Not another anchor?

zoidberg

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 Nov 2016
Messages
6,955
Visit site
Yes.

I'm advised by those kind folks at NauticExpo that this is now available....


29780221588_558c8a5b67_q.jpg



What it does, apparently, on gravel and stones.

And what it does, apparently, on sand....


29780220918_62f9ac3479_b.jpg



There are those who will be swift to acquire one, of course. You know who you are..... :rolleyes:
 
The XYZ, a genuinely different product. American, and a brave attempt at developing an anchor that appears not to have copied anything else.

It lasted a few years, or it was on the market for a few years. I've never seen one 'in the flesh' nor know of anyone who bought one. It was developed by someone who claimed to use his with success - I recall he was based in NY but hailed from somewhere in eastern Europe and had an eclectic mix of totally unrelated successful designs to his name.

Bravery was sadly not rewarded with longevity and I think (or thought) it 'disappeared' 3-5 year ago.

Jonathan
 
The wire is a good idea, it helps any anchor to set more quickly. Perfectly acceptable to Classification Societies - though it does need watching for issues with the swages (and may need to be hand retrieved for the last metre or so). I vaguely recall that Danforth, genuine, were sold (or could be sold) with wire - though that might have been to overcome weight of chain pulling the rode into thin mud.

My recollection of performance of the XYZ was similar to Vyv's - it was a long time ago. I don't recall it being a total disaster more that it was not very good.

But I can admire people that step outside the norm and bring out something original using their hard earned cash. Pity - it could have shaken up the industry. The model illustrated seems no different to the original. I note there is an aluminium version - which was not part of the original portfolio.

Jonathan
 
Yes, the wire was standard.

The unicorn horn for turning was interesting, but seems like a fouling problem.

In testing the performance was best described as inconsistent. When it set, it was quite powerful, but often it did not set, even on good bottoms.

Every anchor is a compromise. I wish I understood the reasoning. I'm guessing the short shank was to make it less sensitive to yawing and changes in wind direction. The horn with a head at the top was clearly to keep it off its back. But it seems there was just not enough pressure brought to bear on the toe; hard to accomplish with such a short shank.
 
Top