Viking's Odin anchor vs Ultra and the original Viking anchor

[Neeves]

Greenland was an extreme challenge, uncharted water, steeply sloping bottom, rocks, no shelter. I was lucky to get through that summer unscathed.

But where is anchoring actually easy, at least in any kind of weather? Not around the UK coasts. Not in the Baltic. Not in the Adriatic, or the Aegean. Not if you're are venturing at all far. Maybe in the Caribbean it's easy sometimes, with all that sand. But that's pretty far from here. Around the UK, I can count challenge-free anchorages on one hand, probably -- Osborne Bay, St. Aubin's Bay on Jersey, Falmouth Harbour, Salcombe.

I guess there are weekend sailors who always get to pick their weather, and never anchor out of necessity. Who never anchor in the winter, or in an unfamiliar place, or in bad weather. Such sailors might have little need for extra holding power. I don't think that describes anyone in this thread, however.

Quote:

'I don't think that describes anyone in this thread, however.'

end quote

This thread has 7 contributors - I hardly think it representative of the membership of YBW, one of the 7 contributors anchors in all that sand in the Caribbean and when the chips were down (or the forecast questionable) wisely forsook the Scillies for a better anchorage. Many who sail in the Med secure their yachts to the marina hard for winter (and spend Xmas and New Year with family) - I'm not dismissive of their choices.

Sailing is meant to be a pleasure not. part of an entry requirement to the SAS. I'm unimpressed with the bravado of sitting out a forecast Storm when secure anchorage is only a half day sail away. If you seek, other, shelter you are then not subject to the random choices of your neighbours with their ground tackle.

So far I count two members, of YBW, who profess to have sailed high latitudes.

The rest of us are just (extended) weekend sailors. . Your recommendations have, some, validity - but most of us sail for pleasure not thrills.

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

Hi Jonathan,

Forgive me I am confused. In the video, Panope (Steve) pretty much bags the Odin in all areas apart from the beginning test of a series of tests in his video using Odin and the other anchors.

This is interesting because I have purchased an Odin 50 at a not inconsiderable cost (though way less than the Ultra of course) - before Steve's video came out - (I am yet to use it as my boat is going through a major refit), and frankly - after watching the video I am strongly inclined to change from the Odin as my proposed main bower, to relegate it to the rank of a spare anchor only. Steve's video is not kind to the Odin at all.

So when you say something diametrically opposite as in "To me Odin is a revelation" - then I am rather interested how you and Steve can come to such different conclusions.

I am interested in your thoughts.
Cheers.

I'm not ignoring your post - I still have not seen the video, or seen only upto 'cobblestones'

In the introduction Steve pans the extension of the flange, welded to the shank. and its extension to the toe. This extension to the toe has no impact on setting ability, it effectively sits in a 'hole' or 'void' excavated by the fluke, (and does reinforce the toe).

Jonathan

 

[vyv_cox]

I have refrained from contributing to this thread because it is impossible to persuade anyone with an entrenched view that the opposite might be the case. I (when I still had my boat) carry the recommended size Rocna for my boat, 15 kg. Over the many years that we have owned this anchor we have sat out many storms, up to 50 knots of wind as a maximum and a good few of around 40 knots. The anchor has always behaved as it should, admittedly mostly in relatively good holding seabeds.

My article on the subject can be read here Oversize anchors – necessary?

 

[Neeves]

JRCO26​

I thought to detail some of my tests. None of this new - its on Viking's Facebook page and somewhere in Sailing Anarchy

This is enough detail, but redacted - fancy word for edited, to introduce a different aspect and should provide meat for sceptics to put through the grinder.

I have an Odin 40, Viking 10, Spade S80, Mantus M1 15kg, I've extensively tested previously the Spade S80 and A80, Excel No 4 both steel and aluminium and a FX16 and Fx 23. I've been testing anchors now for well over 2 decades.

I used the Excels and Spades as primary anchors and in my fetish for low weight reduction retired the steel Excel and Spade and used the aluminium versions. I also downsized the rode from 8mm to 6mm.

All of the anchors except the Viking's are 15kg, approx, The Viking's are around 8kg in HT steel similar weight to the aluminium versions of the steel anchors..

Our yacht was a 38' Lightwave catamaran weight around 7t in full cruising mode, full tanks, enough food for 3 months (an equivalent mono is a 45'/50' AWB - I've measures them). On a beam reach we can average 10knts over 10 hours. Our cruising ground was SW Tasmania (we found the Whitsundays and The Reef too, too popular).

