I hate to do this...but

My interest is nil.

If you do have a commercial interest in one of the various anchors, then you shouldn't really be posting here, as your advice will hardly be unbiassed.

Two bald men arguing over a comb ...
 
The other forum seems to be a ganging up of other anchor makers against Rocna. Much as I dislike that sort of mob approach, I do think that Rocna have brought it on themselves.
 
Bosun Higgs said:
The other forum seems to be a ganging up of other anchor makers against Rocna. Much as I dislike that sort of mob approach, I do think that Rocna have brought it on themselves.
Click to expand...

Indeed. It would seem that several other anchor manufacturers have been getting increasingly annoyed with Rocna - and their now disaffiliated non-spokesman - for some time, and a lot of frustration is now boiling over.
 
Djbangi said:
Now I did not mention yield or proof test, someone else introduced that - I limited myself to Tensile Strength but I did declare both the Tensile Strength of ASTM 415 at 790-930MPa and 316 Stainless (actually Atlas quote 515MPa) in the one posting.

Now Atlas state, and they might be wrong, they are after all only a speciality steel maker quote a

Yield Strength of 316 Stainless at 205MPa

And Bisalloy state, and they might be wrong, they only make and sell the stuff - for Bisplate 80 (ASTM 514A)

Yield Strength of 690MPa

Now it was not me that mentioned yield strength, nor that 316 was not much different in strength to ASTM A514 - but to me there is a small difference between 205MPa and 690MPa, I know to many its not critical (or even important) but to me it seems, well, quite large. But then I'm not a metallurgist and maybe a metallurgist can explain why they are almost the same. We need to bear in mind that mild steel has a yield strength less that Stainless.

Equally if you do not like anchor makers claiming they use 'High Tensile Steels' then please send you complaints to Lewmar, Tie Down, Manson, Anchor Right, Holdfast et al and probably a whole lot of speciality steel makers. They have been claiming to use High Tensile steels for decades and I am sure they will welcome constructive crticism. I am repeating what publically listed and respected private companies have been saying in their literature for years. Do not blame me if I am beguiled by publicly quoted data - that is partially what this thread has been all about - one difference being I am relying on a number of respected companies - too many to argue with, but be my guest (and please post you comments to them).
Click to expand...

I had no intention nor expectation that I would influence the choice of words of anchor manufacturers. To tell the truth I am beginning to doubt what any of them may tell me. I am simply advising users not to be misled when they read such words as 'high tensile'. The truth is that they are better than an annealed low carbon steel, but not enormously so. The fact that many of the same manufacturers produce the same designs in stainless steel, presumably without a warning that they might deform under anchoring loads, suggests that they have no great concerns about a major loss in strength.

This part of the debate was simply sparked because vyv cox suggested that ASTM 514/Bisalloy 80/Q&T 800 does not in his opinion merit the title High Tensile and secondly Vyv cox is suggesting these Q&T 800 steel qualities are little better, in terms of tensile strength, than the stainless steel we use for our deck fittings. I disagreed with both statements particularly as vyv cox is used as a technical consultant for YM and some of this consulting has a metallurgical focus and thus suggests veracity.
Click to expand...
We are comparing the properties of a product that has been manufactured to develop the maximum mechanical properties consistent with its composition with those of an annealed material. This is far from apples with apples.

The Bisplate range is presumably hot rolled (maybe cold rolled, heat treated?) in order to produce a relatively high strength in a low carbon material, a terchnological challenge. The strength of annealed 316 stainless is pretty low and cannot be improved by heat treatment. It can, and is, improved markedly by work hardening. All quality yacht fittings are produced by cold forging that has a significant effect on material strength. I am not able to find figures for fittings but I can find some for wire. I believe, although not certain, that wire in 316 stainless steel for marine use is extruded to give 3% reduction in cross sectional area. This link shows that almost a tripling of strength can result.

A likely effect of cold work is that the relatively low yield point of austenitic stainless steel would be increased in proportion to its UTS. Actual values are not published as far as I know but I would expect a figure not too far from your 690 MPa. Which is what I said ages ago.
 
