Should I swap to a smaller / 3rd gen anchor?

[Seashoreman]

I have a similar small sailing yacht, Leisure 23sl, approx 2 tons fully laden. I use a 7 kg Bruce and anchor most of the time.
Never had a problem with holding. Mostly mud or shingle here in Suffolk. You don't mention where you intend to anchor?
I like the Bruce as it has no moving parts and fits on roller and in locker without any drama as I sail solo.

 

[jbweston]

But fortunately there is solid data that clearly shows that a modern anchor is superior in every way to the older designs and while his current anchor will do the job a smaller anchor of different design will do an equally good or better job. Not opinion, but proven fact,

And, as I said in my previous post, if he wants to save the cash, a new anchor fails on that count. A new anchor of any type will cost a lot more than keeping the old one. Not an opinion but proven fact.

 

[Mister E]

It depends on how you intend to use the boat .

 

[RogerFoxTerrier]

I have a similar small sailing yacht, Leisure 23sl, approx 2 tons fully laden. I use a 7 kg Bruce and anchor most of the time.
Never had a problem with holding. Mostly mud or shingle here in Suffolk. You don't mention where you intend to anchor?
I like the Bruce as it has no moving parts and fits on roller and in locker without any drama as I sail solo.

Anchoring will mainly be Chichester harbour and around the Solent - so I guess mainly mud / sand. Probably further afield to the West Country some day, but one step at a time!

 

[lustyd]

And, as I said in my previous post, if he wants to save the cash, a new anchor fails on that count. A new anchor of any type will cost a lot more than keeping the old one. Not an opinion but proven fact.

Depends how you measure cost. A decent anchor will encourage use of the main asset (boat) while a crappy CQR puts a lot of people off as it fails to set or drags at a change of tide.
They aren’t comparable things. Sure, the purchase price is lower but the cost is an entirely different question.

 

[ylop]

Depends how you measure cost. A decent anchor will encourage use of the main asset (boat) while a crappy CQR puts a lot of people off as it fails to set or drags at a change of tide.
They aren’t comparable things. Sure, the purchase price is lower but the cost is an entirely different question.

I’m not arguing that he shouldn’t replace his CQR if that’s what he wants to do, but your justification seems rather extreme - I’ve never had a problem getting my CQR to set and certainly never limited my sailing because of it. However if the OP is manually lifting that anchor rather than using a windlass he might well be less inclined to anchor than use a mooring or marina and so over a couple of seasons might find it’s financially a good investment anyway. he’s got a biggish cqr on a smallish boat in sheltered water - holding power is probably not his no 1 challenge - usability is. And some people have pointed out some other factors if it has to fit in a small locker - I used to have a delta on a small boat, but switched because wrestling it into the locker was such a faff (dimensions not weight).

 

[jbweston]

I don't want to get at anyone specific here but I do find anchor threads bring out those with strong opinions. I accept it's a fact that more modern anchors work better than older designs. But people have been anchoring for centuries with anchors far inferior to even the old fisherman-type anchor. In the 60-plus years I've been around boats, anchor designs have improved. But the anxiety about which anchor is the best seems to have increased as the frequency of anchoring has decreased. It seems that for some of us anchoring has become an exotic activity requiring the latest in high-tech equipment instead of being a daily occurrence like steering a course, reefing and tying on the fenders.

Please believe me, I have no criticism of anyone that needs a high-tech anchor because of their particular anchoring habits and situations.

I confess I do like to pull the leg of anyone that belongs to the Spanish Inquisition school of seamanship and sees the need to identify and root out anchor heretics that could be lurking in every thread. I'm an old fashioned live and let live type, rather than 'my way is right'. If you want or need a new pattern anchor that's fine by me. Similarly if your old Danforth, CQR or Fisherman does the job, that's OK by me too.

 

[doug748]

We're recently bought a Copland FoxTerrier 22. I believe she's about 1,400KGs.

She came with a 25 lbs / 11 KG CQR as the previous owner deliberately overspec'd it, which I totally get.

