Which anchor?

Bouba said:
Why would you trust a company that gave us the Delta?
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with a Delta, CQR nor Bruce. People have used them for decades with success. They do require patience and skill - and you do need to check the anchor is actually set.

BUT there are now better anchors - Delta the newest of the bunch was introduced in the 1980s - ideas and technology has moved on. Bruce goes back to the'70s and CQR to the 30's.

Vessels are sold with an anchor - the builder or dealer usually offers a 'different' anchor as an option - most buyers are concentrating on options other than anchors (anchors are not sexy) and many buyers simply don't know enough about anchors. The dealer or builder is trying to keep costs down - and for'Anglo-saxons - the dealer buys from Lewmar and gets Delta (I assume at cheap rates). If you buy in France you will get an anchor from Plastimo, a Kobra (if you are lucky) or Brittany.

The dealers are reacting to the market place. If they commissioned with the best available costs would go up.

As I say when you buy a new yacht and you request a different anchor you might get a credit of Stg100 and be charged an extra stg300. What might the wife say - because the anchor is but one item to upgrade from the standard.

Don't entirely blame the dealer.

On top of this - the boat builder, dealer may only buy 'known' and accepted brands, which immediately means they would not voluntarily option Knox and maybe not Spade. Lewmar (and Delta, are all known and for anglo saxons - not something you can argue about - in terms of brand name.

My use of Anglo Saxon is not jingoism, nor racist - its a convenience.

I had this conversation with an importer at the Sydney International Boat Show this past Monday.

Jonathan
 
JumbleDuck said:
It would be a could day in hell before I put a single farthing in the pocket of young Craig Smith. However, that's not a particularly technical evaluation.
Click to expand...

JumbleDuck and I have had our differences - but I am of the same mind - but I have been told to keep my prejudices, largely, to myself. It is an emotive conclusion and not one shared by many (viewing the numbers who own Rocna) - people have short memories, are very forgiving - or are very young. I too prefer to be supportive of 'nice' people. But I also support people who do not deny the obvious and who keep a check on the quality of their product. Now this has all changed - the taste lingers. I'm not particularly keen on 'roll bars', Delta, Spade, Excel, Kobra, Ultra and Vulcan (and we need wait and see, maybe Lewmar's Epsilon - all prove you do not need a roll bar and some of these are technically on a par with Rocna, Supreme and Knox - but everyone to their own.

I note that despite young Craig, or maybe because of him, added to the 'quality' fiasco - Rocna are one of the best known names in the leisure marine industry. At the time I though the brand might sink like a stone - how wrong one can be. What is interesting is that Rocna, the specific model, enjoys great success - but Vulcan that has no associated brouhaha - has not sunk like a stone - but is very seldom mentioned. I could mention other products that have had the same airing - to the same effect. Equally interesting but Rocna, arguably, was 'bought' by CMP in a fire sale - very astute and added to their stable. Their then brands - Titan specifically are seldom mentioned - Rocna stands clear head and shoulders, as a known brand.

Which supports the adage - there is no such thing as bad advertising.

There are lessons in there.

JumbleDuck - you and I are in a small minority (and even I try to suppress my views). Maybe its our joint Scots background and different moral stance.

Jonathan
 
Last edited:
doug748 said:
I know.

But a serious question, I am in the throes of getting a new anchor. It's down to two:

Manson Supreme 11kg at c £230. I like it's robustness and price.

Rocna 10kg at c £290. Perhaps has the edge on reputation (if we ignore the contretemps about construction a while back).

Which would you have? Both will fit the bow roller and locker.
Click to expand...

i had the same dilema.

never used a rocna so cant comment, but i bought a manson supreme (used one significantly cheaper and came up for sale before the rocna) and am happy enough with it, only time will tell though

FWIW... £290 for the 10kg? at jimmygreen is only £220 vs £225 for the manson 11kg (cheapest i found when looking recently)

https://jimmygreen.com/anchors/32889-rocna-anchors#/4566-finish-galvanised/4523-anchor_size-10kg

the Rocna 15KG is £290 vs £296Ish for the manson 16KG
 
doug748 said:
Thanks everyone.

