"Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anchor

[Trop Cher]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

I'm glad I bought a Spade....

I wonder why he didn't test the Rocna?

+1

Tks tudorsailor, interesting vid ...and hardly the stuff to make us Spade acolytes weep into our coffee

Ah good, I don't have to bother watching it now

 

[CAPTAIN FANTASTIC]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

Good tests with predictable results for CQR and Bruce. Interesting to see the Excel performing so well.

 

[GrahamD]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

An anchor thread on Friday night, fat chance!

First :very_drunk:

then :bull_head:

...:boxing:

...:black_eyed:

except it's Thursday, but who's counting?

 

[NormanS]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

Good tests with predictable results for CQR and Bruce. Interesting to see the Excel performing so well.

Except it wasn't a CQR, but a copy, which are notoriously poor.

 

[dom]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

except it's Thursday, but who's counting?

Minor detail

 

[Seven Spades]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

I had a Sou'wester it was terrible, the previous owner used it for 10 years, I have no idea why. I now have a Rocna, consequently I sleep very well which is what counts.

 

[Neeves]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

He could hardly be expected to buy all the anchors and he begged, borrowed or was given them (some he later bought). I believe he posted these vids on more than one forum and I think on one of the threads he did say he approached CMP/Rocna without much success. He has never said so but I suspect his comments on the Supreme might be applied also to the Rocna - but one should never suspect!

For those who are a bit time short then he did a summary video, the last one?, and if you look at the beginning and end you have a decent overall conclusion of his work. You would need to be very keen to wade through 56 of them. Yo.u would also need to be keen just to watch all of the summary video

Interestingly the criticisms he makes are often those not aired by others.

Overall very reassuring for anyone who invested the money in a Spade (though his final choice of a Spade seemed to be dictated by aesthetics - which provides a nice contrast to the effort he invested).

Jonathan

 

[Bru]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

I'm not going to watch the rest because AFAIC the CQR test is invalidated on two grounds

One, as others have already said, it's a copy not a genuine CQR and the copies are notoriously poor

But more critically, two, he's using a scope of just 2.5:1 which is hopelessly inadequate for a CQR

3:1 would be the absolute minimum and from personal experience 5:1 or more, at least initially, is preferable to be sure of the anchor setting straight away

In three years of using a CQR, it never once failed to set instantly when deployed with a 5:1 scope. It never dragged when the tide turned either (we never anchored in severe conditions so I can't say what would have happened). The anchor in question was a genuine CQR and one size above the minimum recommendation for the size of boat (never a bad thing IMO)

CQRs won't set on a very short scope and that is all that his video proves!

In contrast, by the way, the genuine Bruce on our second boat has never earned my trust or approbation. I've had trouble getting it to set at all on several occasions and it has dragged when the tide turned on several occasions

I theorise, from what I've seen and heard, that many of the problems people have with CQRs is due to using too short a scope

Oh and another thing, unless I missed it he doesn't mention the bottom type either. Kinda critical info, that

 

[seajayare]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

I have had Manson supreme for half a season and .I have certainly experienced the anchor collecting large amounts of the bottom. The last time in Newtown Creek I couldn't lift the anchor out of the water because of a ball of clay and weed about 2 foot diameter. The bottom there is very sticky mud/clay and now I have seen the videos I think stuff sticks to the blade and the roll hoop stops the material sliding off the back of the blade when the anchor comes up.

If I had seen the videos before I bought last year I would now have been the owner of a spade anchor instead of a Manson that acts like a garden spade!

still it sets more reliably than my previous Brittany.

 

[sailaboutvic]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

I'm not going to watch the rest because AFAIC the CQR test is invalidated on two grounds

One, as others have already said, it's a copy not a genuine CQR and the copies are notoriously poor

But more critically, two, he's using a scope of just 2.5:1 which is hopelessly inadequate for a CQR

3:1 would be the absolute minimum and from personal experience 5:1 or more, at least initially, is preferable to be sure of the anchor setting straight away

In three years of using a CQR, it never once failed to set instantly when deployed with a 5:1 scope. It never dragged when the tide turned either (we never anchored in severe conditions so I can't say what would have happened). The anchor in question was a genuine CQR and one size above the minimum recommendation for the size of boat (never a bad thing IMO)

CQRs won't set on a very short scope and that is all that his video proves!