But given the CQR design is 90 years old, and they don't get the best reviews compared to modern designs, I was wondering whether it's worth changing. An Utltra is silly money to that's out, but a Rocna looks a good choice. The Rocna site, if I'm reading it correctly, states I only need the 6 KG model, which would be a lot easier to handle. So would the improved setting, holding and re-setting of a new model be better than the sheer weight of the CQR?

Yes, there's nothing 'wrong' with the CQR, other than it's a bit heavy to handle as it's in an anchor locker, not on a roller. I'll also admit I've watched far too many videos on YouTube on 3rd gen anchors and just think they're a bit cool! (sad eh?)

£250 quid for something you don't need, on a modest sized boat, sounds over the top. Look for something used is my advice, by the time you have found it you may be selling the boat so that's 250 pounds towards bits for your new vessel.

.

.

 

[andsarkit]

£250 quid for something you don't need, on a modest sized boat, sounds over the top. Look for something used is my advice, by the time you have found it you may be selling the boat so that's 250 pounds towards bits for your new vessel.

.

.

Good advice and thank you Doug for your bargain used Knox that would not fit in your anchor locker and has worked extremely well on my boat although it has to sit on deck ready for action.

 

[Tranona]

£250 quid for something you don't need, on a modest sized boat, sounds over the top. Look for something used is my advice, by the time you have found it you may be selling the boat so that's 250 pounds towards bits for your new vessel.

.

.

Whole load of assumptions here. Read the OPs question which is essentially what are the pros and cons of changing the anchor to a smaller one of a different design given that he finds the current one difficult to handle. Nothing about cost limitations nor about how long he intends keeping a boat he has just bought. Seems a pretty straightforward question that has already been answered several times based on facts. He can make his own decision on the value of changing to him.

 

[Neeves]

This is a bit like asking if you should replace your 10 year old Merc with a new BMW. Yes, if you want something newer, with a more modern design and if you are prepared to spend the money. No if you find the old one does all you need and you'd prefer to save the cash. The main difference is that cars wear out but generally anchors don't, so if it's a genuine CQR very likely it will still be working as good as when it was new in 50 years from now.

I think it comes down to your personal preference.

Asking on the forum about which anchor is best is is rather like asking if it's better to be Catholic or Protestant, or to support Man City or Man United. Some people have strong views and firmly-held beliefs.

Sadly not true.

The hinge on the CQR wears and becomes loose, The looseness of the connection alters the geometry of the shank to fluke and the fluke will be unreliable in terms of setting ability. It is possible to sleeve the hinge - but its usually sensible if this amount of wear has occurred to retire the CQR and opt for something else.

Good second hand anchors are sold in a variety of locations, eBay for one. If you are not in a hurry watch your favourite auction site and be patient.

If weight is an issue think aluminium, Fortress, Excel and Spade, you want one of the same physical size of a steel version - no need to oversize.

For steel any thing from Kobra, Spade, Excel, Rocna, Vulcan, Viking, Odin, (blind fold you nor anyone else will tell the difference) will be more than adequate - it depends what fits in the locker. and what your local chandler has in stock. I've tested all of these (and basically they all work similarly (blind fold I cannot tell the difference). You can add Epsilon to the list, I have not tested one but all the reports are supportive. No need AT ALL to oversize beyond what the anchor maker recommends. You will only need a short length of 6mm chain - anything else - will just increase the weight you have to retrieve.

Trying not to be specific - concave anchors will be retrieved with more seabed in the fluke (more weight for you to lift) but if you jiggle the anchor as you retreive and dangle the anchor in the water as you move slowly - the fluke will self wash - people who own Rocna's etc seem to cope - without even mentioning the facts

Jonathan

 

[zoidberg]

Like others here with a mile or three under the belt, I'm happy enough if a boat I'm on has a genuine CQR. I'll use it as I have done for decades - but I'll be careful to ensure it is properly set before I crack open the 'yardarm gin'.

Of High Holding Power Anchors, the Spade is reckoned 'very good', and the French 'Kobra II' is almost as good - and very much cheaper.
The alloy Fortress is likewise considered 'very good'; it is quite easy to deploy and recover from aft which, in a 23' boat, is helpful. I keep mine demounted and stored neatly in a bag; I can reassemble it, without tools, ready for use in <2 minutes. I purchased mine 'here' for about 1/3 retail as it was pre-owned. It still had sticky labels attached.

