Which resetting anchor should I go for ??

Here we go again Rocna, Rocna and more F%£"ing Rocna ****!!!!!!!

F"£k Rocna, the OP didn't mention them, but some idiot had to didn't they!!! If the thread doesn't get pulled I'll come back on page 120, and there'll still be a F"£$ing Rocna argument.

In the interests of normality I suggest that No anchor ever be named on this site ever again.

F"£%ing Rocna ruiined more threads than anything else except ColRegs!!!!!
 
Chris_Robb said:
I think you will find it essential to use the good steel. Why does Manson bother to use expensive high grade steel when something cheaper would do?
Click to expand...
yachting monthly destruction tested a Rocna made by the company who took over from the dodgy bunch. Concluded something like "would be strong enough to stand up to any conceivable normal anchoring loads. Shall we move on? It's a good very anchor. As are many others.
 
Ariadne said:
Here we go again Rocna, Rocna and more F%£"ing Rocna ****!!!!!!!

F"£k Rocna, the OP didn't mention them, but some idiot had to didn't they!!! If the thread doesn't get pulled I'll come back on page 120, and there'll still be a F"£$ing Rocna argument.

In the interests of normality I suggest that No anchor ever be named on this site ever again.

F"£%ing Rocna ruiined more threads than anything else except ColRegs!!!!!
Click to expand...

Wow! Take a heart attack pill or you won't be here if it reaches page 120 :)

I think i was that idiot!

The OP asked a question, to which one of the answers could be ROCNA, so it is entirely relevant to the thread.

I'm not sure it is for anyone to decide what should be named and what shouldn't, (other than the moderators etc.).

Anchors are a critical part of boating, as are collision regulations, so it is not a surprise they are discussed a lot.... And it is not a surprise that there are differences of opinion.....

If you have nothing to contribute, why bother. You can ignore any threads that mention anchors in the future and, if you can't stop yourself, you could stop reading any thread that mentions Rocna.You will probably live longer :)
 
I'm chilled out, never been more so, sitting in my air-conditioned saloon, on my boat, in Trinidad planning a trip down to Guyana, Suriname & maybe Brazil. Now how cool is that?

Just bored with everybody getting so worked up with anchor willy waving, and Rocna always seem to be in the middle of it.

Anyway, off to the pool for swim and then to play some music and drink beer with friends.
 
For 20 years I had a CQR. Not even a real one, a knockoff. I once estimated I'd anchored using it at least 2,000 times, on occasion in winds up to 50 knots. The number of times I dragged could be counted on one hand.

You know what? It's not about the anchor. All good modern anchors can be made to work if you understand how to work them.

Having said that, the Fortress (genuine) I was once persuaded to buy was a total waste of time.
 
This exactly coincides with my experience. I've always used CQRs and, for mud, a large Danforth.

For resetting I find the CQR excellent because of the swiveling shank (to go back to the OP's original topic).
 
Richard10002 said:
Without doubt the claims were dubious, and it was stupid and wrong of the them to do what they did, and it was equally stupid of them to behave the way they di when the truth was out.

What I am saying is that, with hindsight, the material doesn't seem to have been dubious. I have not heard of anyone with a Rocna anchor having had an actual problem.
Click to expand...
If as you walk the docks and look at Rocna shanks you will begin to see a number of bent shanks. I just saw one last week on a 25 that looked nearly new and had the bar code still attached to the side. It wasn't bent much, but it certainly was bent. Why anyone would buy one with so many better alternatives available, or why they still have defenders is a mystery.
 
I thought Land Rover made Defenders, not Rocna?

Anchors; as posted by a few, it's horses for courses I'm afraid, you need more than one type, and don't forget you need to carry some appropriate sized chain as well. I watched/helped recover a 45' cat drag with a 33Kg Rocna the other week, the chain was 6mm galv' from a garden centre. He wondered why his Rocna didn't work..........

