Viking Anchors have an other model, Odin

[Neeves]

Jonathan. I can't access any info on the website about the anchor. It's not much of an ask. All the details of the viking anchor are there.

That's because its new.

The models that are available are the first production run. A few tens of anchors were made and sold to those who believed in the product There were prototypes but they were modified to remove issues. So there are no fancy images, yet.

If you want details use the email address.

If you want to wait for the website I understand - its no skin off my nose.

I would like to ask a generic question......this Odin is designed to fit on a Lewmar bow roller.....since the bow roller was designed initially for the Delta, a deeply flawed anchor, and nearly all new generation anchors are made to fit the same bow roller....are they all inherently flawed?
Allow me to add to my argument....the Rocna is often criticized....but the Vulcan gets much praise....and the Vulcan is a Rocna designed for a different bow roller

No

A Spade fits on a commonly designed, ie Delta, bow roller, as does an Excel. Its reflection on the success of having Delta's on new production yachts. The anchors that replace the, inadequate, Deltas have to fit that same bow roller. If the new anchors did not fit on a 'delta' bow roller - people would complain.

Its the tail wagging the dog - very successful

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

Allow me to add to my argument....the Rocna is often criticized....but the Vulcan gets much praise....and the Vulcan is a Rocna designed for a different bow roller

A brief historical analysis

If you look at a Rocna its a copy of Spade, but a crude copy - though its much cheaper to make a Rocna than a Spade. The copy is sufficiently different to not 'look' like a Spade.

Place a Spade fluke over a Rocna the plan views are identical, same angles same proportion of toe to heel. For ballast they doubled the weight of the steel plate for the toe. To make the slight concave saucer shape of the 'fluke' plate they folded the fluke, bent it a bit, and added an upturned heel, they did away with the hollow shank and simply had a shank cut from steel plate, no streamlining. If you take a Rocna shank and use a French curve to 'join' the corners - you will draw a Spade curved shank. But there again, the Rocna shank is a copy of Delta's. But doubling the toe thickness was not quite enough and in some seabeds, because Spade used lead, Rocna did not self right - so they needed the roll bar. If you cut the roll bar off 9 times out of 10 it will self right - but that's not good enough.

Having said that:

If you take other anchors, and take a few liberties, the Deltas fluke plan is not dissimilar to a CQR (nor many other anchors). The narrow toe leading to a flared heel. The Delta shank is really clever as it allows the anchor to roll so that the toe addresses the seabed. Its much copied.

The main outlier is Bruce, totally original design. I see no anchors prior to Bruce with any of its characteristics.

Basically 'our' anchors today are based on CQR, Danforth or Bruce - what Delta offered was the roll over shank - looks simple but at the time brilliant

Vulcan is what Peter Smith wanted to do from the outset - he copied Spade and made the improvement Spade should have made themselves.

I think you will find that Vulcan will deploy adequately from most bow rollers.

Viking took a lot of this but used HT steel to save weight - simple stuff - by why did no-one do it prior? They added perforations, saves weight. You finish with an anchor weight the same as an aluminium alloy clone of Delta, Spade, Excel etc but stronger and better as thin plate offers less resistance to setting (without sacrificing weight)

Odin goes further - and gets rid of the ballast and the roll bar (stopping the roll bar compressing the seabed as it passes over the fluke - and clogging).

Everyone had the opportunity to do any of this - at the time. Most simply copied and added nothing new

I could go on

Jonathan

 

[Bouba]

A brief historical analysis

If you look at a Rocna its a copy of Spade, but a crude copy - though its much cheaper to make a Rocna than a Spade. The copy is sufficiently different to not 'look' like a Spade.

Place a Spade fluke over a Rocna the plan views are identical, same angles same proportion of toe to heel. For ballast they doubled the weight of the steel plate for the toe. To make the slight concave saucer shape of the 'fluke' plate they folded the fluke, bent it a bit, and added an upturned heel, they did away with the hollow shank and simply had a shank cut from steel plate, no streamlining. If you take a Rocna shank and use a French curve to 'join' the corners - you will draw a Spade curved shank. But there again, the Rocna shank is a copy of Delta's. But doubling the toe thickness was not quite enough and in some seabeds, because Spade used lead, Rocna did not self right - so they needed the roll bar. If you cut the roll bar off 9 times out of 10 it will self right - but that's not good enough.

Having said that:

If you take other anchors, and take a few liberties, the Deltas fluke plan is not dissimilar to a CQR (nor many other anchors). The narrow toe leading to a flared heel. The Delta shank is really clever as it allows the anchor to roll so that the toe addresses the seabed. Its much copied.

