I hate to do this...but

Advertising

Now, now Twister - yottin magazins need to pander to advertisers, and no point in biting the hands that feeds you - equally advertisers do not like controversial articles, because their product might be in the next one. So do not knock the jurnos - they only write what is allowed. Blame the publisher not the hacks. However in the case of anchors its all bit academic - they largely do not advertise anyway, which was part of The Mouth's (and the pupper master's) strategy - free publicity. Initially brilliant, and a lesson to many (depends on whether allowing it reduced your hard copy income or whether you want to follow suit) but back fired ever so slightly on the puppet master.

Can someone explain to me what YBW (IPC) get from the Forum - what is the angle?

Have a good night.
 
Djbangi said:
Nostrodamas,

You are more than correct - people should not be peddling their wares to you - but then maybe you should not suggest you are looking for a new anchor!

But - If a manufacturer is involved with libel, misrepresentation etc - how do you know that the anchor someone bought 6 months, 2 years ago, is the same as the one you might buy today - based on that persons comment. If you suspect the manufacturer might have lower values of integrity than you - why do you trust him, when there are equally good choices from manufacturers who are appently more honest.

If the anchor of debate were outstanding in its field, I might lower my moral standards (but might not) - but this is not the case. Manson Supreme, SARCA, SARCA Excel, Spade, Fortress are all exceptional product (some might be a bit bottom specific, some might not fit your bow roller, some might not be 'attractive') but they are all made by companies that have transparent testing methods, a decent press, seem honest, do not result to libel and insult

Not sure there should even be a debate, but maybe I'm biased.
Click to expand...
It is a shame that the original thread has been terminated. Some of us have very good anchoring stories, backed up by excellent equipment. It must be good for us yotties to exchange information on bad products so that we can then identify and promote good products. I will certainly recommend my own anchor. Buyers have to make their own decisions eventually, but the best decisions are made after considering many different recommendations and priorities - such as features or price, looks or weight, sailing circumstances or local conditions. I am happy to promote my own final selection.

I am the proud owner of a SARCA, in my case a SUPER SARCA. This is the best investment I have made. After sitting out a storm at night, reported in the local media as Force 10, whilst surrounded by shallow rocks and a main river fairway channel, held by my SARCA on a chain, I am convinced that Anchorright of Australia have got it completely figured.

IT IS ESSENTIAL I HAVE THE BEST ANCHOR AS I SAIL MY 20TON KETCH QUO VADIS SINGLE-HANDED ALL AROUND THE UK COAST.

I first bought Anchorright’s SARCA when I saw a video of it self-correcting under water until it made a suitable purchase. The roll-over design really works, and the SARCA can only end up the right way up with the point digging in. I also liked the trip design that lets the chain to run forward on the shaft to allow extraction from rocks or other underwater fouling. It has never released the anchor unexpectedly, and its design would not prevent the anchor correctly resetting in the event of a change of tidal flow.

The SARCA is a big beast and it could possibly be the final resort for a vessel driven towards a lee shore. On Quo Vadis I carry 100m of chain so that the SARCA can be let down to snag the first bit of bottom it touches, eventually stopping the vessel before the lee shore. I have not needed to use this handbrake of last resort yet, but feel total confidence in the SARCA if such an emergency arises.

Unlike the unethical company referred to within this forum I can fully recommend Anchorright. When I actually managed to damage my SARCA I contacted them to ask about repairs, and subsequent integrity. They considered my photographs then sent me a free replacement SARCA, stating that my first one could possibly have been made under a temporary license that they had revoked, and that they wanted me only to have the best. That is what I call service. The new SARCA has survived everything I can throw at it. The damaged one lives on my aft deck as a spare in case the horrible happens. My correspondence of real-life action using a SARCA appeared on Anchorright’s website alongside some prestigious endorsements, showing that they are a customer-based company, my sort of people. www.anchorright.com.au then find News at the top right corner of the Home page and go to: 21 Sep 2009: Quo Vadis Sits Out Force 10 on Anchor Right. The passing lifeboat in the picture was astounded that I had sat out the storm without shifting, and the coastguard inspected my chart-plotter track for confirmation. All held in place by SARCA. Thank you.

Peter Hutchison
QUO VADIS
 
Djbangi said:
Sorry but the historic thread,which seems to have been pulled for some odd reasons, was not about anchor performance but about executive performance.

If you want your kids to grow up with standards like those of Rocna, Holdfast and the the Smiths - then by all means continue to support them. I find it abhorent - and with other choices of anchor it is difficult to see Rocna being mentioned. Libel, insult, misrepresentation should be condemned - not taken as being part of everyday socitey and a means of entertainment.

You would not accept it in your local school, you would not accept it in your local pub - why is acceptable for an anchor or anchor manufactuer?
Click to expand...

At no stage have I ever said I supported any one of the anchor manufacturers. My post was not about fear of libel, freedom of speak,or building a world fit for my children to live in.

But after 700 odd post surely everything that could be said on this subuject had been said - probably at least 10 times. I have to admit I lost the will to live after about post 250.
 