In contrast, by the way, the genuine Bruce on our second boat has never earned my trust or approbation. I've had trouble getting it to set at all on several occasions and it has dragged when the tide turned on several occasions

I theorise, from what I've seen and heard, that many of the problems people have with CQRs is due to using too short a scope

Oh and another thing, unless I missed it he doesn't mention the bottom type either. Kinda critical info, that

Bru , I have a feeling your and east coast sailor , am I correct in saying that ?

 

[Bru]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

Bru , I have a feeling your and east coast sailor , am I correct in saying that ?

Yup and I know where you're going with that

Mud and CQRs do seem to get on rather well although I've also anchored on a sandy bottom with the CQR without difficulty (in contrast to the Bruce)

And that's kind've my point really, bottom type is a critical factor in anchor performance

PS I've looked at the CQR video again and the anchor never set. It's hard to see due to the murky water but I stick by my assertion that it failed, copy or not, primarily due to far too short a scope

 

[onesea]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

He is somewhat obsessed - the compilation is the 56th anchor setting video!

There are worse obsessions to have and this one is unlikely to land him in jail!

Thanks for posting.
Really informative video; good to see someone doing detailed research too.

Spade, Ronka etc ha I will stick with my Fortress...

For very much the same reason he chooses the Spade it fits my boat....

I like having so much holding power for so little weight, I don't have a anchor windlass...

 

[sailaboutvic]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

Yup and I know where you're going with that

Mud and CQRs do seem to get on rather well although I've also anchored on a sandy bottom with the CQR without difficulty (in contrast to the Bruce)

And that's kind've my point really, bottom type is a critical factor in anchor performance

PS I've looked at the CQR video again and the anchor never set. It's hard to see due to the murky water but I stick by my assertion that it failed, copy or not, primarily due to far too short a scope

Yep your right east coast mud you can't beat it,
Bru if it works for you that's great , hang on to it .
Little story for our first 10 year of sailing off the East Coast I had a CQR and loved it so much That I took it from boat to boat , it held me nicely on my weekend outings and holidays , although I really never used it away from the East coast because if we sailed to Belgium or France or the sailed past Ramsgate we used the Marina .
within 7 months of leaving the East coast and going off cruises my lovable CQR was bin .
It spend more time on it side kissing the sea bed then any thing else , we had to use the second anchor our Bruce almost every time
29 years on and I am more likely to see an CQR holding open a bar door then on the bow of an boat , we in our winter Marina with over 100 boats from all over the world and there is not one CQR on a bow that has to tell you some thing .
Has a full time Liveaboard who anchors 8 to 9 month a year I need some thing that's not only going to set fast but once it does it going to hold , at time we don't have the luxury of running in a Marina , so what every the weather throw at us we have to deal with .
There are much better anchors , if any thing , knowing what I know now , CQR would be well down on my list of anchors .
But as I said it working for you great .
I respect your comment on your CQR for one very good reason , they would had been my own view on the CQR 30 plus years ago .

 

[Bru]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

Yep your right east coast mud you can't beat it,
Bru if it works for you that's great , hang on to it .
...
I respect your comment on your CQR for one very good reason , they would had been my own view on the CQR 30 plus years ago .

I think you've made an excellent point there - it's horses for courses

I should perhaps state that I'm not for one minute suggesting the CQR is the equal of the more modern designs. And I'll happily confess that if the new boat purchase goes ahead next week the current CQR on the bow roller will, when pennies permit, be retired to the depths of the cockpit cave locker and replaced with one of the aforementioned modern anchors!

That's because we plan on venturing further afield than the East Coast and it's lovely gloopy glorious mud over the coming years

(I've also got every intention of shipping a fisherman type anchor too for the same reason)

But whilst the CQR is undoubtedly not the equal of modern designs, it's equally not as bad as it's often made out to be and crucially, as you rightly allude, why replace it if it's working fine for a particular skipper on a particular boat in the conditions where it's being deployed?

PS It's interesting to contrast the rarity of CQRs aboard boats in the Med, as you report, to their common presence aboard boats in East Coast marinas. That's telling, is that!

 

[GHA]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

I'm not going to watch the rest because AFAIC the CQR test is invalidated on two grounds

One, as others have already said, it's a copy not a genuine CQR and the copies are notoriously poor

But more critically, two, he's using a scope of just 2.5:1 which is hopelessly inadequate for a CQR

....