The main outlier is Bruce, totally original design. I see no anchors prior to Bruce with any of its characteristics.

Basically 'our' anchors today are based on CQR, Danforth or Bruce - what Delta offered was the roll over shank - looks simple but at the time brilliant

Vulcan is what Peter Smith wanted to do from the outset - he copied Spade and made the improvement Spade should have made themselves.

I think you will find that Vulcan will deploy adequately from most bow rollers.

Viking took a lot of this but used HT steel to save weight - simple stuff - by why did no-one do it prior? They added perforations, saves weight. You finish with an anchor weight the same as an aluminium alloy clone of Delta, Spade, Excel etc but stronger and better as thin plate offers less resistance to setting (without sacrificing weight)

Odin goes further - and gets rid of the ballast and the roll bar (stopping the roll bar compressing the seabed as it passes over the fluke - and clogging).

Everyone had the opportunity to do any of this - at the time. Most simply copied and added nothing new

I could go on

Jonathan

My logic is that its a bit like a keyboard .....they have evolved mightily since the earliest of typewriters....but the inherent flaw of the original QWERTY layout holds all keyboards back. And if we didn’t start with a Lewmar bow roller....then perhaps we would now be much more advanced.....thank you for your complete answer

 

[NormanS]

Help please for the ignorant. What's a Lewmar bow roller?
Is it in any way, shape or form, different from ordinary bow rollers?
Have they reinvented the wheel?
I have two bow rollers, one primarily designed for rope, the other specifically designed and made by me, to suit my chain and my main anchor. What am I missing out on?
Would it work better if I wrote "Lewmar" on it?

 

[geem]

My boats bow roller design predates the Delta anchor by 15 years. The Spade anchor fits nicely

 

[Bouba]

Help please for the ignorant. What's a Lewmar bow roller?
Is it in any way, shape or form, different from ordinary bow rollers?
Have they reinvented the wheel?
I have two bow rollers, one primarily designed for rope, the other specifically designed and made by me, to suit my chain and my main anchor. What am I missing out on?
Would it work better if I wrote "Lewmar" on it?

A bit like all boats have Volvo engines....Lewmar and their Delta on a bow roller are ubiquitous....especially in the mass production of the all white boat. They aren’t inherently special....nonetheless....like any industrial product...they have certain length times mass with angles...and that is the starting point for most new generation anchors....can’t sell an anchor to boat it can’t fit on. My hypothesis was simply, did this constrain development?...would an anchor be better if it didn’t have to start with this precondition.
Just a quick thought that Neeves has answered well

 

[NormanS]

I don't see that at all. Nobody says that you must have a roller. Ships don't. They generally have hauze pipes. Some yachts do also. I carry three full size anchors. The one I use most, sits on and uses a roller. No way could the other two (different) anchors use a roller. I'm sure that the little one that Neeves was given, and that he appears to be advertising, could be just thrown over and retrieved without requiring a roller.

 

[Neeves]

Help please for the ignorant. What's a Lewmar bow roller?
Is it in any way, shape or form, different from ordinary bow rollers?
Have they reinvented the wheel?
I have two bow rollers, one primarily designed for rope, the other specifically designed and made by me, to suit my chain and my main anchor. What am I missing out on?
Would it work better if I wrote "Lewmar" on it?

Lewmar have a website the detail will all be there. As I'm equally sure the detail is there for Epsilon and their aluminium Fortress clone.

Lewmar sell bow rollers that accept a Delta. Most other bow rollers look like Lewmar's (and probably originally designed by Simpson Lawrence), though there are hinged bow rollers (sort of sea saw rollers) - I don't know whose idea it was. Most new yachts and MoBos for the last 20 years have had a Delta or Delta copy on the bow, the anchors have all self launched - because the bow rollers were originally supplied by Lewmar or someone making a copy (and no-one changes a bow roller).

A large tranche of Lewmar's business is selling a package to boat builders, hatches, windlass, anchors, chain, winches, chain locks - all bundled together and sold at competitive prices. Competitors who do not have the depth of product have great difficulty competing. I suspect this was part of the motivation for Lofrans to sell chain.

I do note that on bigger MoBos at boat shows the most common anchor is Ultra (there is nothing wrong with an Ultra, except price, but one reason they are on bow rollers at boat shows - they are pretty (my guess is most people have no idea that as well as being pretty - they work well).

The one thing that does seem to have changed - bow rollers have become narrower.

