My choice of anchor is . . .

thrown him in the drink

  • yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • and tied an anchor to his feet

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue">Very well put - it is quite possible that any other type of anchor could have dragged in the same manner that your CQR did, given the circumstances outlined above. </span>

[/ QUOTE ]

Perfectly right..

[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue"> but you have to understand how you deploy it</span>

[/ QUOTE ]

Right too.. with the CQR, you have to be carefull how you set it.. and quite often you should do it again until you fing the "Grip"..

Try ANY of the new generation anchor.. as long as you have enough scope, no mater the way you launch it.. the anchor will abruptly set and hold..

This is a comment from Chuck Hawley ( West marine's Vice President and long time anchor expert ) reporting an anchor test:
" Our veering test was to set it at 1,000 lb, then slack the line and to run the boat at 6 knots perpendicular to the previous direction of pull. The anchor did not release, and slowed Showtime so violently that most testers were knocked off their feet. "

You will NEVER do that with a CQR..

Alain
www.idonotsellanyanchor.com /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Exactly right. We are probably not even aware of all the variables at work in any given anchoring situation.
My whole point exactly is that if you're wise you carry, as far as is practical, a variety of gear so that you can ring the changes in any given situation and find something that works.

No anchor is perfect for every situation, and the bottom line is that if something new doesn't work effectively for at least some of the situations it will soon be forgotten.

I once had a clever clogs guest on the boat rummaging through my tools and spares box (better than my knickers I spose).

He condescendingly declared on finding a spare anchor joining shackle that I obviously hadn't realised I would have nothing to attach to it if I lost the one in use as the anchor would be at the bottom of the sea.

He went all quiet when I opened the forepeak locker to show him the spare Bruce. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

I still feel, the best anchor for rock and weed is the Fisherman, but I don't carry one because of other practical issues.

I love my little Kingston Quickset. It is ideal for the majority of the locations I anchor in
anchor.jpg

but I wouldn't use it every where.

Surprisingly, they also quote tests that prove their anchor is the best alround and fastest setting anchor!! It seems there are so many world's best anchors /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Or maybe individual manufacturers just highlight the tests where the conditions best suit their own products. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

(Nah! They wouldn't do that would they - of course they would want to tell us all about a products shortcomings). /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
Actually you will find the Kingston has had a fair few issues, which it is not alone in. The Shark, another improved Delta type, is probably the one you're thinking off, it's had great reviews and out performs the Delta everytime. Still just a plow though but at the better end.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Try of the new generation anchor.. as long as you have enough scope, no mater the way you launch it.. the anchor will abruptly set and hold..

[/ QUOTE ] What utter nonsense. In the real world you have to deal with too soft mud, too hard sand, rocks, coral and often all of the above on a slooping gradient. Then we have the old mooring lines left in an old harbour, discarded anchor chain, fish nets, fish traps and even the odd bicycle that I managed to set my anchor into.

If somebody tells you that their anchor design will always set everywhere, anytime; then you can safely assume that this person does not have a clue about real anchoring situations and his/her opinions can easily be discarded. Naturally, there is not such a thing as an anchor that will always set everytime.

It seems to me that these frequent references to "tests" presented as the only evidence are without value. They are all clearly done by people with a commercial interest. I must admit that I think the Spade design does look good on paper. But I have worked in the manufacturing industry most of my life and have seen many designs that looked good on paper but did not stand the test of manufacturing stress or usage. The only real test of any value is only a testimonial from a cruiser who has used his anchor in anger many times. Why don't we have lots of enthusiastic Spade users here? I have not yet heard from any. But it is easy to find a happy CQR user, both in this Forum and in real life. That tells me more than I need to know.

I think hylas is a snakeoil salesman.
 
Since you haven't actually tried one, how can you possibly know all this? What is it about this medium that you would insult another person with absolutely no factual basis for your outburst whatsoever? It is not just you, but many here. These are real live people you are talking to - and folks who you would happily have a beer with in a marina - but instead you hurl insults as though you are playing with characters in a Sony Playstation. Weird, or what?
 
Please Lemain. Do you really think that there is such a thing as an anchor that will set everywhere anytime? I have used more anchors than I would have liked and know that there is no such thing as "the perfect anchor". I don't think pointing out that fact is "an insult". It is just assuring that fellow sailors are not misinformed by some anchor designers/manufacturers and are instead getting information from real users.
 
Yeah, funny that innit? Not many spade anchor users have piped up on here yet, maybe they are all anchored with no internet access, but I doubt it! Not many of the other hi-tech users either, maybe someone is trying to tell us something.......
 