Been sailing since Noah was a pup. Used many anchor designs over this time, bought my first Sarca at an international boat show in Queensland some ten years ago. Now and then I will dabble with forums, a friend of mine mentioned to me there was some heated discussions on this forum and Anchor Right’s name had come up a few times so decided to take a look, amazing stuff, most of you should spend more time sailing but since I am here I may as well contribute.

I was fortunate enough to deal direct with not only the owner of the business but inventor himself, they were early days for Sarca, I had heard a few good remarks on Sarca from fellow yachters so I decided with Anchor Rights money back guarantee to give it a go. Would I change? Never on your life but I may be biased, this anchor has never let me down, I have anchored in many types of sea beds in some pretty precarious situations. I have moored by boat many times with the Sarca, sometimes three weeks at a time through many varying weather conditions, on return to find it where I left it.

Last year I parted with Mercifull and purchased a cat, I kept my Sarca from Mercifull and cannot tell you how disappointed I was as it wouldn’t fit. I googled www.anchorright.com.au and who should I get but the man himself, a rare experience these days, after explaining to Rex my dilemma, Rex recommended his more recent design the Excel, if it didn’t fit, or I was not happy with its performance, same deal as before he would give me my money back.
Twelve months later I would swear I am still anchoring on a Sarca, well I suppose I am, Sarca Excel, then again I should not be surprised, the Excels performance is what one comes to expect when dealing with Anchor Right. great company, great product, great service.

Sounds like some of you are purchasing anchors from the wrong people. Rex if you happen to read my thread I will catch you at this year’s Sanctuary Cove boat show and give you a full report, your Excel is a great anchor.

From Down Under

Mark
 
Nostrodamus
Registered User Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Currently in Hull but heading for the Med in spring 2011
Posts: 80


________________________________________
Can I not knowing too much about the history look at this from a different perspective.
As sailors rather than businessmen we look at various items and often think we could make them better.
I decided that I could make a better anchor than was currently available and for the sake of argument I called it Condor
People found this anchor was extremely good and other manufactures also saw its potential so they started making very similar anchors.
I had put a lot of work and money into this anchor but as I was not a businessman I needed help as to what to do next. I was pointed in the direction of John Doe who said to me, “don’t worry, I will sort it out for a small percentage”. He suggested a website which he set up, and moving the manufacturing to China which would be more “cost effective”.
All I knew was that my pride and joy was reaching and helping others and I was getting money so I could go out sailing.
What I didn’t know was what was on the website, or what materials the anchors were being made of. I just presumed they were as I designed them.
Later my anchor was questioned, not for its design which was good but for the questionable things that were on the website and the way they were made.
I ask around and everybody denies involvement or blames someone else that has recently been sacked (the scapegoat)
I as an honest person would want to clarify everything and be open an honest about what has gone on but I am told if I do we may have to replace all the anchors we have sold, it would harm the company and most likely go out of business.
The other anchor manufactures are rubbing their hands at the though and push the questioning and doubts along.
What would you do?


Basically you have got some of it right, difference being if you create a website and direct traffic to a page that bags every other anchor design on the market, then the seeds you sow let thee reap.

Take a set of independent tests and fudge them to show your product is not just better, but a whopping 40 per cent better, Take a competitors web site and direct traffic to information the bags his very design, Alain has now passed on for God sake, what about respect if not for a former competitor, what about his family?

It would make no difference to me and I could not care a less what happens to their product, Rubbing my hands together, what the hell are you on about, these guys have introduced the lowest method of marketing I have ever seen, and for what good reason, I ask you Nostrodamos why would they do such a thing when the product can stand on its own merits, you talk about the designers passion for what he has created.

Do you not think that all of those other designs that he trashes had the same passion. Even though remaining silent so as not to provoke I have still copped a bashing now for seven years, how do you think my family feels about this, I owe them, time to say no more.

Have you honestly seen anyone of the manufacturers in this debate trash P.S. anchor design?
One of the manufactures has passed on and still cops it, you cannot comment on something such as this with an insight, if I designed an anchor and called it Condor, unless you have got the balls to design something yourself, only then will you see the injustice, of not just the designer, but a quantum leap in how it should not be done by the designers marketing company.

