Sans Bateau
Well-Known Member
How about the Guardian? Made by the same people, just a dumb down version.
Any experience or comments.
Any experience or comments.
If a Fortress anchor is so good.....
- Thread starter Sans Bateau
- Start date
stevebrassett
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
How about the Guardian?
[/ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the newsprint go soggy? /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
How about the Guardian?
[/ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the newsprint go soggy? /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
capt_courageous
Well-Known Member
Only holds in the middle grounds and not very well there.
Sans Bateau
Well-Known Member
Cant understand then when its the same design without all the features of a Fortress its not so good /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
rickp
Well-Known Member
kds
Well-Known Member
I use 45 for the mud in the Bristol channel.
Ken
Ken
Sans Bateau
Well-Known Member
The closest I get to the Bristol Channel is when I cross the Severn bridge, Oh! Just realised thats not the Brisel Channel, so that OK!
Sounds like the Guardian would be a good Kedge anchor then, cant bring myself to pay so much for a Fortress as a kedge to spend most of its life not being used.
Sounds like the Guardian would be a good Kedge anchor then, cant bring myself to pay so much for a Fortress as a kedge to spend most of its life not being used.
Birdseye
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Cant understand then when its the same design without all the features of a Fortress its not so good /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
The answer lies in all the different anchor tests you read - they all come up with a different "best buy". Probably the reason is that performance varies with the ground conditions and that is infinitely variable. You could put two identical anchors in the ground side by side and get different results, and thats ignoring the differences you get in the way that the two anchors would hit the ground.
The Fortress is a Danforth type and holds well because of the high surface area dug into the ground. Cant see how another Danforth with the same fluke area, whether ally or steel, wouldnt do much the same. And like all Danforths, re-setting in areas where the flukes can get clogged with clay is likely to be inconsistent at best.
In the end, every sailor has a different view of anchors and every anchor has its proponents. Personally I am always suspicious of hype, and thats what you always get with an American product. They dont undersell things, do they?
Cant understand then when its the same design without all the features of a Fortress its not so good /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
The answer lies in all the different anchor tests you read - they all come up with a different "best buy". Probably the reason is that performance varies with the ground conditions and that is infinitely variable. You could put two identical anchors in the ground side by side and get different results, and thats ignoring the differences you get in the way that the two anchors would hit the ground.
The Fortress is a Danforth type and holds well because of the high surface area dug into the ground. Cant see how another Danforth with the same fluke area, whether ally or steel, wouldnt do much the same. And like all Danforths, re-setting in areas where the flukes can get clogged with clay is likely to be inconsistent at best.
In the end, every sailor has a different view of anchors and every anchor has its proponents. Personally I am always suspicious of hype, and thats what you always get with an American product. They dont undersell things, do they?
discovery2
Well-Known Member
We use the Guardian as a kedge. Much easier to get out of the locker & deploy - especially from the dinghy.
ditchcrawler
Well-Known Member
I use a Fortress FX11 as my second anchor & as I sail on(in) the East Coast mud have the optional mud flaps fitted .They came free from the USA when I filled in the card that came with the anchor & sent it back. The anchor performs well but you do have to make sure it digs in at a slow pace at first.If you are going too fast in reverse it skips across the surface due to its light weight.If I was buying it now I think I would go for the Guardian.I used to use as my bower anchor on my smaller boat ,but now use it as my secondary anchor on my 31 footer,with 7m of chain & 30m rope.
jeremyshaw
Well-Known Member
According to Fortress, there is a difference in that the FX11 has 150lbs more holding power than the GX11 - about 25%. To quote from their site:
(1) Fortress is anodized, which is a chemically bonded coating. This gives the Fortress Anchor greater corrosion resistance and a more attractive appearance. Guardian anchors are not anodized.
(2) Fortress anchors have more precision machining done to the shank and flukes, so they are sharper and better able to penetrate the sea bottom deeper, and thus provide more holding power.
(3) Fortress anchors have two adjustable angles: 32° and 45° for soft mud. Guardian has just the 32° angle.
(4) Fortress anchors have a Lifetime Parts Replacement Warranty, Guardian anchors have a One Year Parts Replacement Warranty.
I must say point two (the only one that bears on holding power) sounds a bit waffly to me. Surely once you are in, you are in, even if it takes a bit longer. But I am sure they could not possibly be fibbing.
(1) Fortress is anodized, which is a chemically bonded coating. This gives the Fortress Anchor greater corrosion resistance and a more attractive appearance. Guardian anchors are not anodized.
(2) Fortress anchors have more precision machining done to the shank and flukes, so they are sharper and better able to penetrate the sea bottom deeper, and thus provide more holding power.
(3) Fortress anchors have two adjustable angles: 32° and 45° for soft mud. Guardian has just the 32° angle.
(4) Fortress anchors have a Lifetime Parts Replacement Warranty, Guardian anchors have a One Year Parts Replacement Warranty.
I must say point two (the only one that bears on holding power) sounds a bit waffly to me. Surely once you are in, you are in, even if it takes a bit longer. But I am sure they could not possibly be fibbing.
Sans Bateau
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
must say point two (the only one that bears on holding power) sounds a bit waffly to me. Surely once you are in, you are in, even if it takes a bit longer. But I am sure they could not possibly be fibbing.