Many today think of anchoring much as they think of parking their car..... set it and forget it! I don't subscribe to that blinkered attitude.... especially if the tidestream is expected to reverse, a big wind shift is likely, and/or a big tidal rise is predicted. My job is to look after the boat - and that usually means a proper 'anchor watch'.

 

[lustyd]

Many today think of anchoring much as they think of parking their car

But that’s kind of the point of good modern anchors. Yes a CQR can be made to work, but why put the effort in when you don’t have to and why have that worry?
People were cooking with fire for centuries but give me a nice modern oven any day as it’s harder to burn food, has a timer, and the heat can be controlled.

 

[billskip]

But that’s kind of the point of good modern anchors. Yes a CQR can be made to work, but why put the effort in when you don’t have to and why have that worry?
People were cooking with fire for centuries but give me a nice modern oven any day as it’s harder to burn food, has a timer, and the heat can be controlled.

First sign of good weather, out comes the BBQ....

 

[lustyd]

First sign of good weather, out comes the BBQ....

and thousands get food poisoning every year doing just that. What's your point?

 

[RogerFoxTerrier]

Whole load of assumptions here. Read the OPs question which is essentially what are the pros and cons of changing the anchor to a smaller one of a different design given that he finds the current one difficult to handle. Nothing about cost limitations nor about how long he intends keeping a boat he has just bought. Seems a pretty straightforward question that has already been answered several times based on facts. He can make his own decision on the value of changing to him.

Exactly! I didn't mention costs. I may have deep pockets, I might be foolish spendthrift or I might be a miser as tight as a duck's ****.

The nub of my question was indeed, is a smaller, modern anchor likely (i.e. in typical circumstances) to be better than an over-spec and over weight CQR. I am aware it's not a binary answer and that there are many variables.

For what it's worth, I'm going to check dimensions of the locker (which is actually quite big) and indeed keep a lookout second hand.

I have 18m of 6mm chain (actually coming up more like 6.7mm on the callipers) and a further 14m of rope.

 

[doug748]

Whole load of assumptions here. Read the OPs question which is essentially what are the pros and cons of changing the anchor to a smaller one of a different design given that he finds the current one difficult to handle. Nothing about cost limitations nor about how long he intends keeping a boat he has just bought. Seems a pretty straightforward question that has already been answered several times based on facts. He can make his own decision on the value of changing to him.

I have re-read the original post and suggest you do the same:

"........I was wondering whether it's worth changing?"

Read my answer again, I have given my thoughts, suggested why I have that view and put forward an alternative to buying a new anchor.

No idea what you are carping about.

.

 

[ylop]

and thousands get food poisoning every year doing just that. What's your point?

I think his point is to the effect that a good well prepared chef can use a barbecue without poisoning his guests and a competent seaman should be able to use a CQR without ending up on the rocks! And like bbq=food poisoning cqr=drag is probably grossly overstated, because nobody bothers to highlight the times nothing exciting happened.

 

[lustyd]

and over weight

This is a quite interesting point. The only reason we measure the size of anchors by weight is that nobody understood how anchors worked when designing older generation anchors. The aluminium Fortress comprehensively demonstrates that weight is not a consideration in holding power, and many modern anchors are sized by weight equivalent rather than their actual weight.
The primary design goal of the CQR was storing flat on deck, which unfortunately makes it a poor anchor by any objective measure. The fluke is also too wide, adding resistance to burying, the opposite of what you want. A scientific approach to design has led to almost everything about the CQR design being superseded to make anchors that set, reset, and hold much better, allowing skippers to become lazy when anchoring and have a better night's sleep.

 

[lustyd]

I think his point is to the effect that a good well prepared chef can use a barbecue without poisoning his guests and a competent seaman should be able to use a CQR without ending up on the rocks! And like bbq=food poisoning cqr=drag is probably grossly overstated, because nobody bothers to highlight the times nothing exciting happened.

Yes I got that, but who wants to train to be a professional just for a weekend away when easier alternatives exist. The analogy also isn't great because even a competent seaman will get caught out when a CQR fails to reset at the turn of the tide and have to re-anchor.