I've no axe to grind, but am currently considering anchors:

http://www.morganscloud.com/gear_failures_fixes/gfanchoring.htm

http://www.zialater.com/abouttheboat.htm

http://www.zingano.com/Log%20-%20Malta%20refit.htm

"We inherited two rather indifferent anchors which I have kept as spares, and we now have an excellent Spade aluminium anchor as our main anchor and a Fortress FX23 as a kedge."

The above long distance cruisers seem to prefer Spades over anything else, but dont post here.

I dont know if they are representative, but they seem pretty sure of what they are doing, and why.
 
The Norfolk Broads mudweight anchor with barely enough rode to reach the bottom will set and hold immediately in Broads mud. I've sat with two 36 footers on one through a gale. Didn't move an inch.
Absolutely no good in a sand and gravel river bed though (even one in Norfolk)!

When they do give, they give suddenly and dramatically.
I have heard secondhand tales that some of the modern anchors do this, but I have not been able to verify this.

However, time will tell, and in the meantime it is unlikely IMHO that there will be a mass scrapping of perfectly servicable anchoring systems and their replacement with expensive, modern, relatively untried 'super' anchors.

What concerns me is the outlandish claims made by some of the modern anchor producers for their products, including the Kingston Quickset which I use as my main anchor (because it works well in the conditions I'm anchoring in at the moment).

I'm a long way from supporting the manufacturers claims.

I also have a Fortress (which has been independently tested by no less and august body than the US Navy) which I use primarily as a lunch hook because of it's lightness and the fact that it fits snugly into the foredeck cable locker.

But I'm also a long way from believing that manufacturer's claim for his product.

I would be concerned if I thought that the sales hype and a series of clever looking graphs made people think that they could depend solely on any one such anchor and not take time to learn all the broader skills associated with anchoring /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
 
Please Lady Jessie do me a favor:

1° click on my name.
2° on the new window, showing my profile, look at the right lower corner and click on: “ IGNORE THIS ”

We are not playing in the same ground.. I do not want to hear any comment from you..

[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue"> I think hylas is a snakeoil salesman. </span>

[/ QUOTE ]

and believe me , personal insults is not the good way to convince people that you are right!..
/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
No. I mean the Kingston Quickset.
http://www.kingstonanchors.com/quickset.htm

I didn't mean to imply that I believed it IS the world's best anchor, but simply to point out that so many manufacturer's make very strong claims for their products and need to be taken with a large pinch of salt.

I think, the bottom line is that if people find their anchoring set up doesn't work for them, they will start looking for something that does.
They are unlikely to change something that works for them.

I changed because I lost one of my two Bruces - not because it failed, but because it worked exceptionally well in atrocious conditions and is the reason I still have The Goose today.

I replaced it with the Quickset because I felt it would be good to have something with different characteristics in my amoury.

I think it's important to develop the habit of monitoring what is happening in your own anchoring experience, and being nosey about what is going on on other boats in the same anchorage.
I have seen a spade type stubbornly refuse to set in the Rhode River where the bottom at the time of year was layers of last autumn's leaves.
It may well have worked fine in the same spot 6 months later!

I was unable to check it was a genuine spade, and I couldn't make a detailed analysis of what the crew's anchoring technique was like, but in the end they gave up and went somewhere else.

My Quickset, set on second throw (not a big deal in 10 feet of water.

The cheap nasty, so called 'Danforth Type' seemed to do best. Ugh!! /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif
Which is probably why I see so many o them on the bow rollers of local boats.
 
Well.. I have NO experience , neither positive nor negative, with the Kingston QuickSet anchor.. but to me it looks like a knock-off of the Delta anchor..

A very classical game: - just doing enough small changes to not fall down into the description of the Delta patent..

The web page itself is very poor looking..

And the only test they have are tests conducted by Kingston Anchors “ with an independent observer ”..
/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Then, perhaps the anchor is a wonderful one, but, personally, I wouldn’t buy an anchor with such a poor Web page..

(Look at the difference with:
web page /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif )

Alain
www.Idonotsellanyanchor.com
 
The Rockna site is pretty impressive for sure...... and if there was a shop down the road from me that sold them I would have bought a Rockna yonks ago.... but there isnt...... so one must improvise with what one can find........ like I wanted to get a Delta, thrust some filthy greenbacks into the paw of a friend who was bringing a boat back from the BVI's, and he turned up with..... a Bruce! Cos the chandlery in Tortola had run out of Deltas...... But Brucies seem to be good anchors, so I am not complaining....... shall still try and get a Rocky or Delta (or a Spade!) some time, to complement our CQR, Danforth and Bruce.
 