NormanNoMates said:
They considered my photographs then sent me a free replacement, stating that my first one could possibly have been made under a temporary license that they had revoked, and that they wanted me only to have the best. That is what I call service.
Click to expand...


So, a company that actually admits to having put out 'dud' anchors then? :o
 
Last edited:
Rocna's ethics

I'd say Sarca is far more ethical than Rocna who posted a former production manager's record to get a post removed before this guy could reveal the steel grade of Rocna's Chinese anchors.

Just edited this post. Sarca should never be brought down and mentioned in the same sentence as Rocna. Sorry Rex of Anchor Right!
 
Last edited:
Quo Vardis

Hi Scotty,

There was no suggestion it was dud. It had bent, but so might most anchors under the conditions described. 6 hours under Storm force winds a 5knot tide, short scope, no snubber and latterly a horrendous chop (I checked). I was interested and made the effort. Even the RNLI were surprised (at the anchor performance), I went to the lifeboat station, spent 3 hours and lunch with them, had a personal tour of the lifeboat (great photo session), they took me to the location. Lovely people. It appears that Anchor Right thought that it might have been bought from a licensee that might have cut corners, or might not, and it was not worthy of a discussion - they simply replaced it.

Seems good to me, however you want to look at it.

Interestingly - Classification Society certification for anchors, HHP or SHHP, is for vessels waiting to enter port etc and is not a indication that an anchor will hold in adverse conditions, say beyond 25 knots, when a master should seek shelter or put to sea to ride out inclement weather. In fact most commercial port authorites will order commercial vessels at anchor (all of whom have anchors passed by CS) queuing to enter port to leave when winds are forecast beyond 25 knots. Not much use having RINA, Lloyds, or ABS certification if it does not allow any real comfort to a leisure sailor. Australian certification does not carry this caveat - interesting that Rocna have spurned Anchor Right's certification and the methods for which it was achieved.

I also note the absence of any reply from Steve Bambury on metal quality, all talk and no trousers?
 
Scotty Twister,

I was feeling pretty good until I saw your remark, but I suppose I can enlighten you. It’s a problem being the inventor, so much passion, but then again I am the only inventor you guys have had on your forum since good old Alain P.

From memory Peter had rang me saying that he had been through a storm, his Sarca anchor had held through 6 hours of change in various directions with constant pounding and never let go, he was, absolutely over the moon with its performance, what one should realize his anchor was a Sarca anchor, not Super Sarca.

The Sarca anchor was ever only tested for high holding power, not Super high holding power, therefore it did not have anything like the proof loads applied that you get with S/H/H/Power. No I am not defending our product because Peter had used this anchor many times over a four year period with absolute success in all sea beds in some pretty ordinary conditions.
It should also be understood that no one knows when this anchor bent, was it during the storm? what a phenomenal performance, even though bent did not let him go, or maybe it was bent when they took him in tow, the Sarca would have been subject to a rugged retrieval in those conditions and would have buried beyond the surface?

Peters Sarca anchor was made in N.Z. I think he would have purchased it from Holts of whom I believe no longer exists, you talk about Quality control, from one of my unsuspecting visits to the factory in N.Z., and then onto the Christchurch boat show, what I saw coming out in our product was not the Quality product they were licensed to make, Please understand, these are just words, if you live the journey I have, it stacks years on your life.

When Peter contacted me to ask about repairing his anchor I just simply said based on what I had discovered in the N.Z. factory, I will send you a new Super Sarca. I don’t think Peter was quite ready for my gesture as all he wanted to know was how he could repair it. And yes Scotty if you want to call it a dud that too is absolutely fine, but myself I am very proud of your description,not to many dud anchors can save lives.Just maybe it wasn't a dud after all,maybe I pulled out of N.Z. to early.

In saying all of this I cannot emphasizes enough; no anchor that puts out high performance will ever carry a guarantee of no bendy shanks, I say to all manufactures, if a customer bends his anchor, just replace it, over 16 years of selling our product I have only heard of 4, make it three as Mr. C bent one, yes you got it right, I didn’t replace it.

Thank you Peter for sharing your story.
Regards.
Rex.
Anchor right Australia.
 
Many thanks for enlightening us. Rex/Peter, I have no reason to doubt that the anchors you have been involved with are amongst the finest in the world. Of course the 'dud' anchor comment was said tongue in cheek and invited exactly the response it was meant to.
It comes as no surprise that under extreme conditions all types of anchor could have their failings and that failings may not be down to the design, the materials used or method of manufacture, simply the extreme conditions they have been subjected to.
It has seemed that in recent postings, on many threads and on more than one forum, that there is only one anchor that may at some time fail. Obviously not.
Today my yard informs me that my new chunk of metal has arrived and I will keep my word to Parsifal that if I find any failings with it, I will report back.
Best wishes,
S.
 
Last edited:
Material correctness

I know there's been intense interest in seeing independent testing of our materials and we've just published test results over at Anything Sailing. Unfortunately I can't post the full report here as the PDF file size is too large, but I've posted the other pictures here. It looks like you don't need to log in / be a member over at Anything Sailing to see the full report, so follow the link above if you're curious.