In the end I got the Rocna. It looked a bit feeble next to the Manson but I guess they have done their sums
Click to expand...

There is a tendency for consumers to want bulletproof anchors. This is, I think, fuelled because testing of anchor strength is easier for the sailing magazines than testing anchor performance. Some want us believe the performance of “all modern anchors are the same”, but in reality testing anchor performance is time consuming and expensive, testing anchor strength is quicker and easier.

However, as a general rule, for modern anchor designs adding weight to the anchor shank will decrease the anchor’s performance. Hi tensile, or fabricated shanks are ways of adding strength without undue weight, but all the major players of quality modern anchors adopt one of these strategies.

A blend of performance and strength is needed in my view, so don’t feel put off with your assessment that the Rocna is a little more “feeble” than the Manson Supreme.

More boats are damaged from dragging anchors than bent anchors.
 
noelex said:
There is a tendency for consumers to want bulletproof anchors. This is, I think, fuelled because testing of anchor strength is easier for the sailing magazines than testing anchor performance. Some want us believe the performance of “all modern anchors are the same”, but in reality testing anchor performance is time consuming and expensive, testing anchor strength is quicker and easier.

However, as a general rule, for modern anchor designs adding weight to the anchor shank will decrease the anchor’s performance. Hi tensile, or fabricated shanks are ways of adding strength without undue weight, but all the major players of quality modern anchors adopt one of these strategies.

A blend of performance and strength is needed in my view, so don’t feel put off with your assessment that the Rocna is a little more “feeble” than the Manson Supreme.

More boats are damaged from dragging anchors than bent anchors.
Click to expand...

All very true. Though I'm not sure that many magazines have tested for anchor strength - and it is expensive - who pays for anchors that have been intentionally bent - I can assure you the anchor makers do not support that work. But maybe you can back up your assertion - no that is a stupid comment, of course you cannot.

But be careful - some anchors that are grossly hyped, and some that have not been hyped, have never been tested for strength nor hold. Some manufacturers simply don't divulge what steel is used in the shanks and offer their own videos on anchor performance. This does raise questions. People buy them, which to me seems inexplicable given the brouhaha ha over 'bendy shanks' and 'my holding capacity is better than yours' - obviously people have very short memories - but each to their own.

There is a lot to be said for ignoring the hype and waiting till there is a good cross section of user reports - before committing to a specific design - or waiting till a sailing magazine does some independent testing.

Bear in mind really good videos, by the manufacturer, or excellent underwater photographs by interested parties - are not the panacea hoped. Also remember - no-one, or not many, are going to fork our stg500 for a new, untested, anchor and then admit they bought a lemon. Equally no-one is going to admit they bought a lemon when the deficiencies of the anchor had been roundly aired. Furthermore once diffiencies are underlined - vested interests are loathe to agree - having hyped a product extensively - as it makes them look very, very foolish. In fact they will try all efforts to suppress negative comment - so be careful

Jonathan
 
Last edited:
99% of all nights at anchor, by all boats in the world, pass without incident. Anchor manufacturers need to hype their new designs because an anchor can last a lifetime - which means few repeat sales, but to be profitable they have to persuade people to "upgrade". Boats have been anchoring for centuries using all sorts of anchors and my firm belief is that if you understand your anchor and know your cruising ground, take a little care with weather forecasts, choice of anchor spot, and then set it properly with the correct scope - you'll be pretty much OK. Storm or hurricane preperations are a completely different story and having "the best" modern anchor as your main anchor won't be the deciding factor at the end of the day.

While it is interesting to see which combination of anchor and sea bottom is ultimately "best", there are so many other factors involved when it comes to avoiding problems, not least the number, density, and ability of the boats around you. Almost every time I have had a problem at anchor in the last decade it's been due to other boats - in crowded anchorages, when the wind gets up or a thunder storm sweeps through - I've bailed out a number of times when boats start hitting each other or drifting and I always have a plan B - be it another bay nearby or a marina. I usually end up in anchorages with charter boats, who get whichever anchor the charter company chooses (cheapest) and often the skippers and crew only sail for 2 weeks a year and simply don't understand how to position their boat relative to others or what scope they actually need - they anchor on top of each other and then use short scopes to compensate.