You are obviously missing my whole point. I wouldn't buy any anchor on the basis of the manufacturer's web page no matter how glamorous.

'Then, perhaps the anchor is a wonderful one, but, personally, I wouldn’t buy an anchor with such a poor Web page..'

That seems to me to be a very poor way of either ruling an anchor in or out of a list of possible choices. I don't usually find much of a correlation between marketing budget (which includes web site design) and quality of product.

The quality of the web page simply demonstrates the company's access to someone skilled in web site design and really is no indicator as to the quality of their product.

The facts are that Kingston is a long and well established firm with a good reputation supplying companies such as Lewmar and Simpson Lawrence.

As well as their own tests they also refer to tests conducted by Practical Sailor and Power-Boat Reports.Com which were independent.

The Quickest actually has it's own patent and is quite different from the 'normal' delta when you see them side by side.
However, I'm not here to defend the Quickset.

The whole point of my post was to suggest that company websites and the sometimes lavish statements of manufacturers and inventors about their products need to be taken with a healthy level of skepticism, and that includes the slickness of their websites.

I made my decision based on as much independent information as I could get hold of on US sailing chat rooms, BoatUS comments, owners association websites etc, as well as observing and talking to other boaters around me.

I had a Delta on my previous boat, but this does perform much better.

However, the other main point of my post was that different things work well for different situations. What works in the Chesapeake won't necesarily work on the Coast of Maine.

That's why local knowledge is such a valuable commodity in sailing.

And anyway, what is wrong with a company doing its own tests with independent observation. At least Kingston make it plain that is the case and give enough details that anyone can repeat the Test to verify (or not) their results.

How many manufacturers or companies in general (with very glamorous websites) don't make obvious the vested interests and bias in sampling and methods of their own tests, I wonder.
 
Ladyjessie, you're being naughty. The quote you attacked - 'no matter the way you launch it' - had an assumption behind it. The assumption was that intelligent sailors would always launch their anchors in suitable places which wouldn't be affected by [ QUOTE ]
too soft mud, too hard sand, rocks, coral and often all of the above on a slooping gradient. Then we have the old mooring lines left in an old harbour, discarded anchor chain, fish nets, fish traps and even the odd bicycle

[/ QUOTE ] His claim was that like for like, modern anchors 'caught' better than older anchors, even if those weren't his exact words.

I have experience to support that claim; I've seen multiple tests by many journals to support that claim; I've heard many who've changed their hook make that claim. In the face of this evidence, the claim can only be refuted by proving that 'other anchors' set quicker or as well as modern anchors. That's the philosophy of scientific proof. Sorry, I haven't yet seen that, except where someone calls up a plastic sheet to load the vote.

It is not disproved by showing that thousands are happy with their current (older) anchors. Nor is it disproved by trying to show that a proponent is a fool. Or a snake oil salesman (argumentum ad hominem in my schoolboy philosophy days).
[ QUOTE ]
Why don't we have lots of enthusiastic Spade users here? I have not yet heard from any. But it is easy to find a happy CQR user, both in this Forum and in real life. That tells me more than I need to know.

[/ QUOTE ] Well, when I last looked at the top of the page, it was 48% modern anchor users, 52% old anchor users. Of course it is easy to find happy CQR owners - they'd prefer to adapt their methods rather than pay to change the anchor. An eminently reasonable decision. But it doesn't disprove the 'quick set' claim. And we have heard from a number of modern anchor users . . . even if they haven't posted in proportion to their votes. Perhaps you preferred not to notice them?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Why don't we have lots of enthusiastic Spade users here? I have not yet heard from any. But it is easy to find a happy CQR user, both in this Forum and in real life. That tells me more than I need to know.

[/ QUOTE ]

I maybe stirring up more problems with my comment, but that could mean we get to 200 responses!!
I feel that in this forum mainly britishers participate and most of the others are native english speakers (australians, canadians, new zealanders and united staters). This means that few non-english speakers participate. As far as I know, there are a few dutch and most of the others from non-english speaking countries are expatriates.
Most of the "modern" anchors are of non-british origin and were introduced first in their own country. It is interesting to note that, according to this forum, a lot, if not most, of the german sailors in the Med use the Buegel anchor, which is a german design. The Spade is a french design and it could well be, that it is used mainly be french sailors. One particular participant in this forum, GMac, who has a very unbiased opinion about the modern anchors is a new zealander. I tend to conclude that the love of the CQR anchor is typically british. Why??
 
