30boat
N/A
I think you're being too kind on the CQR
Looking at those videos I'm surprised it sets at all.
Dragging of anchors
- Thread starter Neeves
- Start date
Looking at those videos I'm surprised it sets at all.
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
I think you're being too kind on the CQR
It doesn't. Those of us who claim to find it satisfactory are lying, hallucinating or both.
30boat
N/A
I had a 25 pound CQR that came with my previous boat.It had rusted badly which thinned the flukes a lot making them sharp.I had it zinc sprayed to try and make it last a bit longer.It would set in mud and sand after a few tries and never dragged but I didn't trust it. Then I made a Bugel copy and couldn't believe the difference!
CAPTAIN FANTASTIC
Well-Known Member
In summary; there are a number of parameters that would affect the Dragging of anchors; sea-bed media, concave/convex fluke, angle between head and shank, weight, anchor rod.
However, in my opinion, new generation designs differ fundamentally from older designs in two areas; the weight of the tip has increased hugely, and the overall distance between the crown and the end of the fluke has been increased a lot too. These two critical design changes make the anchor more effective, reducing dragging.
However, in my opinion, new generation designs differ fundamentally from older designs in two areas; the weight of the tip has increased hugely, and the overall distance between the crown and the end of the fluke has been increased a lot too. These two critical design changes make the anchor more effective, reducing dragging.
geem
Well-Known Member
What you have never had you never miss. Ignorance is bliss......
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Whatever you say. Whatever you say. As long as my fertile imagination can hold the boat in place, I'm happy.
Delfin
Well-Known Member
I think that is true, at least that certainly conforms to one of the stated and advertised design features of the Ultra. They say the hollow shank is to increase tip weight proportion. Probably does, but the lead in the tip most certainly does compared to older designs.
30boat
N/A
I think the hollow shank thing doesn't work.If you add the wall thicknesses including the bar inside you end up with the same amount of metal as a solid shank.The air inside will provide some flotation but I doubt it makes a difference.
Delfin
Well-Known Member
Could be. Anyway, the lead in the tip swamps the shank so whether a solid shank or hollow the Ultra is very tip heavy, which seems a virtue. Still like your improved model, though...
30boat
N/A
) Making a bigger one now.I must be anchor mad...NormanS
Well-Known Member
It's not really such a NG design feature. My Fisherman has at least 50% of its weight on the tip. Does that qualify it as an NG anchor?
vyv_cox
Well-Known Member
The secondary design feature is fluke surface area. How does your fisherman do on that?
NormanS
Well-Known Member
Very poorly. Just pointing out that tip loading is not everything, and certainly nothing "New Generation" about it.
However, in hard bottoms, and weed, the good old Fisherman is as good as any of the Post Modern, or whatever the current Buzz terminology demands.
30boat
N/A
They are ,until the boat swings and the chain catches the sticking out flukes.
NormanS
Well-Known Member
Well yes, but no thinking person would lie only to a fisherman, in a situation where the direction of pull was going to change by more than 180º.
I'm not trying to say that a fisherman, or indeed any anchor is perfect in all situations. I'm merely pointing out that the so called New Generation anchors don't have a monopoly in good tip loading. I carry four separate anchors, and use whatever, or indeed whatever combination, is appropriate in the circumstances.
30boat
N/A
I agree
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
As anyone with a Fortress knows.
Neeves
Well-Known Member
Sorry but the 85 years of 'life' of the CQR simply underlines the fact that the anchor worked. If it did not work it would have died 80 years ago. If it did not work it would not adorn the bow rollers of so many yachts - unless people are suggesting that those with genuine CQRs either do not anchor or are simply mad.
It works, the fact that after 85 years there have been improvements should not be a surprise - but that does not mean that a CQR does not work.
What on earth do people thing yacht owners used prior to 1970, when the Bruce was introduced, or late 80s when the Delta was introduced - it was a CQR. It was not perfect but it worked much of the time, despite photographs (on CF) and videos (posted above). It is easy to take an image of an anchor showing it does not work - a child can do it, and many of the images (good though they are) look as though they might be trying to prove a point with bias rather than be honest.
JD - do but be riled, it is simple ignorance on their part.
Edit I have focussed on the CQR (above) but the same can be said of the Bruce, genuine, and Delta, 45 years and 25 years old respectively. They might be 'pre-modern' but they were an improvement then and worked, otherwise we would not see them today. Since the CQR we have welding technology available in every garden shed, we have steels simply not even a dream 85 years ago. It would be amazing if design and manufacture had not improved - but it is a testament to success that people still use these pre modern designs - without complaint.
Another modern design I think I might have missed, The Scoop, though only available from West Marine, so maybe Robin can comment.
And I specifically do not use NG as I think Peter Smith who coined it had such a tight definition that it would exclude, Kobra, Scoop, Fortress, Vulcan?!, Spade, Excel - he might have wanted to exclude the Supreme - but that was an ask too big. I recall, and might be very wrong - I have not bothered to check as its not important - it demanded a roll bar and concave fluke, no weight in the toe.
close edit
It is very difficult to argue against any product that is still used 85 years after its introduction. Yes there are, might be, better - but that does not mean it cannot be used.