We carry a plough, a big Danforth, and a Fortress (which is very good by the way!), I'd carrya Fisherman if I could find one as well. We change ours to suit the ground we are anchoring in, yes we do drag now and again but 99% of the time we get it right
 
Even though this subject has been done to death, anchors are a critical piece of safety gear so it's not surprising it stays a current topic. Here is one person's opinion, which as you know, is something everyone has.

Roll bar anchors: Roll bars serve a theoretical purpose, but many are starting to suspect they may be tail fins on a Cadillac. One poster on Cruising Forum states he cut the roll bar off his Manson five years ago and has lived on the hook with no problems since then. Be that as it may, the roll bar will provide two disadvantages. First, it will prevent the anchor from digging in as well as it might otherwise. Yes, I know people say they dive on their Rocna/Manson/Bugel and say they are buried, but in the same sea bed an anchor without a roll bar would have buried deeper. The deeper you go, the denser the substrate and if dug into that, the better the holding. The other disadvantage is that once dug in, the roll bar presents an impediment to rotation that puts a significant load on the shank. Peter Smith (previously) claimed that because of the design, the Rocna absolutely, positively had to use Q690 steel, like Bisalloy 80. Manson does use this grade, which is probably why I have never heard of a bent Manson shank, but once Rocna cheapened their steel, lots of bent shanks appeared and still are appearing. Based on this, I wouldn't want a roll bar anchor but it you have your heart set on one, then go with the Manson. Even the new Rocna uses Q620 which is better than the rubbish they snuck in earlier, but still not as strong as the Manson. So, unless the Rocna is A LOT cheaper, avoid.

One other roll bar that stands by itself is the Super Sarca. It is a convex design as opposed to the concave design of the others mentioned, and its roll bar is so thin it is reported not to have the difficulty rotating when partially or fully buried so reportedly puts less load on the shank. All of the above have very good holding power. Also an exception is the Knox, which I don't hear anything about, but which is made of even stronger steel than the Manson. Looks intriguing, but I wonder if the split fluke would collect little rocks, and impede burying occasionally.

In the non roll bar, 3rd generation anchor you have a few choices - Spade, Excel, Ultra, Boss, Tern and probably a few others not much used. All of these are 'diving' anchors, so IMHO will out hold a roll bar design simply because they will all go deeper into the seabed. I exclude the Delta because I'm not sure it is a 3rd generation anchor, and besides and for whatever reason users do report that they can drag frequently, and there have been reports of bending shanks.

The jury is out on the Boss because it is brand new, but second hand reports claim some problems with bending shanks even though made of Bisalloy 80, probably because the shank is so very thin. Who knows, but I would be reluctant to be the first on my block to own one, plus they are so HUGE, your vessel would look like a waterborne Abrams tank from the bow.

That leaves the Spade, Excel, Ultra and a new one, the Tern. The Tern needs testing and may be great or horrible - but until we know, best to stand aside. If you can get an Excel in your area, methinks this is the best anchor out there. Made of Bisallow 80, dives and from all testing I have seen holds as well or better than anything. The Spade is also very good although some people are made nervous by the bolt that attaches the shank to the flukes. And with apologies to all Spade owners, butt ugly, IMO. They look like a high school shop project, but also are a fantastic anchor for digging in and holding. The Ultra is what I have and because it is new my experience with it is somewhat limited I would humbly suggest that it is actually an improvement on the Spade. Little testing has been done because they are mostly bought by people who want bling for their boats and they are very expensive. We anchor mostly and so far it looks really good. Whether the hollow and internally reinforced shank will ever bend or not, well time will tell, but I doubt it.

Hope that helps, and my sincerest and humblest apologies to any design I didn't mention, but it is only because I don't know enough to comment.

p.s. Keep the Danforth as a storm anchor. The Fortress/Guardian/Danforth design is a wonderful hurricane backup. Digs in really deep - so deep you sometimes can't retrieve them - but during a hurricane, who cares?
 