Rex.
Anchor Right Australia
Anchor Right Australia.
 
Congo (Rex)
I am sorry if my post upset you as it was not directe at anchor designers in any way. It was to show that designers of anchors are often passionate about their products and like most designers they are not usually motivated by money. They usually believe that they have made something which has taken a long time to perfect and will help others. (this can be seen from a previous poster who only has good things to say about you personally and your anchors). You were so confident in your product that you offered a guarantee that I have not seen from many if any companies.
I personally know that doing something you believe in takes you if not physically (although it often does) but mentally away from your family and they become saints for what they put up with.
The post was to show how, if you are badly advised or employ someone you may trust but is profit motivated rather that product motivated, that peron can change the face of that company.
The techniques used by some are underhanded, wrong in every way, misleading and underhanded. If I or my product which I knew was good was being attacked for seven years by one company i would ineed be rubbing my hands that the truth was finally comming out and that the smoke screen was being removed.
As a end user we have seen through these posts that there are still good people nd companies out there who still believe in giving customer satisfaction. Those customers, like the one who wrote about you are comming out to support you and in my mind those posts will persuade me to buy from the company more than pages and pages on a website.
 
Caught up in the moment

Nostrodamous

I too meant no offence either, please forgive my passion, Ithank you kindly for your nice words and for the first time, giving the families credit for standing behind their fathers,husbands hare brained Ideas, it’s a pity someone else doesn’t understand the involvement of family and remove a certain link to one of Alain P old web sites.

Kind Regards.
Rex.
Anchor Right Australia
 
I've arrived late on this debate, but some years ago when Rocna NZ was in its infancy, I was in discussion with CS about taking on an agency deal for Rocna in the UK and Europe.

It seemed (still seems !) pretty pointless moving awkwardly shaped tonnes of steel halfway round the world, so as I have a connection with a manufacturer of high quality specialist vehicles for the MoD, I offered to set up a production line for anchors using Rocna's own stated steel specification and designs, working with full ISO QC and MoD certificated welders.

We were unable to progress the deal because Rocna was not inclined to allow highly controlled manufacture in the UK, with concerns especially in relation to the quality of steel available here. This raised some eyebrows amongst my manufacturing friends, who are well accustomed to working with very specialist armour materials and steels used for highly stressed fighting vehicles.

A great shame at the time, but perhaps it has turned out for the best.
 
sarabande said:
We were unable to progress the deal because Rocna was not inclined to allow highly controlled manufacture in the UK, with concerns especially in relation to the quality of steel available here. This raised some eyebrows amongst my manufacturing friends, who are well accustomed to working with very specialist armour materials and steels used for highly stressed fighting vehicles.
Click to expand...

In fairness, quality control has always been an essential part of their Business Development model..........
 
Last edited:
G.mac

I don’t know about this, how many smoking guns will there be out there firing Manson’s bullets, this is something that should have been confidential, if they were going to make it public on the forum it should have been done by no other than Manson. I ask you, why didn’t they.

Furthermore as much as I have my suspicions about the steel quality in C.S. anchors, I know what I would be doing if a competitor tested our anchors for steel quality, then used for a specific reasons and obvious market gains. who is to say ,Mansons anchors were of their normal production line, I hat to say it given it is directed at C.S. and Steve, it still has to be fair.

If someone is going to test C.S. anchors it has to be by someone totally independent, anchors have to be selected randomly and not by a manufacture, competitor, it has a smell to it.

I say to Steve, you have lied to many customers over many claims that you have made, given the fact they purchased your anchors based on best performer, S/H/H/Power certification the list goes on, you owe them, so clear it up, simple, allow three of your customers to have their anchors independently tested by whom they chose and you cover the cost.
I am sure plenty will put their hand up.

Rex.
Anchor Right Australia.
 
Last edited:
Speaking from the average user’s viewpoint what do these figures actually mean in real life?
Statistics are all well and good in some places but without the ability to interpretate them what is the point unless you are a metallurgist.
What I want to know is, are either of the anchors likely to fail when used on a boat in conditions that I may find myself.
Can someone from the plain English club please help?
 