When I bought my boat, it had a galvanised M-Anchor (ex-charter boat) ... it had a bent shank where they had drilled a hole so a pin on the bow roller could hold it fast. I immediately replaced it with an original but unused bruce I found on E-Bay for €18 (still had the original stickers on it) ... I didn't drill a hole through the shank, and it's been fine for the last 9 years - including when I got it stuck in a rock crevice off Unije and after trying everything to dislodge it, had to dive to retrieve it - fortunately it was undamaged.

I have the luxury of not having to sit out hurricanes at anchor and I have a plethora of safe bolt-holes, harbours and marinas if it gets really nasty. For me, anchor discussions are interesting but academic, a new anchor is so far down my list of priorities it doesn't even figure. I would imagine there are many others out there in a similar situation.

That's not to say don't keep up the good work - if I lost my bruce for any reason, I'd probably buy a modern anchor to replace it.
 
A post from the silent majority - very likely to produce a rash of disagreement (with little substance to suppot their rants)

One of the common assertions is that a bigger anchor will work in a marginal seabed. I'd be interested in any evidence. I am actually sure there is evidence - but not so sure that one size bigger will offer any detectable difference.

Now, I don't expect any evidence - I thought I'd raise the idea of the proponents adding some substance.

If we talk about weed - then a Fishermans or Luke would be better than a bigger anchor (one size bigger?). If we talk about soupy mud then a Fortress, or Danforth would be a better option (and to support the contention a bigger Fortress might be best - which is precisely why we carry a big Fortress). If we talk about very hard seabeds, how many actually anchor in hard seabeds that defeat a Rocna, Spade et al and would a bigger one (rather than an anchor with a sharp toe) be better.

Anchors are a compromise.

Just because 'you' use a big anchor, just because you say 'every live aboard cruiser' (really?) use an anchor one size bigger - does not prove you, or they, need it.

A large number, a decent sized minority group, of the population in Sydney drive a big 4x4, Merc, BMW, Range Rover, Toyota, Ford - that does not prove they or you need one. They may say they are safer - I bet few of them have accidents anyway.

We already have one proponent repeatably saying a big anchor can be used at short scope, with no quotable foundation - surprise me - give any evidence that a big anchor is better in a marginal seabed (and define what a marginal seabed might be).

Jonathan
 
Last edited:
doug748 said:
I know.

But a serious question, I am in the throes of getting a new anchor. It's down to two:

Manson Supreme 11kg at c £230. I like it's robustness and price.

Rocna 10kg at c £290. Perhaps has the edge on reputation (if we ignore the contretemps about construction a while back).

Which would you have? Both will fit the bow roller and locker.
Click to expand...

Had both and both held well. Of the two I prefered the Rocna . That said both were too heavy for my old body, and leaning over the puspit to locate them in the roller having dragged them from the locker was risky. So I swapped for a Fortress and have never regretted doing so.
 
birdseye said:
So I swapped for a Fortress and have never regretted doing so.
Click to expand...

That might invoke a few reactions.

Some of our American cousins are also happy with a Fortress, you are in good company.

My only note of caution is:

I found the anchor size recommended for our cat was a bit big and we could not set it sufficiently deeply that the stock lay on the seabed, or better, was buried. We have gone one size down and can bury or almost bury the stock in sand (for thin mud we went one size up) and the recommended sized model collects dust with the other anchors, excess to needs. If the stock is clear of the seabed and there is a change of tide (or wind) the chain might get under the stock and trip the anchor. This might be one of the oft quoted weakness of Fortress, that it trips easily - and it might simply be due to anchors being used that are simply too big to set deeply.

We have not regretted downsizing, from a FX23 to a FX16 (set at 30 degrees). We often use the Fortress (the FX16) deployed from a dinghy when setting up a 'V' anchor (as it reduces veering).

Jonathan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top