Fortress Anchors

[Vindleka]

I have been happily using a fishermans anchor for the last 10 years. Last year, it dragged a little for the first time through hard sand in wind strengths of around 30 knts. I have decided to get a Fortress anchor. My boat is 10.5 metres and 9 tons and I have 60m of 8mm chain. The recommended size is a FX-16, rated for boats between 10 and 12 metres. The one above it is rated for boats between 12 and 14 metres and is getting on for double the price. In other posts on this forum I have seen recommendations for using the heaviest possible anchor in case of extreme wind conditions. Should I go with the Fortress recommended sizes? Should I be getting the size above? Or is it a waste of time unless I also increase the chain size?

 

[snowleopard]

I have 2 fortresses, an FX16 and an FX37, as kedge and storm anchor respectively on my 40 ft cat. My main anchor is a Delta which I far prefer for normal work. I would be reluctant to use a Fortress for day-to-day anchoring as (a) I have had problems getting them to set - they tend to 'fly' along the bottom on hard sand and (b) re-setting on turn of tide is a problem, they can fail to re-set or fail to turn resulting in a bent shank.

If you really want a lightweight anchor I think an aluminium Spade would be a better bet.

 

[Saguday]

Yep. We use a foldy-up FX37 as our (third) backup storm anchor and have a CQR + Bruce for everyday work. Fortresses are nice and light and easy to store for this purpose. Usual trick to get them to hold down on the bottom is to use heavy/long chain as they are very light anchors and can "skip". Good results from anchor tests in US using 2 Fortresses in tandem in storm situations, though.

Have fancied a Spade as a main working anchor for years but can't justify expense of getting rid of one of our otherwise fine existing anchors...

 

[jimbaerselman]

Fortress is not a very good 'setter' in hard sand due to the light weight at the digging tip. This will be a similar problem with any type of light weight anchors.

Consider any of the 'roll bar' types instead, especially if they'll stow in your bow roller, though I guess this isn't an issue for you since you've been using a fisherman.

In terms of weight, you'd probably get away with 66% of the weight of your fisherman and still have improved setting and holding with any of the 'modern' anchors - Spade, Rocna etc etc.

And for 10 tons, 8mm chain will be fine . . . and better if you always back it up with a 10m+ nylon snubber.

 

[davidbains]

Like many others I carry a Fortress 16kg as a second anchor. The lightweight makes it very easy to row out if necessary. However few skippers use them as a main anchor. My main anchor for the last few years has been a Delta, and in future will be a Rocna. I'm sure the 16 should be big enough for a 10mtr boat especially with 60mtrs of chain!! With a multi as Snowleopard says an alloy Spade is attractive but I resist the idea of an anchor in two pieces at least as main anchor.

 

[ChrisE]

I'd agree with all of the above, especially the idea of ali spade. We tried using our Fortress as the main anchor and whilst it never dragged and easy to deploy it was a sod to store on the bow roller without digging into the gelcoat. We now use ours as a spare and it sits below or on a plate on the stern.

David_B, you might like to look at the morganscloud website regarding the efficacy of a spade, they use theirs in quite exposed conditions and are impressed, as are we.

 

[scarlett]

I have used a 3 kg Fortress as a main anchor on a 25 footer for 3 years in the Med. [No electric winch.] It is no good in Eel grass and I suspect Kelp as well. If it digs in it holds. The three kg one with a chum will hold a 30 footer in sand in a bit of a blow [F6].

I now hang, nearly perfectly, on a 12kg Oceane [with a winch].

 

[HoratioHB]

Did anyone see the Yachting Monthly report on anchors the other month ? The fortress was streets ahead of any other although I can understand how they could be a problem on hard bottoms. I am just speccing/outfitting and have decided to bin the kedge in favour of a FX37 which is as light as the original kedge the broker was going to supply and has about 3 times the holding power.

 

[CraigB]

Although I'm about to buy a Danforth, I did look at Fortresses. The cost was the first thing that put me off. But I saw quite a few comments from people about the shanks bending. They do dig in well, but perhaps too well, as when you swing, the anchor doesn't always follow and puts big lateral pressure on it. Don't take my word for it, I am really no expert on anchors at all, but that was just what I'd gleaned after searching fora while trying to decide on a suitable second/kedge anchor. (They may have been referring to something a bit lighter than the FX37 though..)

 

[jimbaerselman]

The YM article on anchoring was beaten to death in several threads on these fora shortly after it was published. If I knew how to search out these old threads . . .

I don't remember the Fortress coming out 'streets ahead', excepting when holding power was compared with anchor weight.

But size for size the fortress was in there with other 'flat' anchor types (Danforth) but with it's own disadvantage of not digging in to hard surfaces. And of course, the fault that all flat anchors have - tipping out when there's a significant lateral pull (and not always resetting if they've caught a dishful of mud, an old stone, or whatever jamming them up).

Just what I recall of the discussions. Anyone hot on searching old threads will dig this up quite quickly . . . just like a lateral twitch on a Fortress?

 

[scarlett]

Fortress makers reckon they are guarantteed for life and will replace bent bits free. The downside is that you might need the anchor, you might be on the move and then there is the postage costs.

I bent one of my Fortress flukes when going astern , to dig it in in soft sand and caught it on a rock. The boat didn't move! I took the fluke to a workshop and they straightened it in minutes.

 

[craigsmith]

If you've gotten used to a Fishermans, pretty much anything will be better, but a Fortress will prove to be the "other extreme", if that makes sense. Going from a heavy small fluke anchor to a light large fluke design does not seem sensible.

As Snowleopard and others hint, a Fortress is not a good general purpose anchor.

