How good is the Rocna?

[Fortress]

Some thoughts on Spade Anchor's comments:

• Alain Poiraud, the late founder of the Spade, was unquestionably a pioneer in anchor design.

Alain and I had a contentious, but an always respectful and oftentimes humorous relationship.

During the initial launch of his product, Alain was quite fond of sending me stories of anchor tests from France when the Spade out-performed the Fortress with "My anchor is better than your anchor" type of comments, and I was more than happy to oblige him when there were other test results that favored our product.

• During the past 19 years, I have found that the independent test results for the Spade anchor and by owners in "real world" conditions have been overwhelmingly positive.

• Fortress sponsored the Chesapeake Bay soft mud tests in 2014 aboard the 81-ft Rachel Carson research vessel that is owned by the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science.


20mb image hosting

Of course we had expected positive results, particularly with the 45° angle setting, as it is no secret that widening the shank / fluke angle (if possible) for soft mud will dramatically improve an anchor's holding capacity in that type of sea bottom. Large anchor manufacturers such as Bruce, the US Navy, and Vryhof all make anchors with this feature.

Since we are an anchor manufacturer, it is quite natural for there to be those who make claims of bias, and they are correct: In setting up the protocol, we put our product at a disadvantage by not following our own advice of setting the anchor initially at a short scope of 2:1 or 3:1 in soft mud.


posted image

Since other anchor manufacturers do not advise this, we felt that it would not be right to impose this setting technique on their products as well.

So on the very first day and pull test of our own beloved anchor, the 21 lb. FX-37, and in full view of the boater writers who were aboard.....it did not set!...

This prompted one writer aboard to comment about how nervous the Fortress staff were afterward, and he wrote in his follow-up story that someone among us had said, “Well, at least no one can say that the test was rigged in our favor!”

I was very glad that this writer did not overhear my comment about wondering whether a nearby bridge was high enough!

After 48 pull tests in 3 days, and after seeing many other anchors experience difficulty setting in the soft mud, we tried setting all of the anchors at a shorter scope for the last series of 12 tests, as we felt that we might learn something that we could pass along to their owners.

Unfortunately, this technique was not helpful for the other anchor models.

We had some very experienced boating writers aboard (several of whom were, or had been, liveaboards), and I think that Fortress was commended in many of their stories for the tests being conducted fairly, honestly, openly, and transparently.

I would be glad to share the contact information for the writers and for the fearless crew of Rachel Carson crew if anyone is seeking their opinions directly.

Safe anchoring,
Brian Sheehan

Fortress Marine Anchors
Fortress Anchors – The World's Best Anchors!

[uncle stinkybob]

Rocnas are much like Mantus. My Mantus is nearly a first time every time grap bottom anchor. Great price also.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Rocna gets good marks from all people we know who have one?

Just as a slightly contrary point of view . . . We had a Rocna and dragged more with it than any other anchor (except our original cqr on silk which was undersized and we dumped pretty quickly). My thought was that it was excellent in good penetrating bottoms but lousy in bad or non-penetrating bottoms. We sold it and never regretted that.

The spade unfortunately has "the galvanizing problem". That always eliminated it from my personal consideration.

The fortress is truly excellent for special purposes, but I personally don't consider an aluminum anchor appropriate for everyday use (it gets nicked and dinged).

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Just as a slightly contrary point of view . . . We had a Rocna and dragged more with it than any other anchor (except our original cqr on silk which was undersized and we dumped pretty quickly). My thought was that it was excellent in good penetrating bottoms but lousy in bad or non-penetrating bottoms. We sold it and never regretted that.

The spade unfortunately has "the galvanizing problem". That always eliminated it from my personal consideration.

The fortress is truly excellent for special purposes, but I personally don't consider an aluminum anchor appropriate for everyday use (it gets nicked and dinged).

I completely respect your experience in using the Rocna, but can I ask you what size Rocna did you try on your size boat?

[barnakiel]

I, for one, would have no issues buying an anchor made out of 'Chinese materials' (or do you mean rice?) or one made in China.

In fact, I do have one. And it was good for our sailing and our anchoring. Countless times. Countless, really.

People use China made iPhones but they will say China made anchors (or 'Chinese materials') are not good?

A-ha.

Look at QUALITY. It does not matter if your steel and production is USA or Vietnam. Look for quality, not for nationality.

b.

[CC45]

Hello,
I live up in the PNW and we have 5 vessels, motor, and 1 sail boat, ( 30ft up to 45 feet.) that i know, all switched to the Rocna. They went up one size for what they, Rocna says to have. they changed over last yr, and i asked about this, they said they are glad they did the move. I have a 30ft searay and will be going to Rocna also.
hope it helps some

[model 10]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Rocna gets good marks from all people we know who have one. And so does Spade.
b.

I don't know you but I am somebody not so keen on our Rocna at all. It's way over sized (25kg on a 18,000lb boat), and on lots of 5/16 chain too. I doubt I'm the worst sailor around and I have drug several times with it. We used to have a 45lb CQR and I would see it sitting on it's side many times and think what a piece of junk. However it seldom let us down. The Rocna has failed in muddy sand over coral, in grass and on short scope in sand. It really failed on a hard bottom. It could only dig down a couple of inches. Same kind of problems most anchors have.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

I completely respect your experience in using the Rocna, but can I ask you what size Rocna did you try on your size boat?

55 kg 47' boat

all our anchors (except the fortress) were 50-55kg - that is 'oversized' by the charts but seemed right for the sort of cruising we were doing.

[kevins]

What are you anchoring in? Mud, Sand, Turtle Grass, Hard coral, soupy mud, rocks.

One cannot blindly hope that one anchor will work in all those conditions. Different anchors for different environments.