Companies like Knox, Viking, Anchor Right service the replacement market, when the owner finds that the Deltas is not quite what they wanted. Historically marketing was on the basis of magazine tests, we still quote the 2006 West Marine test or the Fortress Cheasapeake mud test, magazines are facing tough and lean times and the opportunity for another big test is slim. Promotion now is Facebook (and I cannot stand Facebook) or similar and.......websites. The trouble with Forum, Facebook, websites (and me) is that there is no peer review. Knox has a great product - how often is it mentioned? People are besotted by underwater video and underwater stills - sadly they show what the 'photographer', yes - like me. wants you to see - no peer review (and I can describe how badly that works for the average guy on the London omnibus - but let's not go there . I'm trying to keep the thread civilised ).

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

I don't see that at all. Nobody says that you must have a roller. Ships don't. They generally have hauze pipes. Some yachts do also. I carry three full size anchors. The one I use most, sits on and uses a roller. No way could the other two (different) anchors use a roller. I'm sure that the little one that Neeves was given, and that he appears to be advertising, could be just thrown over and retrieved without requiring a roller.

Unnecessary wording.

But yes - that's actually the point of the Odin, if its small enough you can simply chuck it over the side, it can land anyway and it will set and develop hold...quickly, no ballast, no roll bar. It actually sets and under tension buries till just the tip of the shank protrudes in a 2m set. Its the same size as a 15kg Spade or Excel but weighs 8kg and its steel. I find it remarkable. Initially I simply did not think it would work, could work. Its magic - and to me a great step forward, a bit like, in their time, CQR, Danforth, Spade. There is one more development needed - but I'll leave that for another day, you will be relieved to hear.

I'm not advertising Odin - I'm describing a new concept in anchor design, no roll bar, no ballast that works without these crutches. If you would rather not read of new concepts - don't read my post - put me on 'ignore'. If you don't think its appropriate to mention new products don't winge and be nasty - put me on report.

I have no financial involvement at all in Viking, though I did get a free anchor. But I value my independence and would not allow a gifted anchor colour my comments. I say what I see. I used to be offered Mantus products, until I repetitively criticised their swivel, chain hook, Mantus M1 anchor - so I've never seen the Mantus M2 - honesty is sometimes disliked. I have oft seen comment like 'Neeves does not like Mantus' - no-one ever says -' why did Mantus not do their own product testing' (which was actually the comment of one of my editors). But I don't knock too Mantus much - without them I'd have much less to report .

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

Repeated post

 

[Neeves]

My boats bow roller design predates the Delta anchor by 15 years. The Spade anchor fits nicely

Your yacht was built around 1970? They knew how to build real yachts then. You are lucky - there will be few such yachts left and of a condition to sail the Atlantic - most people have to live with AWBs.



Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

A bit like all boats have Volvo engines....Lewmar and their Delta on a bow roller are ubiquitous....especially in the mass production of the all white boat. They aren’t inherently special....nonetheless....like any industrial product...they have certain length times mass with angles...and that is the starting point for most new generation anchors....can’t sell an anchor to boat it can’t fit on. My hypothesis was simply, did this constrain development?...would an anchor be better if it didn’t have to start with this precondition.
Just a quick thought that Neeves has answered well

I don't think, apart from the hinged sea saw extension that bow rollers have much more room for development. If the anchor fits and follows historic design norms the anchor will self deploy.

We are seeing anchor development, Delta, Spade, Fortress, Knox which are all very different - designers don't seem to suffer constraint (in fact a Fortress looks totally out of place on a bow roller). But Fortress is a good example - it does not fit on a conventional bow roller. But if the CQR had not been developed and we had only had a Danforth, Brittany and then Fortress etc - then bow rollers would look totally different to those we have now. It would not be difficult to design a bow roller for Fortress - but the market is simply too small (not denigrating Fortress). The market is...for something like a Delta.

Jonathan

 

[geem]

Your yacht was built around 1970? They knew how to build real yachts then. You are lucky - there will be few such yachts left and of a condition to sail the Atlantic - most people have to live with AWBs.



Jonathan

Designed in 1977. Built in 1980

 

[Bouba]

When I decided to ditch my Delta.... I downloaded a paper template from the Rocna website....stuck it to cardboard...and test fitted it to my Lewmar bow roller....
And I will get an Odin.....as soon as my Rocna wears out.......(my serious point being that people seldom change their anchor because they last several generations and it’s hard to explain to the wife why you need a new one when the old one always looks as good as new)

 

[Neeves]

People do lose anchors (or if you make anchors )


Using Odin as an excuse to bore the pants of those who don't like anchor threads...