I test using a load cell and all the anchors can develop hold of around 2,000kg in good clean sand, except Mantus which struggles to break through 1,000kgs (its a design issue). I exclude the FX - they will achieve more than 2,000kg - are then enough for our cat- but I'm nurturing my load cell, which has a 2t limit though I do test the bulk of the anchors and none consistently breaks through 2,200kg.

I have other anchors, but much smaller, so a poor comparison, Rocna, Supreme, SARCA. I have a Knox - but it lacks market in Oz and I'm time short.

The fact that the anchors achieved 2,000kg hold is twice that of a 15kg Delta (or CQR) and puts the anchors, Viking and Odin (except) M1 in the Superhigh Holding Power (SHHP) category.

! don't rate the M1 but include it - as I've got it.

Roll bar anchors did not fit on our bow roller - which for us excluded 'good' anchors..... Like Viking.

I whinged to the owner of Viking Anchors - hence Odin. Odin fits perfectly on our bow roller.

Don't query why two similarly sized, almost identical anchors are numbered a No 10 and a No 40 - I have no idea.

I tested for setting and hold on the beach in shallow water using a 4WD and the load cell. Being easily accessible I was able to test Odin in a variety of seabed positions.

Odin sets a dream from any orientation that I could devise. Tension the rode such that the toe faces the tension and it rolls to the setting position, on its side and toe just engaged, increase tension and it begins to dive and re-oreintates to the shank being fore and aft as it dives (and moves forward). When set, depends on shear strength of the seabed - the 2 fins are just visible, left and right of the tension direction.

The setting performance is not much different to the other anchors - except Odin needs no crutches. ballast and roll bar.

To me pretty magic.

I don't waste my time testing in soupy mud - I've done enough research that in soupy mud the only anchors that will offer any reliability is a Fortress (and in support of Dockhead) the data shows you need a oversized Fortress to have reliability (we had a FX35?).

I've been testing anchors and I think I know my anchors (many would disagree. ) but the weakness I found of many, most if not all, was that in an oscillating strongly gusting wind (when you are getting williwaws from left and right) - anchors would. reorientate with every opposing gust, the shear strength of the sand would collapse, too much movement, and the anchor would eventually capsize. Our chosen remedy was to anchor in a fork or inverted 'V'. Setting a fork is really not difficult, especially with 8kg anchors, but age is wearisome - and I was looking for a more comfortable and less challenging answer.

Odin provides the answer - in gusting winds in a clean sand seabed with the anchors set to 500kg tension the fins on the heel of Odin act like vertical flukes and they offer significant resistant to sideways movement. The Excel and Spade, my previous favourites, (also set to 500kg) would be induced to drag, Odin sat unperturbed.

I'm amused by Steve's use of cobblestones as a seabed. On the whole length of Australia's east coast from SW Cape to almost Cape York I know of one stony anchorage.

Weed is an issue. In Australia we are discouraged from disturbing the seagrass and we have enough anchorages with sand seabeds, silica sand in the south, coral sand in the north. - we don't need to anchor in weed.

Viking, the company, had issues with preparing the anchors but have installed a machine to round off the cut edges (which can almost be sharp) and are better able to accept galvanising. Steve made no mention, that I am aware of only having been able to see to the end of cobblestones, that the Odin toe is welded, because the steel is too difficult/hard to bend. You should be able to detect the 2 slits, following the fold lines, on your Odin 50. The slitting technique may have changed, it is possible to bend the toe with a decent press but involves extra labour (you need to leave a flap to allow the steel to be in the press and then cut the flap off later).

Multiple sets on the shoreline in shallow water and multiple sets in 5m depth, approx, to test bering resistance.

That's a sufficient and brief summary as to why I am impressed.


You suggest you are disappointed with the Odin performance - I suggest you keep an open mind as I don't think you will be disappointed. I find Odin a better anchor than the original Viking. Odin sets as well as Viking, has a similar hold to Viking, is more stable in veering winds and fits on bow rollers on which roll bar anchors do not fit. It has half the weight of the equivalent steel anchor. Its more stable and reliable in veering winds. I think the Odin 40 good for yachts 40'-50' or multis 35'- 43' Depends on radar arches, helm stations, dinghy on the deck etc. The steel is 'almost' bullet proof (not quite armour plating grade). At 1450 MPa is stronger than the steel used for many anchors, like the flukes 400MPa)) or the shanks which might be 800MPa (if you are lucky).

I don't think Odin has reached the end of its development, it can be improved but so far its minor.


Finally - I have never been comfortable with Steve's test protocols (I don't think I'm alone). His complete absence of hold data (has that improved?) is very questionable.

Jonathan

 

[geem]

Greenland was an extreme challenge, uncharted water, steeply sloping bottom, rocks, no shelter. I was lucky to get through that summer unscathed.

