by Steve Dashew who exalted the advantages of larger anchors in allowing him to be safe in marginal substrates and where necessary using short scopes. His thoughts have been widely published. In his current 64 foot (skinny and low windage) production FPB he fits a 110 kg Rocna, so he follows his own advice (with 10mm chain !)

Other much more accomplished cruising sailers than myself have followed suit. For example, Evans Starzinger aboard Hawk, which is an almost identically sized and constructed vessel to my own, has used the same sized anchors as I do (a 50kg Bruce or a 55 kg Rocna). Morgans Cloud's advice is to fit "one size larger than is recommended for your boat size or if at all possible two sizes larger". This is not say their views are right, or the only option, but these are very experienced sailors.

Of course there is no perfect answer. Jonathan's practice of always setting at least two small anchors when the wind is forecast at 30 knots would drive me mad. I cannot see how it would be practical cruising the Med over winter or perhaps even the Cyclades over summer, especially after factoring in un-forecast strong wind. No doubt he would similarly feel the weight of an oversized anchor on the bow of his lightweight cat would be too much.

I think it is up to the owner to decide based on their type of vessel and sailing area, whether to oversize the anchor or not. However, I don't agree with the suggestion that an oversized anchor will cause holding problems.

I have used an oversized Rocna and now an oversized Mantus for approximately 2000 nights at anchor and have never felt the size caused the anchor to set inadequately. I have photographed every single set of the Mantus and every other anchor in the same anchorage that I have seen over the last 18 months. My oversized Mantus has often been the best set of any of the other models in the anchorage. These photographs are available for anyone to see. Make up your own mind.

In my view a larger anchor will invariably beat a small one in terms of holding.

The ideal when oversizing your anchor is to reduce your chain size by one step. If you can do this the overall ground tackle (bow) weight can be significantly less despite a larger anchor. You can even make the chain longer and come out well ahead.

In terms of cost, larger anchors are more expensive, but one large anchor is cheaper two small anchors and associated rodes, so if you plan on deploying two anchors in stronger wind this will be more expensive than the KISS solution.

Anyway, these are just my thoughts. A larger anchor gives me not only greater security on an everyday basis it makes it safe (in my view) to live at anchor in the Med over winter, to anchor in locations where the holding is more suspect or where a shorter scope is needed. This is a lot advantages for a small increase in weight over the recommended size anchor.

Personally, with any design of steel anchor I would be wary of going much below the table of sizes recommended by Rocna if you are intending to anchor overnight in possibly adverse conditions.
 
Neeves said:
If a genuine anchor costs Stg500 and you only use it for 60 nights per year - its cost you less than stg10 per night, for the second year - it halfs etc. Its incredibly cheap insurance.



A genuine anchor will last 'almost' for ever. It is a lot of money for, what looks like, a pretty unremarkable combination of steel plates - but people spend that sort of money for a mobile phone that's no better (really) than last year's model and the new one will last 18 months? Its a question of priorities - and how a serious long term cruiser, who lives at anchor, can consider saving money on such a critical item of kit (when there are sensible alternatives) beggars belief.

Jonathan
Click to expand...

+1 The most expensive anchor is half the price of of an iPhone6/Galaxy 6 or alternatively, 20% of what my new genoa is costing.
 
eddystone said:
+1 The most expensive anchor is half the price of of an iPhone6/Galaxy 6 or alternatively, 20% of what my new genoa is costing.
Click to expand...

Unless its a Spade. Ours was slightly more expensive than an iPhone6, but I would have no hesitation in buying another one if I needed to. It's been excellent.

An interesting point about sizes. When we switched from a CQR, the recommended size was 20kg for our boat, which was bigger than the 35lb CQR we were replacing. The 35lb CQR came with the boat when it was built in '72.
 
Last edited:
Sorry posting without thinking. Price of anchors compared to iphone was referenced to size suitable for Sadler 32; i.e. 12kg Manson Supreme (If there was room to pass between the roller and the furling drum) - obviously VFM issues a bit more critical if you have a much bigger boat.
 
charles_reed said:
There's probably little to choose between Spade (the original) Rocna (exorbitantly priced), Manson, Bugel or Mantus. The Ultra, beautiful though it is, is totally uneconomic unless bought in Turkey.
I found the Mantus the least ridiculously priced and bought that - a 25lb one is as recommended for my boat, cost $US 340, delivered Greece from Texas.
I'd suggest you buy the one that leaves the smallest hole in your pocket. Likely to be a Bugel or Mantus.
Rocna, despite their claims for the efficiency of their anchor seem to demand you buy a far heavier one than anyone else, perhaps that's why they come highest in cost of any anchor choice.
I've used the Mantus for 144 anchorings, during this season, 1 mis-set, 1 drag on a seagrass rhizome and 1 drag on an old tyre.
Click to expand...

