Mantus real world experience

[FranklinGray]

Originally Posted by Delfin

you are "trying to drum up good publicity" for Mantus, given your lack of commentary on equivalent performance of the lighter Fortress.

Oh, I give credit where credit is due. Nothing better than a nice big fortress anchor as a storm anchor if used in a star mooring. Fortress is just like the Danforth in that it holds very well but it doesn't reset well. I have two Fortress fx-37 just for that very purpose. They are light and can be taken apart so having two big ones doesn't take up much room or add much weight.

I highly suggest anybody who thinks they might have to anchor out for a storm to get a couple of Fortresses, but I do not recommend at all making them a primary anchor.

[FranklinGray]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Actually, I have an 80 kg Ultra on my bow....

Not according the the For Sale pictures on the web. Maybe they are just old. If so, I apologize.

[Delfin]

Franklin, I don't mean to roast you on this - you like your anchor and I am happy for you, you like Greg and I am sure he is a fine fellow. And neither Greg, nor anyone from Mantus has any obligation to answer any question from anyone. After all, they make a fine product that has engendered support from lots of people who are trying to help them in any way they can. And I take to heart your irritation on my, or others asking questions - after all, I'm just some guy on an Internet forum, so I don't expect an answer from Mantus.

So I'll presume to answer my own questions and let the matter drop. So, no, the mild steel shank that is owned by current Mantus owners is not adequate, and will fold up like a noodle if side loaded. That's why they say they are going to change it to steel that is nearly 3 x stronger. And if they do, they will have an even better product than they do now. If they don't then they are just like another manufacturer we all are familiar with in that what they say can't be trusted. But I am sure they will and I wish them every success with their new product.

And no, the data posted that was deleted was not accurate and was rubbish on its face. This is either because they wanted to intentionally mislead, or don't know how to use the modeling program, or input wrong assumptions, or just made an honest mistake they don't want to cop to. Either way, their numbers on the Fortress conflict with real world testing, and even their own comparison of their own shanks with the different steels is bogus.

And no, using their anchor without the roll bar would be a very bad idea, and not recommended. In a wind shift, it could easily flip over and it will be perfectly stable upside down so could not be trusted to hold you in one spot.

Now, none of that says that the anchor is not a good design, even if their own apparent decision to upgrade their steel indicates that their first implementation of the design left something to be desired. That it is apparently a good design is based on the use cases described on this thread and others. You want to puff the product and that's fine. It probably doesn't need it, although if they do change the shank steel, and stop recommending use without the hoop and stop publishing false data on the design strength of competitors, they will gain credibility. At least with some.

[FranklinGray]

Those are some pretty strong accusations without any facts to back them up. Sounds really odd considering you are asking for the numbers. If you are asking for the numbers that sounds like you don't know them. If you don't know them, how can you claim they are false?

I guess you fish a lot because ....

[FranklinGray]

" and will fold up like a noodle if side loaded"

So you are telling me that of the hundreds of anchors out there being used now, none have ever been side-loaded? I find that hard to believe. If they "fold up like a noodle" then that would mean there would be stories and pictures of bent shafts but yet I haven't heard of any. I've heard nothing but good things from Mantus owners.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by FranklinGray

Those are some pretty strong accusations without any facts to back them up. Sounds really odd considering you are asking for the numbers. If you are asking for the numbers that sounds like you don't know them. If you don't know them, how can you claim they are false?

I guess you fish a lot because ....

Lacking answers from those that know, I can only speculate. No charges made, just my opinion, offered because the numbers don't appear to be forthcoming, so all that is left is speculation.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Now, none of that says that the anchor is not a good design, even if their own apparent decision to upgrade their steel indicates that their first implementation of the design left something to be desired.

I wish we could have a thread about anchors without 10 pages discussing shank strength. There are many other important attributes.

If you want to discuss shank strength, at least keep it balanced. Delfin, you seem strangly critical of a very open policy from Mantus with an offer to upgrade the shank, while at the same time ignoring the policy of Ultra, the anchor you own and use.

Ultra have done exactly the same thing that you seem so indignant about. They have strengthened their shank (incorporating some webbing into the design). They made no announcement of redesigning the shank, we don't even know when it occurred. Unlike Mantus, Ultra have offered no policy of replacing the older designs. There are no calculations from Ultra, or anyone else, about their shank strength before or after the change.