We use a rocna, oversized for our boat, and it does not work everywhere. One cannot expect it to.

When you enter a new country and are in the anchorage, look to see what the locals are using. That type may be best, or it may be all they can get.

What we have found that works
sand - rocna
hard mud - rocna
turtle grass - danforth style
soft mud - danforth style
rocks and hard coral...I am still looking for one that can penetrate a rock or hard coral.

[redsky49]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I, for one, would have no issues buying an anchor made out of 'Chinese materials' (or do you mean rice?) or one made in China.

In fact, I do have one. And it was good for our sailing and our anchoring. Countless times. Countless, really.

People use China made iPhones but they will say China made anchors (or 'Chinese materials') are not good?

A-ha.

Look at QUALITY. It does not matter if your steel and production is USA or Vietnam. Look for quality, not for nationality.

b.

Agreed! Most of my marine electronics on board are from China, as is my television, microwave, cell phone, etc. Not to mention my computer, various pumps and compressors, my wife's Gill oilies (my Henry LLoyd are from Poland!), sound system, and of course my Rocna 25KG anchor. Quality has more to do with the character of the company than the location of the manufacturing site [Aside: Is Tunisia now the center of high-tech manufacturing? More so than China? Hmm...]

There are several good anchors out there. I ended up with the Rocna as it fit better in the bow roller than the Manson Supreme I originally purchased. I would likely be just as happy with any of the concave competitors to Rocna.

We should also note that the German anchor Bugel is likely the innovator of the rollbar concave anchor style. I believe they were first to market with this design. They do not market extensively in the US, but can be found here if searched for.

I have about four years experience with my Rocna. Galvanizing is still pretty good - sllght rust present from anchoring in rocky shale/schist. Still sets very quickly, sometimes abruptly, with even silly short scope (i.e. 2:1). Sometimes difficult to retrieve. Frequently brings up a large geological sample. Seems to handle reversing current/winds better than any anchor I have ever used:
Danforth (several)
Delta
CQR
Brittany

The take away from all this is that the new generation is indeed better than the past generation of anchors, but technique still matters!

Love my Rocna. Even better, so does the Admiral

[Jim Cate]

We should also note that the German anchor Bugel is likely the innovator of the rollbar concave anchor style. I believe they were first to market with this design. They do not market extensively in the US, but can be found here if searched for.

Quite true, and also I believe that the original roll bar anchor patents were filed by Bruce, who never marketed such an anchor to my knowledge.

But all the claims that the Manson Supreme was a rip-off of the Rocna were, as I recall, made by Craig Smith, here on CF, in an unfortunate series of posts lauding his products and denigrating all others. He somehow failed to mention the Bruce patents and the Bugel anchor both predating the Rocna. This was followed by the mild steel shank debacle... all past history now.

The bottom line is that all the newer design anchors are excellent products and if logically sized will work well in nearly all situation met by cruisers. Quibbling about which is the absolute best is a waste of time and proves nothing.

Jim

[Lucky Larry]

In my opinion the Rocna is close to on a par with the Manson Supreme and both are better than most other designs, but neither is as good as the Mantus.

We absolutely love our Mantus. We keep a backup Manson Supreme and a Fortress. But I'm considering buying another Mantus that would be too large for our bow roller as a storm anchor. We have an 85 pound Mantus as our primary anchor on our Lagoon 450.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

55 kg 47' boat

all our anchors (except the fortress) were 50-55kg - that is 'oversized' by the charts but seemed right for the sort of cruising we were doing.

I'd certainly agree with that. It must be twice the size of mine on my 36 footer. just can't imagine it dragging with something that big.

[mako]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I, for one, would have no issues buying an anchor made out of 'Chinese materials' (or do you mean rice?) or one made in China.

Look at QUALITY. It does not matter if your steel and production is USA or Vietnam. Look for quality, not for nationality.

What the barnakiel-man is getting at here is entirely correct. I work overseas in structural steel. If you were to take an industry tour in China you would be blown away by the technology - from the mills to the rolling facilities to the prefabricators. The majority of the complex 3-dimensional steel shapes being used in the Middle East iconic and megaprojects are pre-fab'd in China. Ignorant remarks about cheap Chinese products (like you find at Harbor Freight or Walmart) is one of the reasons why the Chinese are quietly and quickly surpassing America's industries.

I have also sourced steel shapes and plates from Vietnam. The "Vietnamese" steel (un-classed) you don't really want to rely on. But the metals classed by any of the international societies (and they are all represented) is excellent.

So if you wish to purchase an anchor made in China but which the manufacturer can show you ISO certificates for the factory then you are in good shape . If you are really concerned then buy an anchor that is classed by any maritime society. And BTW, the Chinese Classification Society CCS seems that uphold decent standards, that I have compared against ABS and Lloyd, but that is not my area of expertise, just an opinion.

Hope this helps.

[evm1024]

Rocna is very good at many things....

Very good at:

- telling the world how inferior everything else is
- instilling FUD
- moving production to china
- changing the steel used to make bendable anchors
- blaming the production manager for the change
- getting a product notice from West Marine
- getting bought by a Canadian company
- having stronger steel but not to the original (and required) specs
- having the best product image recovery ever

But, Rocna is a good design and if we ignore (or forget) the companies history it is a great anchor.

Spade, rocna, manson, mantus are all up there at the top of the new design chain and you could likely not go wrong with any of them. And a fortress too.

I choose Mantus (having owned a danforth, delta, bruce, rocna, manson and currently a mantus.

Try this test, on like weight anchors set them on their sides and put your fingers under the bill (tip of the fluke). Feel which one has the most force.....

Guess which will penetrate hardpack, weeds better?