Charles - in a later post you suggested you had used your new anchor, 25lb, in a 54 knot wind without any issues.

There was a thread a month or so ago on whether modern anchors dragged. Other than catching crab pots or old fishing nets no-one who contributed mentioned that their modern anchor (call them new gen if you must) had dragged. No-one was disappointed.

edit: http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?440143-Dragging-of-anchors&highlight=Modern+Anchor close edit

The overall conclusion of the thread was that modern anchors were reliable.

Most people who contributed to the thread who had modern anchors bought the anchor to a size recommended by the manufacturer, a surprisingly large number, maybe a large minority had gone larger (this must have helped line the anchor makers pension fund) and a few had gone smaller. Those that went larger bought a 25kg, rather than a 20kg or a 33kg instead of the recommended 25kg. So larger was not buying a 40kg instead of a 20kg model. Those that went smaller did so on the basis that if the anchors were better then there was no need to buy one the same size as the one previously on the boat and thus bought something smaller.

None of these people suggested they had ever dragged their modern anchor - and Charles you have found your, correctly sized anchor, was quite acceptable in 54 knots.

The question has to be - when is an anchor twice the size of that recommended for your yacht needed? No-one in the thread had issues - so what is the justification for the concept - unless you are an anchor maker. I apologise if the answer is glaringly obvious - but it beats me.

We appear to have modern anchors that are factorially better than older designs (and those older designs are still in use to the same sorts of weight) and simultaneously we have taken to oversizing our anchors.

Have we lost confidence in the anchor, ourselves or do we have too much money?

Jonathan
 
Last edited:
noelex said:
Wow we have some diverse views on this topic :).

Jonathan and I have very different sized anchoring gear.

.
Click to expand...


I'm not alone in being slightly incredulous



From Cruisers Forum, same thread

qoute:



J
Location: cruising SW Pacific
Boat: Jon Sayer 1-off 46 ft fract rig sloop strip plank in W Red Cedar
Posts: 7,328

Re: Photos of Anchors Setting

Wow, Nolex, that pic shows that either your anchor is truly huge, or that your mermaid is really tiny (or maybe that you use a weird lens!).

Jim
__________________
Jim and Ann
s/v Insatiable II, back in Noumea getting ready to clear for Oz


SailRedemption




Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: New Orleans




Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Wow, Nolex, that pic shows that either your anchor is truly huge, or that your mermaid is really tiny (or maybe that you use a weird lens!).

Jim

I was going to say something very similar!

That roll bar is massive.. I'll take the 85lb thanks.

Very cool picture regardless of the mermaid to anchor size ratio.
__________________

end quote

Starzinger, Morgan's Cloud and Dashew are all basing their choice of anchor on sailing in higher latitudes, Greenland or Patagonia. In Dashews case - intentionally sitting in the path of a named hurricane and using only one anchor (good test - but how many find themselves in this situation). I simply find the suggestion of carrying an anchor twice the size recommended slightly unrealistic.

I would hope anyone with a focus on higher latitudes would have evaluated their ground tackle and used it themselves and would not rely on these threads. These threads are thus for we lesser mortals :)

Jonathan
 
Last edited:
Neeves said:
Starzinger, Morgan's Cloud and Dashew are all basing their choice of anchor on sailing in higher latitudes, Greenland or Patagonia. In Dashews case - intentionally sitting in the path of a named hurricane and using only one anchor (good test - but how many find themselves in this situation). I simply find the suggestion of carrying an anchor twice the size recommended slightly unrealistic.

I would hope anyone with a focus on higher latitudes would have evaluated their ground tackle and used it themselves and would not rely on these threads. These threads are thus for we lesser mortals :)

Jonathan
Click to expand...
Again - twice the size? -Who said that?

And you missed the caveat...