I am not knocking Ultra. They make a beautiful anchor and early indications are that it works very well. I don't think Ultra have in any way behaved badly (in fact the opposite). They saw a way to improve their product and incorporated this into the newer design. In the meantime, they offer a lifetime warranty that will replace a bent anchor (like Mantus). Seems very honourable conduct to me. I wish all anchor manufacturers would do the same.

However, I am puzzled why you are jumping up and down about Mantus here and on other sailing forums, when the very anchor on your bow, Ultra, have done the same thing in a less transparent way, with no offer to upgrade existing customers. You own an Ultra anchor costing over $6,000 ,but you are not making demands for them to calculate and compare shank strengths. Was your anchor before, or after the reinforcement? Do you know? Can anyone find out?

The above looks like I am singling out Ultra, which is not my intention. I mention them only because of the source of the criticism. There are other manufacturers that have announced they will upgrade the anchor shaft material in the future such as Anchor Right with their Sarca anchor. Many more won't tell us what their anchor shank material is eg Kobra, Delta etc so they can make changes without anyone knowing. If we do have discussion about shank strength, let's discuss all manufacturers in a balanced way.

Could I please make a plea that occasionally we are allowed to discuss issues such as setting and holding in different substrates, resetting ability etc, factors that are much more important to most users.

[foolishsailor]

+1

...especially the part about discussing the working aspects of an anchor.

All this talk about shanks strength seems a bit freudian to me at this point anyway.

[JonJo]

[QUOTE=noelex


Could I please make a plea that occasionally we are allowed to discuss issues such as setting and holding in different substrates, resetting ability etc, factors that are much more important to most users.[/QUOTE]



I think Delfin did query re-setting ability, in the absence of a roll bar. I am pleased that you at least would wish to comment. Possibly you can encourage others to do likewise - real world experience of those that have removed the roll bar and experienced the Mantus re-setting, or not, in a tide change, or whatever, might be of immense value - especially as it was the main feature of a Mantus promotional video.

I find it encouraging that you and Delfin have some questions, or queries in common. Possibly you can progress them together as you both have similar objectives and you Noelex, for one, highlight the characteristic as being of merit. I recall that MaineSail has a Mantus, and is featured in the 'Open anchor design' thread as an impartial anchor tested - this would give him opportunity to further hone his skills.

Being an Australian - I would hesitate to make any further comment, at all. But I will look forward to reading of the constructive pursuit of this common goal with considerable anticipation.

Jonathan

[Factor]

And I will reduce my questions to one.

1, Real world experience on Mantus without roll bar please.

[s/v Beth]

Originally Posted by Factor

And I will reduce my questions to one.

1, Real world experience on Mantus without roll bar please.

+1
Let's keep it to what the OP suggested. Will the bent shank guys go somewhere else please. I have trouble skipping over all your spin. Oh- I want experience with the roll bar too.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by JonJo

I am pleased that you at least would wish to comment. Possibly you can encourage others to do likewise - real world experience of those that have removed the roll bar and experienced the Mantus re-setting, or not, in a tide change, or whatever, might be of immense value - especially as it was the main feature of a Mantus promotional video.

I have no real world experience. I have heard of people that have cut off the roll bar on their Rocna, or MS, but I have never seen one in real life. So below is purely speculation.

How the roll bar anchors would perform without the roll bar is a subject that has fascinated those with the anchor disease (like myself) ever since the Bugel was first introduced.

I must admit the question interests me far less than others because my boat can fit a roll bar anchor without any problems.

Those people that cannot fit a roll bar anchor do face a bit of dilemma. The Spade anchor is very good, but is expensive and is difficult, or impossible to re galvanise making it an expensive proposition for someone like me who anchors all the time. The Ultra (or a SS spade) are even more expensive again. I would normally encourage people to get the best anchor, but this ignores the economic realities we all face. Nevertheless with a boat that could not fit a roll bar anchor I would do everything I could to buy the very good and proven Spade.

The alternatives (if a roll bar anchor will not fit) is Manson Boss (early days, but reports seem a bit luke warm) or dropping down to a convex anchor like the Excel, Kobra, Delta etc.