--------------------

The design and manufacture specification of metals for the Rocna anchor is as follows:

For the fluke: G400 grade high strength low alloy steel. Rocna Anchors use equivalent grade Q235D.

Properties:
UTS (Ultimate Tensile Strength) – typically 370-500 MPA
2% yield – minimum 215 MPA
Elongation – typically 25%

For the shank: G800 grade high strength low alloy steel. Rocna Anchors use equivalent grade Q620D.

Properties:
UTS (Ultimate Tensile Strength) – typically 710-880 MPA
2% yield – minimum 600 MPA
Elongation – typically 15%

The test report posted at Anything Sailing is for the Q620D steel used to construct the shank, which has the greatest strength requirements. The test was completed in November of last year and illustrates that the materials used to make Rocna anchors are not inferior and are well within our design specification parameters.

For further insight into our quality assurance process, we’ve also included a few pictures taken by our team in China in January this year. We take random hardness tests of finished anchors to ensure that the material continues to meet specification. This is a simple test using a portable digital hardness test unit as seen in the photos. We measure the Brinell Hardness Number (BHN) which can be converted to UTS by 1 BHN = 3.44738 MPA. (Therefore the picture QA 1 shows a result equivalent to 910 MPA, and in QA 2, 948 MPA)

Hardness testing is performed either before galvanising, or as in these photos, random samples are taken aside at the final QA step before packaging, the galvanising removed and the metal sanded smooth so as to assure an accurate reading. Multiple readings are taken from each sample and averaged.

The picture QA 3 shows a photo that our quality assurance team took during one of their inspections, showing the Q620D steel in use on the factory floor, and QA 4 shows a whole bunch of anchors going through the QA process.

Steve
 
CONGO said:
Scotty Twister,


When Peter contacted me to ask about repairing his anchor I just simply said based on what I had discovered in the N.Z. factory, I will send you a new Super Sarca. I don’t think Peter was quite ready for my gesture as all he wanted to know was how he could repair it.
Click to expand...
That’s great service Rex. Fortress offer a similar guarantee. Its a pity other manufactures do not follow suit. It would make any concerns about bent shanks and tips steel quality etc much less of a concern.
I think it would also show faith in the product. Its seems a cheaper option than certification (given the small number of anchors that would be effected) and I think an unconditional guarantee would be a better selling point.
 
The thread

was pulled as it had nothing to do with Anchors at the end and we are having to go through every single post right now to see if we can put it back.

Do you know how long that takes!

Once and only once are we satisfied with the content it can go back up (maybe missing a few bits)
 
Twister_Ken said:
As far as I'm concerned the Rocna is only fit for anchoring a bargepole, which I wouldn't touch it with.
Click to expand...
Cor, you are being generous - I suppose you do not mind losing a bargepole. I fell heir to a 16kg roc..roc.. last year - tried it, didn't like it, now used as a door stop at which it does appear to function reasonably well except when it rolls over. - I had thought of dumping it in the scrap yard but it would cost me more in fuel to get there than what I would get for it.:rolleyes:

I think it is better as a door stop than for example an old Volvo block (which I believe have been used in the past as anchors when they ceased to be any use as engines):D
 
RichardShead said:
was pulled as it had nothing to do with Anchors at the end and we are having to go through every single post right now to see if we can put it back.

Do you know how long that takes!

Once and only once are we satisfied with the content it can go back up (maybe missing a few bits)
Click to expand...

Richard,

It would be great if the editorial team decided there's a story worth telling to the wider world out there.
 
jamesjermain said:
But after 700 odd post surely everything that could be said on this subuject had been said - probably at least 10 times. I have to admit I lost the will to live after about post 250.
Click to expand...

James,

If you lost the will to live after 250 postings you may have also lost the ability to read. I don't know if you did go through it all (and I can understand it if you didn't) but you are wrong to imply that it was simply repeating the same stuff and getting nowhere.

Frankly, many people have been persuing this and a lot of effort has gone into trying to get to the bottom of the story. A lot of progress has been made, but I am sure there is also more to come.

Maybe you don't like the "investigative" aspect of all this. That's fine. It's your call and there are plenty of other threads which you may prefer. BUT, many people have been interested in this and I don't believe that your somewhat scathing comments do you justice.

Sorry, but that's my view.
 
Suspended threads

Hello everyone

As I said in my initial post (which I have now made sticky for all to see) we have had a complaint made of defamatory statements made in the anchors thread.

I hate to pull a thread with 750 posts, which has obviously been of great interest to users, but until I have been able to investigate the matter the thread will remain suspended.
 
Natalie Davies said:
Hello everyone

As I said in my initial post (which I have now made sticky for all to see) we have had a complaint made of defamatory statements made in the anchors thread.

I hate to pull a thread with 750 posts, which has obviously been of great interest to users, but until I have been able to investigate the matter the thread will remain suspended.
Click to expand...

Understood.
It can't be easy for you in IPC Towers. I'm sure that most people just want to get to the raw, honest truth of the matter.
 
Understood #2. Natalie, is it possible to edit out the offending posts and put the thread back up?

Regards,
Brian

P.S. Love your name, have a daughter named after you.
 
Not sure yet, Brian but flattery will usually get you everywhere!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top