Anyway, these are just my thoughts. A larger anchor gives me not only greater security on an everyday basis it makes it safe (in my view) to live at anchor in the Med over winter, to anchor in locations where the holding is more suspect or where a shorter scope is needed. This is a lot advantages for a small increase in weight over the recommended size anchor
 
GHA, my apologies - but if a 33kg anchor would fit an anchor makers size requirements and the owner buys a 55kg or 58kg anchor - its as near twice the size as you can get - with out being 2.5 times, or 3 times which might be the next anchor size up (edit, for a Rocna the next size up is 70kg). I think you will find that Dashew is also using anchors around 'twice' the size, through he appears to have dropped Rocna for a Supreme in his biggest vessel.

Nothing wrong with moving one size up from that recommended, so 15kg to 20kg or 25kg to 33kg - whether you need it is obviously debatable (Charles seems to have successfully used his anchor of the recommended size at 54knots - so it appears to be 'big enough', if not too big - who knows). However if you sleep better, whether you need it or not - that is important (and not a factor ever discussed).

As a separate issue I have wondered about the impact of carrying a monster anchor when the yacht is, inevitably, subject to an ocean swell, with seas on top - and waves break over the bow. Not in terms of weight but in terms of surface area - presented to a large wave.

Jonathan
 
Last edited:
Neeves said:
GHA, my apologies - but if a 33kg anchor would fit an anchor makers size requirements and the owner buys a 55kg or 58kg anchor - its as near twice the size as you can get -
Click to expand...
it's actually 1.66 for a 55. Very different from twice which just comes across as subjective spin.

I think you will find that Dashew is also using anchors around 'twice' the size, through he appears to have dropped Rocna for a Supreme in his biggest vessel.
Click to expand...
Google didn't come up with anything for the supreme, but this from Rocna - who discourage going up!! Though for full time living on the hook it sort of does get covered..
Windhorse was 1.57 X rocna recommendations.

http://kb.rocna.com/kb/Rocna_sizing_recommendations
Going over our sizing recommendations could in some cases be justified, for example by the requirement to use very low scopes (short rodes). In this case, a higher angle of pull will be applied to the anchor, necessitating a higher element of dead-weight in the anchor to resist this. As a real world example, Steve Dashew uses a Rocna 110 on his 84' powerboat Wind Horse. Our recommendation for this boat is a Rocna 70. However, Dashew routinely anchors in tight and non-ideal anchorages, and reports his Rocna perfectly secure at scope as low as 2:1.
Dead weight can be required in other circumstances, such as when anchoring on a sea-bed into which the anchor cannot possibly be set (e.g. solid rock, or a very thin layer of sand over coral pan, etc). The anchor then depends solely on its weight in order to generate friction against the bottom.
Click to expand...
 
Neeves said:
As a separate issue I have wondered about the impact of carrying a monster anchor when the yacht is, inevitably, subject to an ocean swell, with seas on top - and waves break over the bow. Not in terms of weight but in terms of surface area - presented to a large wave
Click to expand...
Good point.
Maybe from a pushing the bows off point of view, if strength is an issue then your anchor roller isn't strong enough for the type of cruising which might need the benefits of an an oversize anchor once in a while :)
 
On the new 130' - that's a real biggie - for serious cruising.

This comes from the website: http://www.setsail.com/?s=Manson+Supreme&x=0&y=0

Paul Shard Says:
July 27th, 2015 at 3:00 am
I see you have upsized from the Rocna 240 on your 83 footer to the larger 350 Manson on your new Dream Machine 78… were there times you felt the 240 was not sufficient? Or any other reason for the switch?
Steve Dashew Reply:
July 28th, 2015 at 5:43 am

Hi Paul: First reason for going bigger is because of additional windage. The second is because this allows even shorter scope.

Bob N Says:
July 27th, 2015 at 9:52 am
Not so much an anchor as a way of life. Why the change to Manson?
Steve Dashew Reply:
July 28th, 2015 at 5:45 am

Howdy Bob: The Manson is locally built (New Zealand) in a Lloyd’s approved shop.


The vessel (130') falls off the Rocna sizing chart so I do not know what they might recommend, vs what was chosen. It falls off the Manson sizing charts but Manson do say this:

NOTE: The Supreme is a Super High Holding Power Anchor, so a size smaller than the Plough may be used - ie 30lb Plough may be replaced with a 25lb Supreme.

The Manson Plough sizing charts is as follows


. Manson Plough 60lb
48' - 55'

Maybe 27kgs, vs 58kg for the Mantus - so instead of downsizing, as Manson suggest, the weight is effectively doubled, or 2.14 to be pedantic :)

Jonathan


edit - My 2 times was a 'ball park' figure baed on Noelex, Dashew et al actual usage - it was not intended to be spin, exaggeration for impact. close edit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top