Well we are long distance cruisers and use our anchor most of the time only visiting marinas or taking a buoy very occasionally. We alway use our spade as our primary anchor,it has seen us though 60kts+ at anchor and never budged even with 180 degree wind shifts. We also have a CQR. When diving on our anchor it is amazing how many CQR anchors are lying on their sides. Most people we know who have started cruising in the last 4 years have bought spade anchors, but most cruisers are not logged on to the internet very often, we are lucky here (Bonaire) and have free internet in the mooring area (no anchoring in Bonaire).
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why don't we have lots of enthusiastic Spade users here? I have not yet heard from any. But it is easy to find a happy CQR user, both in this Forum and in real life. That tells me more than I need to know.

[/ QUOTE ]

I maybe stirring up more problems with my comment, but that could mean we get to 200 responses!!
I feel that in this forum mainly britishers participate and most of the others are native english speakers (australians, canadians, new zealanders and united staters). This means that few non-english speakers participate. As far as I know, there are a few dutch and most of the others from non-english speaking countries are expatriates.
Most of the "modern" anchors are of non-british origin and were introduced first in their own country. It is interesting to note that, according to this forum, a lot, if not most, of the german sailors in the Med use the Buegel anchor, which is a german design. The Spade is a french design and it could well be, that it is used mainly be french sailors. One particular participant in this forum, GMac, who has a very unbiased opinion about the modern anchors is a new zealander. I tend to conclude that the love of the CQR anchor is typically british. Why??

[/ QUOTE ]

What a big pile of completely sensible words /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif Well said wagenaar and I think you are sooo right. I don't think the love of the CQR is just a British thing though, it's just a case of they have not yet had the best opportunity to try something better. You can't knock them for that bit /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Many French (and others) cruisers we see down here have Spades. More than half the cruising Cats I've seen here have Spades. I've seen many cruising cats (and more than a few monos) in Aussie carry Spades, actually a surprisingly big number of those are Stainless as well. Down here it is not that hard to find a Spade sure a huge pile more Manson plows, Deltas and so on but you would expect that with the age of the plow, Manson being the biggest anchor maker in the Sth hemisphere and Lewmar having a 'pre-condidtioned audience' and a marketing budget the size of a small country. I would not call the Spade an un-common anchor sure not the biggest number but there is plenty around.

Obviously Rocna being an NZ anchor they are also commonly seen everyday on boats from 5mts up to BIG. Again not the most common by a long shot but only being available on the open market for a couple of years that is not a surprise. The Rocna has a good and getting a lot stronger following in the cruising fleet as well. I can tell you all Rocna can not keep up with demand, a bitch I've been having with them today actually. Of interest is that I've also had the same bitch to Spade who have the same issue.

The Supreme is also common place now. Obviously Manson are local as well and have a fully set-up distribution network so they have the best coverage by far. Manson is also struggling to supply. That was a 2 week ago bitch /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Last week I got offered approx 100 english pounds for one of Alains 1st every 4kg Oceanes we have had lying around for a long long while. When I asked why he wanted to pay so much for a demo superseded anchor he said he has had enough of the rest and could get a new one for love nor money currently. I know the bloke and he's no bunny. That is the level of interest we have here for the newer designs.

If all 3 are struggling to supply I'd suggest there must be a big pile of people buying them. One of these lot been asked by their EU people to fly the bloody things there due to demand. That is not done with something no body wants.

It's just a simple case of this website being British based and it is only recently that these 3 anchors became available there in any numbers. I know the numbers of anchors that have been going up there over the last few months and I'm sure many of you would be surprised at how big they actually are, I was. The Spade people are saying delays are due to demand in the EU as well.

So why haven't some seen them? Simple lack of easy availability and if you have an anchor that is working for you (or at least you 'think' it is, but that's another story) why change? You don't it's simple. As the current fleet (what's a pile of anchors called?) of anchors in use wear out, fall off, get lost or whatever you will see people taking the opportunity to look at the new ones. If they have an open mind and think about it many will swap to a new one and away we go, it's called critical mass. The exact same thing happened here, a lot faster than I would have expected to be honest.

An hour ago we were still over 60 new anchor deliveries behind what these 3 can supply, by the end of the week it'll be over 100. We are not wanting for any plows, deltas and the like as the demand is dropping away noticeably. And that's only one little outfit in one little country in the middle of no-where.

Shortly the same thing will start to happen up there and many of the nay-sayers will have to have a nice long cool glass of 'I should have just shut the f### up' /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif Meant in a good way.