The Mantus without the Roll bar does provide an off beat alternative. There has really been very little objective evidence, but the following points have been made:

1. If it lands upside down it will stay in this position and not set.
I think this is probably right.
The waters of the Med are clear enough to see my Rocna anchor when it hits the bottom in most anchorages. If dropped when stationary or going slowly backwards (as you should do) it is balanced to nearly always lands the right way up, so I suspect landing upside down only happens occasionally.

I always apply full reverse and check the set of my anchor so if an anchor is upside down this would be readily apparent. In my opinion the step is essential when anchoring using any anchor, but not everyone does this. This step would certainly be essential when using the anchor without the roll bar.

2. The anchor might pull out and turn upside down when resetting.
Good modern anchors do not pull out, but the resetting ability would be my biggest concern. When properly set they remain buried and shuffle around. During the shuffle they develop a slight list. Does the roll bar (on the roll bar anchors) play a role in preventing them developing a greater list? I don't know.

One very serious application that has not been discussed is in unusual substrates like thick weed. In very thick weed the roll bar of any of the roll bar anchors does catch on weed and reduce penetration. In the same way, only worse, the thick toe of the ballasted anchors like the Spade (and all the convex anchors) also inhibits penetration. Cruising sailors have reported weed so thick they could not get a new generation anchor to set despite multiple attempts. (Both Rocna and Spade) The absence of the roll bar (and thick toe) would enable the Mantus sans roll bar anchor to slide through the weed possibly better than any other anchor and the increased effective tip weight from the roll bar removal would also be helpful.

Would a roll bar anchor without the roll bar work in these situations? I don't know, but it is an intriguing possibility with an anchor that could be used with the roll bar under most conditions, but quickly removed in this sort of substrate.

I think we will only answer these questions with more practical experience.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

I wish we could have a thread about anchors without 10 pages discussing shank strength.

Originally Posted by foolishsailor

+1

All this talk about shanks strength seems a bit freudian to me at this point anyway.

Originally Posted by s/v Beth

+1
Will the bent shank guys go somewhere else please.

All of this was said when these guys were sussing out the Rocna fiasco. I am NOT suggesting that this is the case here, and don't believe it is. I'm just making the point that sometimes the bulldogs are doing good even if it seems petty or redundant to you at the time. I appreciate that, even when I have to skip past minutia that doesn't interest me. If it bothers you, ignore lists and scrolling are your friends here.

Mark

[colemj]

I have spent a lot of time watching our Rocna set. If lowered straight down without free fall, it will land on its "head" with a 50:50 chance of tipping backwards on its shank or falling forward on its fluke. The roll bar, of course, makes sure it ends up the correct orientation regardless. This takes place almost instantly - dropped on its back, the anchor never drags more than a foot or two to roll completely around and set hard. I can't say whether without the roll bar it would also eventually assume the correct orientation, but I doubt it would, or that it would drag significantly before doing so.

In soft mud where the anchor needs to settle down pretty far before finding stiffer substrate to bite into, not having the roll bar would definitely result in an anchor that never sets. In this case, if the anchor landed on its shank, the mud substrate would keep it from assuming a correct orientation for good. The roll bar "drag" in loose mud is the only thing that allows the anchor to flip around the right way. Even with the roll bar, if the anchor gets dropped upside down in soft mud, it will need to be dragged quite a bit for the roll bar to get it around the correct way.

Of course we could revert to old-generation anchor discussions here and debate the fine arts of dropping and setting an anchor so that none of the bad aspects come into play.

Mark

[Rhapsody-NS27]

Originally Posted by colemj

The roll bar, of course, makes sure it ends up the correct orientation regardless. This takes place almost instantly - dropped on its back, the anchor never drags more than a foot or two to roll completely around and set hard. I can't say whether without the roll bar it would also eventually assume the correct orientation, but I doubt it would, or that it would drag significantly before doing so.

Mark

I saw somewhere that the Mantus anchor still sets just fine without the roll bar. I looked at their Youtube channel for demo videos. There was one showing a demo of the anchor being thrown into the water without the bar and it still kept the right orientation. I didn't see that video there now, or maybe it is and I just didn't see which one it is in. I may test my anchor with and without the bar in the future to see how it works out myself but the comments I've seen so far look promising.