Oh and another thing, unless I missed it he doesn't mention the bottom type either. Kinda critical info, that

You didn't look very hard, the very next video in the series is the same anchor @ 3.5:1.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFXaY679bqQ

How can a "CQR test is invalidated" when there isn't one? Only a test of the copy, no doubt of you sent him a real one he would gladly do the same test & upload.


The " Kinda critical info, that" is in the video description, not exactly hidden.
Published on Nov 18, 2015
Demonstration of a CQR (Copy) anchor being set, re-set and retrieved using scope of 3.5 to 1. Seabed consists of "Sandy Mud".

 

[Bru]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

You didn't look very hard, the very next video in the series is the same anchor @ 3.5:1.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFXaY679bqQ

I didn't look at all!

How can a "CQR test is invalidated" when there isn't one? Only a test of the copy, no doubt of you sent him a real one he would gladly do the same test & upload.

OK, put it another way - it's not a test of a CQR

The " Kinda critical info, that" is in the video description, not exactly hidden.
Published on Nov 18, 2015
Demonstration of a CQR (Copy) anchor being set, re-set and retrieved using scope of 3.5 to 1. Seabed consists of "Sandy Mud".

I missed that, that's what you get when you're trying to do three things at once! Not seeing much mud though I have to say!

Critically, the second video kind've makes my point. The CQR copy does set and reset (eventually) on a 3.5:1 scope. How much better would it have performed on a 5:1 scope?

And as Sailaboutvic and I have already bandied backwards and forwards, it's horses for courses

Nobody (surely) in their right mind would go out and buy a new CQR today anyway so it's a rather moot point

 

[GHA]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

And as Sailaboutvic and I have already bandied backwards and forwards, it's horses for courses

Very much, I used a cqr round the thames eastury for a while as well and probably would still be using it if I hadn't left.

 

[GrahamM376]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

I have had Manson supreme for half a season and .I have certainly experienced the anchor collecting large amounts of the bottom. If I had seen the videos before I bought last year I would now have been the owner of a spade anchor instead of a Manson that acts like a garden spade! still it sets more reliably than my previous Brittany.

I may have done the same but in fairness it has performed brilliantly compared to previous cqr lookalike. I don't understand why he used the slot in trials as it's actually designed to trip the anchor when the direction of pull is reversed - a totally useless feature as far as I'm concerned for use in tidal waters. Also, with the chain attached in the slot, its position stops the anchor riding over the roller when retrieving.

 

[Richard10002]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

While not knocking his efforts, I think in the real world, if you want to anchor, you don't do it charging astern at three knots. I do, however, admire the work that he has obviously put into his research. So much better than the normal underwater stills that tell very little.

Nor do you anchor with the anchor behind a tractor on a beach? In the 40 minutes I think he did some normal type anchoring with each anchor, then he did some stress testing with the boat travelling at speed. All seemed very valid, and much better than some of the tests I have seen.

The fact that the Spade became his favourite, having used the Manson for a number of years, was significant, as well as the fact that he found it hard to discount several of the anchors.

Very useful and interesting, and well worth the investment of 40 minutes if you are stressed by the performance of your current anchor, (as I was in my travels to Malta and back in 2006-2009), and are not sure what to do.

 

[Scotty_Tradewind]

Re: "Real" anchor testing - ie underwater filmed with a Gopro attached above the anch

Although very interesting to see what could be achieved in an emergency with little scope, the videos served little other purpose for most boat owners.

If you are wishing an anchor to do most things, most of the time, whatever the outlay, then it seems that the Spade has what it takes.
Otherwise imho it seems to me that a modern generation anchor with a concave fluke is most acceptable.
Convex fluked anchors will plough and will not bury well under serious loads although many will provide adequate secure anchor in reasonably benign conditions

I have never had problems with rocks jamming in my Rocna causing it to fail to reset overnight with a tide change, but I can see that it is a possibility.
However, I have seen it come from off the sea bed holding masses of seabed and weed.

What the videos do not take into consideration is the best holding power and reset probabilities in all sea beds during a gale with a lot of scope.

To sleep at anchor successfully most of the time, with changes of tide in U.K. waters, was my basic criteria along with cost.

As always I remind boat owners......... the rounded bar on certain anchors is there primarily for the wife to be able to lift it successfully!

S.