2 anchors I have almost ignored in my summary of anchors are Knox and SARCA. Both continue the trend that anchors are designed by passionate individuals, Spade, Danforth, Fortress, Rocna, Mantus

These 2 are really quirky - but work, and work well.

They bear an uncanny resemblance to each other, SARCA is by far the oldest. They don't seem to travel, few outside the UK know of Knox, few outside of Oz and NZ know of SARCA.

Both are innovative, that little fluke on the top of the SARCA help's it to self right and it was the first anchor, of which I'm aware, with slots or perforations. Like Mantus is would offer better hold if the crown. junction of fluke and shank, was further aft. Its hidden but there is a plate of steel under 'each' fluke of the Knox which makes it both robust and adds some ballast forward. Both have that unusual right angled shank - rejecting the Delta shank in favour of the roll bar. Both have also rejected the narrow toe widening to the heel.

The uncanny similarity is spoilt as each rejected the other's choice of fluke, concave vs convex.


Neither would have fitted on Josepheline's bow roller

Jonathan

 

[NormanS]

Unnecessary wording.

But yes - that's actually the point of the Odin, if its small enough you can simply chuck it over the side, it can land anyway and it will set and develop hold...quickly, no ballast, no roll bar. It actually sets and under tension buries till just the tip of the shank protrudes in a 2m set. Its the same size as a 15kg Spade or Excel but weighs 8kg and its steel. I find it remarkable. Initially I simply did not think it would work, could work. Its magic - and to me a great step forward, a bit like, in their time, CQR, Danforth, Spade. There is one more development needed - but I'll leave that for another day, you will be relieved to hear.

I'm not advertising Odin - I'm describing a new concept in anchor design, no roll bar, no ballast that works without these crutches. If you would rather not read of new concepts - don't read my post - put me on 'ignore'. If you don't think its appropriate to mention new products don't winge and be nasty - put me on report.

I have no financial involvement at all in Viking, though I did get a free anchor. But I value my independence and would not allow a gifted anchor colour my comments. I say what I see. I used to be offered Mantus products, until I repetitively criticised their swivel, chain hook, Mantus M1 anchor - so I've never seen the Mantus M2 - honesty is sometimes disliked. I have oft seen comment like 'Neeves does not like Mantus' - no-one ever says -' why did Mantus not do their own product testing' (which was actually the comment of one of my editors). But I don't knock too Mantus much - without them I'd have much less to report .

Jonathan

I never thought I would see the day that you would comment about somebody else's post as "unnecessary wording".

 

[Neeves]

When I decided to ditch my Delta.... I downloaded a paper template from the Rocna website....stuck it to cardboard...and test fitted it to my Lewmar bow roller....
And I will get an Odin.....as soon as my Rocna wears out.......(my serious point being that people seldom change their anchor because they last several generations and it’s hard to explain to the wife why you need a new one when the old one always looks as good as new)

This maybe true but there are a number of companies, some quite big, Manson, Fortress, Tie Down Engineering (who make the genuine Danforth) + some family businesses, Anchor Right, Spade, Viking who seem to make an adequate business out of anchors. I confess that knowing the number of businesses active in the product and looking at bow rollers - it is all a bit difficult to believe - and your post should be correct.

I can understand your desire for an Odin and suggest you start to anchor with a 2:1 scope. Your wife will say - 'its never behaved like this in the past, it s always been so reliable', you can point out to her that anchors age and maybe its tired and needs a new life as a garden ornament, or be recycled to scrap for the next batch of RN warships, better submarines.

You need to be more innovative.

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

I never thought I would see the day that you would comment about somebody else's post as "unnecessary wording".

Are you going to complain I'm 'advertising' Knox?

Jonathan

 

[NormanS]

Are you going to complain I'm 'advertising' Knox?

Jonathan

No, why would I do that?
I am slightly concerned at the apparent lack of impartiality when you're ringing the praises of an anchor, which you just happen to have been given as a freebie.
It doesn't affect me, as I am not in the market for another anchor, no matter how wonderful it's claimed to be.

 

[Bouba]

No, why would I do that?
I am slightly concerned at the apparent lack of impartiality when you're ringing the praises of an anchor, which you just happen to have been given as a freebie.
It doesn't affect me, as I am not in the market for another anchor, no matter how wonderful it's claimed to be.

Almost none of us are in the market for a new anchor.....we all have one on the bow....and possibly a spare or two in the lazaret or garage....but if an incredible new product comes to market.....many of us might still be persuaded to get it