Now a trick bit. As the choices up there are improving the next thing is to see how many can get over the fact they cost more. The newies are labour intensive, use high grade materials and are boutique type gear, this costs. Lets see how many expect one of the new ones to be the same price as a mass produced dodgy materialed (oh I'm making up words /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif ) shitters out of the east. Sadly I suspect it will be many. I'm constantly amazed at how many can find the money for a LCD flat screen for the boat but can't for such a mission critical bit of gear like an anchor. Should be interesting to watch the bitching about that /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Quite frankly reading some of the ill-informed posts is purely a laugh. It is so screaming obvious that 99% of the nay-sayers have never tried one and are spouting pure bollix. Sorry but true. As lemain said earlier to one "how would you know if you've never tried it?". I'd suggest almost everyone here was told the same thing by Mum over a plate of Broccoli /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif and lemain and wagenaar are at least willing to be open to the thought things can improve. These 2 esteemed gents will be able to sit back with a cold beer and just watch people taking 1/2 hour to set their plow, drift past at 3am when the dingdangle lets go and won't reset or when someone actually brought the size anchor specified on the marginal sized Lewmar chart. I'm sure they will enjoy it, after they have helped as all good yachties do of course.

Believe me or not, I don't really care, but the new ones are better and they are coming to a bay near you soon.

Just to add the usual. No, not all old anchors are bad just the new ones are better. It's a simple fact many of you up there will soon find out.

Oh yeah 'Cruising' DOES NOT mean going from marina to marina. That's just like shifting your car from your garage to your mates garage /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Sorry all about the bitching. It's been a big day of it trying to get enough new anchors actually.

Disclaimer - Yes I sell a range of anchors which do include the Spade, Rocna and Supreme. No none of the tight [--word removed--] manufacturers are paying me to say anything (I actually pay all 3 of them /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif ) or are even willing to give me their sisters phone number. It's just not fair, she's cute /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

How's that, post 120-130 odd all in one /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif I do like my smilies.
 
Gmac, you've been at the juice!
[ QUOTE ]
As the current fleet (what's a pile of anchors called?)

[/ QUOTE ] How about a 'set' of anchors?

So, you're running short of supplies. Can I help?

Anchors.jpg


Hmm. Perhaps that lot should be called a 'history' of anchors?

Waagenar's comments about national tastes are right on the mark.

Most sailing in UK is incredibly crowded, and has been so for some 35 years. So much so that rafting up in marinas and pontoons is now the normal way to stop, and anchoring for most Brits is putting a weight on the bottom for a fine weather picnic lunch. A small minority of sailors in UK anchor seriously - if they can find a space free of moorings. Not much incentive to change . . . and lets face it, many early 'round the world yachtsmen' were Brits and used and recommended the fisherman and CQR - the only hooks available at the time. And they had to know what they were doing, didn't they?

France only recently (25 yrs ago) became busy with boats. Until then the ethics of the Glenans sailing school created very high standards of seamanship - no engines their norm. Strong tidal streams and many rather exposed anchorages with good holding led that school to look very closely at anchors and anchoring techniques. The habit of questioning spread throughout the French sail training system. Anchor development stemmed from enthusiastic amateur effort, while the state still ruled a lot of industry, so marketing was not an issue.

The American marketing system ensured that the Bruce became the historic anchor of choice over there. 'Oil rigs' was a wonderful, if completely misleading story to sell to the public. 'If it can hold an oil rig . . .'. And don't a lot of them now regret it.

German sailors are recent entries. They cut their bottoms (can't say 'teeth' in this context) in the anchor happy Baltic and Mediterranean, where tides are slight. Being recent market entrants, they looked for evidence before buying, and the migration from CQR to Bugel was in full swing among the Mediterranean cognoscenti - and didn't the PR people ensure that buyers knew that.

There's a theme here. Marketing. And marketing has, until recently, been national. Then the new kids on the block arrived - these kiwis and ozzies. They just poked around, look for the best, adapted it a bit, used it. No histerical (hystorical?) hangups.

Well done guys. One more for the 200. And with a bit of luck this'll stir up a bit of nationalist sentiment . . .
 
Re: Help Choosing - Spade or Rocna

Can I elicit some help choosing between a Spade and a Rocna.... it wont be for a few months, but I'm thinking of using the Hi-Blade, (CQR Copy?) as a kedge/stern anchor, and replacing the bower.

I might be able to nip to Tunisia to pick up a Spade, or I might need a Rocna delivered to Malta.

Does that make 200, or did I miss it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top