[ QUOTE ]
Did anyone see the Yachting Monthly report on anchors the other month ? The fortress was streets ahead of any other although I can understand how they could be a problem on hard bottoms.

[/ QUOTE ]The test was on hard bottoms, so I can't see how you arrive at both those comments. In any case, the Fortress did not do so well; its peak results are explained by it being about twice the size of any of the other contenders, its actual holding figures were considerably less impressive, and furthermore it failed (shank or fluke bent) during the testing.

That testing is on our website.

 

[thailand69]

Whilst I can understand that you want to promote your business, whenever these threads appear (in whatever place)I do get the feeling of being somewhat oversold to..........which always makes me kinda wary - Especially with products that if any good should really be pretty much selling themselves from the experiances of users............

 

[Sea Devil]

I am very wary of 'tests' with anchors... They do not cover all situations, bottoms, angles etc etc... Statistics.... There is no doubt that the CQR is regarded by most Cruising Boats as the best general purpose anchor there is for all bottoms and conditions. The majority of people who regularly anchor use a CQR..

Having said that I carry a Fortress with a couple of metres of 8mm chain on it then warp, as a bower anchor - stern anchor and have been constantly amazed at its holding and setting ability... There is a small adjustment between the shank and the flukes which enables you to increase the 'dig' angle and the little length of chain I use seems to make it dig into the hardest of pack sand. What is also important is the angle of pull... need to let out lots of warps.. As a 2nd anchor it is by far and away the best I have ever found and I am somebody with a fisherman's for rocks, Bruce cos I have it, danforth for certain very high wind conditions in mangrove swamps as well as a tiny grapnel for a dinghy.. It is light and can be rowed out very easily and planted and is easy to use if you are doing a Bahamian moor in crowded American anchorages... And is very reliable - a superb piece of engineering and so light --- so easy to handle.

 

[snowleopard]

There was a fault in the research for the YM article in that they supposedly used the anchor size recommended by the manufacturer fo the size of boat but in the case of the Fortress the one they tested was 2 sizes larger so of course it performed better. The one they tested was I think the FX37 which is recommended for boats up to 51 ft whereas the others were sized for a 35 footer!

 

[SVSirius]

Fortress anchors work..they are not perfect for all situations but when the dig in they hold... best example of this is we have a FX7 which is the smallest anchor they make for use as a dingy anchor. This is attached to a flat rode on a reel. I had some friends tied up to the boat [Moody 47] - there were a total of 5 boats on a raft in a quiet little cove. Had a bit of wind that wanted to push the raft the wrong way.. set the baby fortress as a stern anchor to keep the raft from rotating. It did not move all night in fact to pull it out I had to back over it with the big boat could not release by hand..

For the record boats primary is a 60lb CQR, we carry a Spade A140 as a spare, and two other Fortress anchors a FX37 and a FX55 all with appropriate rodes. So we do have some anchor redundancy...

 

[jerryat]

Yep, I don't understand those with a 'downer' on these anchors. Ok, we use one or both of our 35lb CQR's as a rule and have a 15lb Bruce as a permanently fitted kedge, but we've used our FX16 on half a dozen occasions.

The first time (in Ibiza) it simply wouldn't hold and we hauled it up in disgust to find a large seashell stuck over one of the flukes. BUT, since then it's held unbelievably well in a variety of bottoms, so much so, that it is the only anchor we use that is ALWAYS set with a tripping line, just to be sure we can get the damned thing out again!!

Like many, I was extremely sceptical when they first appeared (must have weight down there etc) but have to say I'm a definite convert. I'd be tempted to use it as a bower were it not such a b**tard to stow on the stemhead.

 

[Vindleka]

It is very interesting to hear the various responses - thanks to all. We have used our fishermans anchor in all kinds of conditions and locations over the last 10 years, some tidal in the UK and France and some in Mediterranean Spain, France and Italy. Over all that time, it has only dragged about 10 - 15 metres on one occasion in Sardinia, and once in Capraia. Although this worried me a little at the time, it seems to be rather less of a problem than most people are having with all of these other 'modern' anchors... I think perhaps we ought to stay as we are!

 

[charles_reed]

In fairness

to Craig, he doesn't appear to be giving us a hard sell.

It's really interesting how the YM test is all things to all men.

As I read it - modern fixed-shank anchors with their high fluke area (Spade/Oceane/Sword as well as Rocna) are best of all anchors in sand.
Large fluke area anchors should also be better in mud.

As an all-rounder the CQR appears to be better than most others, except for its horrible habit of capsizing instead of re-setting - the Rocna and other roll-bar anchors may effectively address this problem.

Where the high-fluke area anchors appear to fall down is on shingle bottoms.

the Danforth, Fortress, Brittany anchors all appear to be unstable, prone to "closure" and easily damaged. Certainly I wouldn't consider them as a bower, though carefully set in the appropriate bottom they have enormous holding power.

All the patent anchors are nonplussed by rocky, weedy bottoms and I defy any one to find me an anchor (perhaps Bulwagga) to hold in thin sand over rock.

The one at the bottom of the pile is the Bruce (only ceding to the fisherman) - yet many of the Americans swear by it.

All the anchor designers are (I believe) sincere in arguing why their anchors are best - arguing their beliefs as fact, criticising their competition (in some cases, though not in Craig's).

The primary determinant is the nature of the bottom - the anchor, whatever the protagonists claim, is secondary to that.

In the end it's the one you fancy that's best!!

 

[thailand69]

Re: In fairness

to Craig nothing he ever says is obviously unreasonable or demonstrably wrong.

Just that every time the subject of Anchors comes up (here AND elsewhere)........he appears like an internet "Pop up" advert.

No other retailer (of anything) I can recall seems to feel the need to do "defend" his product quite so much............