Delfin said:
If as you walk the docks and look at Rocna shanks you will begin to see a number of bent shanks.]
Any data to back that up? Photos, what size, where, how many? If CMP are producing substandard anchors then it's a massive scandal for a multinational company. In the uk yachting monthly destruction tested a cmd model and found no problem with the shank strength so if there is an issue it could just be state side.
Click to expand...
 
GHA said:
Delfin said:
If as you walk the docks and look at Rocna shanks you will begin to see a number of bent shanks.
Click to expand...
Any data to back that up? Photos, what size, where, how many? If CMP are producing substandard anchors then it's a massive scandal for a multinational company. In the uk yachting monthly destruction tested a cmd model and found no problem with the shank strength so if there is an issue it could just be state side.
Click to expand...
Already been a scandal, but perhaps you missed the memo.

Its why the Smith's lost their company. Happy to post photos of the one I saw recently when I get back to the dock, and I believe the barcode on the already identified Rocna 25 is from Suncoast, so it would be one of the great number manufactured recently but prior to CMP purchasing the company. That said, the CMP version of the Rocna still uses a lower grade of steel than the designer, Peter Smith said was mandatory for the design of the anchor. CMP, and Smith now says their lower grade steel is 'fit for purpose', which begs the question of what purpose. So someone has two choices if they want a roll bar anchor that has the negative issues I described. First, buy a Supreme that has no reported bent shanks made out of Q690 steel, or buy a Rocna that has lots of them and is made out of weaker Q620 steel. Simple, really.
 
Delfin said:
Already been a scandal, but perhaps you missed the memo.

Its why the Smith's lost their company. Happy to post photos of the one I saw recently when I get back to the dock, and I believe the barcode on the already identified Rocna 25 is from Suncoast, so it would be one of the great number manufactured recently but prior to CMP purchasing the company. That said, the CMP version of the Rocna still uses a lower grade of steel than the designer, Peter Smith said was mandatory for the design of the anchor. CMP, and Smith now says their lower grade steel is 'fit for purpose', which begs the question of what purpose. So someone has two choices if they want a roll bar anchor that has the negative issues I described. First, buy a Supreme that has no reported bent shanks made out of Q690 steel, or buy a Rocna that has lots of them and is made out of weaker Q620 steel. Simple, really.
Click to expand...
Ah, a non story then. The "nearly new" anchor you saw wasn't. But made by a dodgy previous manufacturer who quite rightly went out of business for selling a product which wasn't up to the job. Do you have a link to confirm any bent rocnas in q620 steel? Surprising Google came with nothing if there are "loads of them".

Edit. Any details of the others you have seen recently?
 
Last edited:
GHA said:
Ah, a non story then. The "nearly new" anchor you saw wasn't. But made by a dodgy previous manufacturer who quite rightly went out of business for selling a product which wasn't up to the job. Do you have a link to confirm any bent rocnas in q620 steel? Surprising Google came with nothing if there are "loads of them".

Edit. Any details of the others you have seen recently?
Click to expand...
I merely noted in my post the reasons why hoop style anchors have, IMO, some disadvantages over anchors without but that if you really want one, suggested that perhaps choosing one that was stronger rather than weaker might be sensible. Apparently not to you.

And how, pray tell, would you know how new the particular Rocna I saw is, Scooter? It still had the barcode sticker on the side, so I presume it was purchased recently, but if you read what I wrote (something I've noted you have difficulty with), you would see that I said the barcode was from Suncoast, not CMP. The issue isn't whether the Q620 shanks of CMP made anchors will bend. Of course they will because any steel will if you load them beyond the yield strength of the shank, which in the case of the Rocna is around 20% lower load factor than an equivalent Manson. The issue is whether if one has a choice (one does) of purchasing an anchor with weaker steel vs. one with stronger steel why would one chose the weaker?

You wouldn't be a Rocna owner would you? I find the most enthusiastic supporters of less for more are those already finding themselves holding the short straw. But I will leave you to your musings Scooter, as you appear to be a troll and trolls are best left to talk to themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top