[/ QUOTE ]
Or rather are they trying to justify the extra cost of the Fortress?
must say point two (the only one that bears on holding power) sounds a bit waffly to me. Surely once you are in, you are in, even if it takes a bit longer. But I am sure they could not possibly be fibbing.
[/ QUOTE ]
Or rather are they trying to justify the extra cost of the Fortress?
A
Anonymous
Guest
[ QUOTE ]
I must say point two (the only one that bears on holding power) sounds a bit waffly to me. Surely once you are in, you are in, even if it takes a bit longer. But I am sure they could not possibly be fibbing.
[/ QUOTE ]They say that it is machined to make it sharper and there is little doubt that sharpening an anchor helps considerably in penetrating hard sand and weed. If if can't penetrate it can't hold so ipso facto it improves the holding /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I must say point two (the only one that bears on holding power) sounds a bit waffly to me. Surely once you are in, you are in, even if it takes a bit longer. But I am sure they could not possibly be fibbing.
[/ QUOTE ]They say that it is machined to make it sharper and there is little doubt that sharpening an anchor helps considerably in penetrating hard sand and weed. If if can't penetrate it can't hold so ipso facto it improves the holding /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Danny Jo
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I must say point two (the only one that bears on holding power) sounds a bit waffly to me. Surely once you are in, you are in, even if it takes a bit longer. But I am sure they could not possibly be fibbing.
[/ QUOTE ] They say that it is machined to make it sharper and there is little doubt that sharpening an anchor helps considerably in penetrating hard sand and weed. If if can't penetrate it can't hold so ipso facto it improves the holding
[/ QUOTE ] So buy a Guardian, sharpen it (and paint it)?
Mark
[ QUOTE ]
I must say point two (the only one that bears on holding power) sounds a bit waffly to me. Surely once you are in, you are in, even if it takes a bit longer. But I am sure they could not possibly be fibbing.
[/ QUOTE ] They say that it is machined to make it sharper and there is little doubt that sharpening an anchor helps considerably in penetrating hard sand and weed. If if can't penetrate it can't hold so ipso facto it improves the holding
[/ QUOTE ] So buy a Guardian, sharpen it (and paint it)?
Mark
Brierley
Well-Known Member
I have never managed to successfully dig in our Fortress in weed - it's just too light. We only use a Fortress for lunch stops - if there's weed about, I end up looking for a bare patch of mud/sand to drop the anchor onto! So unless you've got a very big Fortress, I can't see how having it sharper will help much when it's too light to go through the weed at all.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Maybe, or make your own anchor - a surprising number of people do, believe it or not, especially long-time blue-water liveaboards. Chap next to me at the moment has made his own 'danfrittany' with flukes like a brittany, hinges like a Danforth, a much bigger lateral stability bar and much, much, heavier and stronger than you'd expect for the size of anchor (or size of yacht). Nice piece of kit, actually.
But where do you draw the line saving money? Dunno, it's a personal thing. I rather suspect that performance wise you'd be much the same.
***BUT BEWARE*** One of the big benefits of a light Danforth is ease of carrying; if it is sharp(ened) you might cut yourself. The only place to keep a sharp anchor is well tucked in to the pulpit where nobody is likely to come into contact into sharp edges, IMO.
But where do you draw the line saving money? Dunno, it's a personal thing. I rather suspect that performance wise you'd be much the same.
***BUT BEWARE*** One of the big benefits of a light Danforth is ease of carrying; if it is sharp(ened) you might cut yourself. The only place to keep a sharp anchor is well tucked in to the pulpit where nobody is likely to come into contact into sharp edges, IMO.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Is any anchor reliable in weed? I haven't heard of one. But yes, obviously weight must help, along with sharp edges. Loads of people sharpen Bruces.
Danny Jo
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Loads of people sharpen Bruces.
[/ QUOTE ] Maybe I should do the same. I have difficult getting mine to set in hard sand.
Any tips on this? As I have two 15 kg Bruces, I don't suppose I can do much harm taking a large angle grinder to the one most in need of regalvanizing.
Loads of people sharpen Bruces.
[/ QUOTE ] Maybe I should do the same. I have difficult getting mine to set in hard sand.
Any tips on this? As I have two 15 kg Bruces, I don't suppose I can do much harm taking a large angle grinder to the one most in need of regalvanizing.
A
Anonymous
Guest
People use angle grinders. I have never done it or watched anyone do it. Be careful not to do it anywhere near the boat or marina as the swarf and filings are horrible - metal splinter risk plus rust over boats and the surroundings.
Birdseye
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Is any anchor reliable in weed? I haven't heard of one. But yes, obviously weight must help, along with sharp edges. Loads of people sharpen Bruces.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not a gaff rigged stockholm tar covered traditionalist - but I have found that the old Fisherman is quite effective in weed. Whether that is design or just because you always use a heavier Fisherman than other designs I do not know.
Is any anchor reliable in weed? I haven't heard of one. But yes, obviously weight must help, along with sharp edges. Loads of people sharpen Bruces.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not a gaff rigged stockholm tar covered traditionalist - but I have found that the old Fisherman is quite effective in weed. Whether that is design or just because you always use a heavier Fisherman than other designs I do not know.