These are the figures which Racno claimed to be their specification

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%​

But it needs sombody who knows about these things to give a laymans interpretation.
Interesting to see that Manson got those tests done in a few days, but Ranco seem to be dragging their feet on the tests which they were getting done.
 
Congo,

Why Manson didn't post it 1st I have no idea, maybe they were going to but I was just faster. I'm sure they will tell you if you ask them

Will Manson gain market share? Maybe, maybe not. Manson outsells Rocna comfortably now from what I see so I suppose time will tell but I doubt that was the main objective of them doing that. I reckon, and it's only a guess, they had just had enough and thought it was time to finally respond.

But hasn't all the banging on by Rocna been just so they can shut highly competitive competitor/s down? Hey, at least Manson used a independent transparent way of responding rather than using just randomly made up stuff up they/you/others have been the target of for many years. I can't see why you'd think it should be confidential.

Nostrodamus, what does that mean? Basically the steel used isn't anywhere as strong as Holdfast has been saying for years and continues to do to this very second. The testing info shows the steels are only 1/2, there abouts, as strong as they state it is and the CEO no less stated so only a few days ago right here in this thread.

In use?? Most won't notice I would expect, but it does mean the shank is a lot more likely to bend, if pushed, than what they say it is. Don't know what the implications of the defective casting are though. I suppose it comes down to how defective it/they are or maybe.

Better go get a book and some pop-corn now. I'm intrigued to see just what sort of attack I'll cop from Holdfast for posting this. I'll probably be the reason for the defective castings due to me being the cause of Global Warming. I'm sure it'll be creative and a good giggle, they usually are :)
 
Integrity

Most users of most anchors do not use them to the limits. Anchors are over specificed (though sadly subject to a user lack of education). In the same way that yachts, or halyards, are over specified.

However if a manufacturer claims one specification (which incurs expense) and then uses a cheaper specification (and saves money) and no-one (or sufficiently few) are hurt then why not go the whole hog and save as much as possible?

Its all about integrity, it has nothing to do with performance of the product. If my liferaft is declared to meet certain specifications I (unexpectedly) assume it meets those specs. If I find it does not meet those specifications I would expect my complaints to merit attention, and if they do not merit attention and my claims are valid I would expect a whole host of Safety Bodies to fall, like a ton of bricks, on the liferaft manufacturer.

If an anchor anchor maker makes claims as to the quality of steel he uses and someone finds those claims are wanting I find sadly there are no Safety Bodies and the ton of brick need come from you and me. If you stand by and say 'this is all right - he can cut quality and costs', and put the extra money in his pocket (call it increased profit) then when something horrific happens - you can carry it on your conscience. Personally, I confess I have been credited alongside others of being imbued with the 'higher moral ground', I find the suggestion that its 'all right', 'why question' abhorent.

If Holdfast/Rocna - the Bamburys (both Brian and Steve) and the Smiths (both Craig and Peter) survive we only have ouselves to blame and we can expect the same in the future.

Its not about who profits - its about who, today, next week, next year - might be put at risk.

Make the most of it.
 
G .Mac

There is no problem with exposing what many of us have suspected for some time, the results speak for themselves and clearly explains why they cannot supply a RINA S/H/H/Power proof load test, so what are they doing? Making a pilot run of anchors to bring them up to the spec’s they have been falsely claiming, might as well test this batch at the same time for tensile strength.

Any no wonder it is taking time to produce favorable results. We still have to be fair to C.S. and his cronies, if we don’t then we are no better. Manson I believe has independently exposed their product quality, a great result and I am thankful for their effort, they have done well to have their own anchors further tested, but I would have preferred those tests to be carried out before this saga for no other purpose than satisfying the end user of their quality.

They are not and have not been under suspicion. Disclosing their results now, well its not good timing as it does put a slant on things; all we needed to know was what was in the rickety product.

As already stated, before releasing this information to anyone, it should have been directed to the forums first by Manson. They are the messenger. But then again I am old fashioned and have forgotten morals no longer count.

Just trying to be fair.

Rex.

Anchor Right Australia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top