But where is anchoring actually easy, at least in any kind of weather? Not around the UK coasts. Not in the Baltic. Not in the Adriatic, or the Aegean. Not if you're are venturing at all far. Maybe in the Caribbean it's easy sometimes, with all that sand. But that's pretty far from here. Around the UK, I can count challenge-free anchorages on one hand, probably -- Osborne Bay, St. Aubin's Bay on Jersey, Falmouth Harbour, Salcombe.

I guess there are weekend sailors who always get to pick their weather, and never anchor out of necessity. Who never anchor in the winter, or in an unfamiliar place, or in bad weather. Such sailors might have little need for extra holding power. I don't think that describes anyone in this thread, however.

If anchoring in the Caribbean "with all that sand" was so easy, why do we see so many boats struggling to set their anchors?
In my experience, lots of anchorages in the Caribbean are not your lovely sand. Many are broken coral sand and sea grass mixed together and quite variable even in the same anchorage. There are spots in certain anchorages where we know setting an anchor is harder than just a 100 metres away.

Most of the charter boats seem to be equipped with Delta anchors. These are the most common anchors we see dragging. Charter boats these days are not equipped with Bruce or CQR anchors or we might see a few more boats struggling to set anchors and dragging.

We know from various anchor tests over the years that NG anchors set far better than the old generation anchors ( if you have any anchor size that can be power set with the engine). We also know that weight for weight NG anchors have approximately twice the holding power when set.
I am not from the oversize the anchor brigade. I know many good cruising friends who have sailed around the world to some far off places living at anchor who share my view that an appropriately sized NG anchor is all you need. There is a relationship between what you can power set with your own engine and too big so you can't power set.
We have dragged the anchor numerous times during the setting process by the use of our 86hp engine. We will drop the anchor with 4:1 scope, fit the snubber and slowly build the revs to at least 3/4 throttle. This is usually sufficient to give a good set with only the top of the shank visible in most seabeds. We couldn't do this with a far bigger anchor as we would have insufficient HP from the engine to do so. A well set anchor ensure we sleep well.
Once set, it doesn't drag. Our experience is quite the opposite. The anchor keeps digging. Many times when we have come to lift the anchor, it is so deeply set the only way to break it out is to motor forward with the chain vertical. The large 1700w windlass just stalls.

 

[Baggywrinkle]

Our yacht was a 38' Lightwave catamaran weight around 7t in full cruising mode, full tanks, enough food for 3 months (an equivalent mono is a 45'/50' AWB - I've measures them).

I have a question, and it's got nothing to do with your experience ...

have I understood this right .... 7t ? .... either way if that's metric or imperial, that seems very light for a 45'/50' AWB ..... the unladen weight of my 44ft AWB ist 10,400kg and with all my crap on board, plus crew, it is closer to 12,500-13,000 kg in "floating holiday home with sea view mode" .... I could go with it being equivalent in windage at anchor ... but definately not on weight.

Is weight equivalent what you meant? and if so, how did you get 7t?

 

[Baggywrinkle]

If you take the bigger is better approach, to the nth degree, you would have a massive anchor that would be deployed and sat on the bottom. If you have insufficient engine horsepower to set it, then it will be lying on the bottom, on its side not set. Remember we are talking nth degree. A ridiculously over sized anchor. In benign conditions, the boat will be held by this lump of metal resting on the seabed ......

I swore I would never get involved in an Anchor thread, but here I am

This entire post is absolutely spot on, and also reflects my experience since the 80s in numerous boats with numerous anchors in numerous parts of the world, also the experience of my sailing friends ... back in the late 70s/ early 80s (in Scotland) there was a tendency for my dad and his friends to go one size up .... but those were not NG anchors ... they were primarily Bruce, CQRs, Danforth, and the boats were all much smaller, so even one size up still wasn't that big, or that much of a difference .... the average family cruiser back then was 20-30ft, without powered windlasses or any of the cruising cr@p we cart around today.

That mindset has persisted, but I see no reason to second guess the manufacturers tables. They design the things, and it would not be in their interests to sell an undersized anchor for numerous (obvious) reasons. I only ever go next size up if my boat lies right at the top of the recommended size, or when the anchor size recommendations overlap and I'm well into the overlap. The important point IMO, as @geem says, is to be able to set the anchor properly - and the bigger the anchor, the more HP you need to sink it up to its shank. When I have set properly, I have never had my anchor "let go", but they have ploughed into the seabed in strong winds making them difficult to recover ... and if more holding power is needed, 2nd anchor with appropriate ground tackle is the answer IMO - also properly set.

... now you can roast me