Jonathan
It works, the fact that after 85 years there have been improvements should not be a surprise - but that does not mean that a CQR does not work.
What on earth do people thing yacht owners used prior to 1970, when the Bruce was introduced, or late 80s when the Delta was introduced - it was a CQR. It was not perfect but it worked much of the time, despite photographs (on CF) and videos (posted above). It is easy to take an image of an anchor showing it does not work - a child can do it, and many of the images (good though they are) look as though they might be trying to prove a point with bias rather than be honest.
JD - do but be riled, it is simple ignorance on their part.
Edit I have focussed on the CQR (above) but the same can be said of the Bruce, genuine, and Delta, 45 years and 25 years old respectively. They might be 'pre-modern' but they were an improvement then and worked, otherwise we would not see them today. Since the CQR we have welding technology available in every garden shed, we have steels simply not even a dream 85 years ago. It would be amazing if design and manufacture had not improved - but it is a testament to success that people still use these pre modern designs - without complaint.
Another modern design I think I might have missed, The Scoop, though only available from West Marine, so maybe Robin can comment.
And I specifically do not use NG as I think Peter Smith who coined it had such a tight definition that it would exclude, Kobra, Scoop, Fortress, Vulcan?!, Spade, Excel - he might have wanted to exclude the Supreme - but that was an ask too big. I recall, and might be very wrong - I have not bothered to check as its not important - it demanded a roll bar and concave fluke, no weight in the toe.
close edit
It is very difficult to argue against any product that is still used 85 years after its introduction. Yes there are, might be, better - but that does not mean it cannot be used.
Jonathan
Last edited:
Robin
Well-Known Member
Jonathan, I know nothing about the west Scoop other than what I found here.http://www.westmarine.com/buy/west-marine--scoop-anchors--P015985708 The review copied and pasted here is on west site for a 25lb one, on sale now $159.99 I will look next time I go to our local store to see if they have them on display. When I sell my original nd inherited 33lb S/S claw, one might be a suitable buy as onboard spare if it will fit through/into our lazarette locker which the claw will not. The usual Danforth styles don't fit either nor does a 25/35lb delta so our spare currently is a Fortress FX-11 kept dismantled in it's carry bag but with a short length of chain and 150ft nylon rode attached to the shank ready to go. Our primary45lb Delta stows on the bow roller..
We picked up a 25 lbs. version of this anchor for our 24,000 lbs. Tayana 37. Before getting the anchor, we had a 55 lbs. Rocna (primary), 45 lbs. Bruce, 35 lbs. CQR, and large Danforth on board.
Wanting to get an idea of how well the new West anchor worked, I put it through the paces, using it as a primary anchor and trying to tear it out of the set by motoring in opposite directions on it. We found that the anchor worked as well or better than everything but our 55 lbs. Rocna. The West anchor holds more often than our Bruce or CQR (despite the weight difference) when we backed down on it at high RPM. It also either did not pull out or quickly re-set when we changed direction on it. We anchored on it in mud bottom and strong reversing current with no problem. The anchor is also incredibly easy to move around both because of its lighter weight compare to our other anchors and because of its streamlined design.
Obviously, I would purchase a heavier version if I was thinking of using the West for my primary anchor, but it will serve as our go-to backup and lunch hook. And if I was in the market for a new primary on a budget, I would definitely think about picking up a larger size of the West. I suspect you will not be disappointed if you give it a try.
We picked up a 25 lbs. version of this anchor for our 24,000 lbs. Tayana 37. Before getting the anchor, we had a 55 lbs. Rocna (primary), 45 lbs. Bruce, 35 lbs. CQR, and large Danforth on board.
Wanting to get an idea of how well the new West anchor worked, I put it through the paces, using it as a primary anchor and trying to tear it out of the set by motoring in opposite directions on it. We found that the anchor worked as well or better than everything but our 55 lbs. Rocna. The West anchor holds more often than our Bruce or CQR (despite the weight difference) when we backed down on it at high RPM. It also either did not pull out or quickly re-set when we changed direction on it. We anchored on it in mud bottom and strong reversing current with no problem. The anchor is also incredibly easy to move around both because of its lighter weight compare to our other anchors and because of its streamlined design.
Obviously, I would purchase a heavier version if I was thinking of using the West for my primary anchor, but it will serve as our go-to backup and lunch hook. And if I was in the market for a new primary on a budget, I would definitely think about picking up a larger size of the West. I suspect you will not be disappointed if you give it a try.
Neeves
Well-Known Member
Well done Robin, I had not seen that review. My only query (of the review) is why if its good enough, or might be good enough, would it only be suitable for someone on a budget. If its good enough why would it need to be expensive. Why are only expensive anchors appropriate?
Its made in NZ, says so on the label.
Jonathan
Its made in NZ, says so on the label.
Jonathan
