All modern anchors with loop, based on the Bugel are the same in performance

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

I've had some real-world experience. 50 years of cruising between Labrador and Colombia, out to Bermuda, and down to the Virgin Islands, using a variety of anchors including CQR, Danforths, Fortress, Bulwagga and Mantus. In the multiple hurricanes that I have endured I have usually been able to pick up a heavy mooring, which I supplemented with my own anchor, but in Hurricane Gloria, which went right over us on Long Island, I anchored out with a CQR and two Danforths in a star pattern. Most of the mooring field near my boat dragged ashore. We did not. I usually go for the recommended size and up one. On my current boat we have used two different 45lb anchors that have never dragged with up to around 60knots of wind in really bad holding (very hard) on very short scope. Sure, there are conditions when any anchor will drag and more weight can help, but if in doubt I have successfully deployed a second or even a third anchor. Those situations are rare.

I did not say that you have no experience so I don’t understand why you are defending like if I did say that. Surely you’re not trying to put words in my mouth?

I wrote that your comments sketch a black and white picture, whereas your size anchor has proven itself to be 100% effective and a size up is nothing but extra weight without any benefit.

I refuted that and it seems your response has nothing relevant to my comments even though you quote them?

[Kettlewell]

You said the following:

You sketch a black and white picture that isn’t comparable to the real world.

I am just pointing out that in the "real world" I have experienced (in full living color!) for awhile you do not need to go way oversized to have good anchoring performance. Frankly, I'm not even sure that going larger, even for the same anchor brand, is always beneficial. You want to have your anchor well buried to develop maximum holding power, and in some bottoms I have observed by diving that larger anchors are not well buried, while smaller anchors with sharper flukes slice right into the bottom. I've seen this many times in the Bahamas sand, for example.

[Fuss]

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

You said the following:

I have observed by diving that larger anchors are not well buried, while smaller anchors with sharper flukes slice right into the bottom. I've seen this many times in the Bahamas sand, for example.

Great…another vote for the thin fluked Bugel then…oh the Bugel…is so superior..but so underrated!!

But seriously, let’s chose another as the inferior anchor.

This has the potential to be a very informative test.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

You said the following:

I am just pointing out that in the "real world" I have experienced (in full living color!) for awhile you do not need to go way oversized to have good anchoring performance. Frankly, I'm not even sure that going larger, even for the same anchor brand, is always beneficial. You want to have your anchor well buried to develop maximum holding power, and in some bottoms I have observed by diving that larger anchors are not well buried, while smaller anchors with sharper flukes slice right into the bottom. I've seen this many times in the Bahamas sand, for example.

Oh, I was reading about CQR’s and multiple anchor deployments etc. so lost track.

The partially buried anchor in hard sand is completely normal. It means that it wasn’t pulled hard enough yet to fully bury. A good squall or storm is all that is needed to pull harder and bury it further.

If your anchor fully buries in hard sand, then it has reduced holding power in soft bottoms where the big anchor that didn’t fully bury in hard sand, does fully bury just like the smaller anchor. That bigger anchor has more fluke area and more weight and will improve holding power in that bottom.

Of course you could bring a range of anchors for the different bottom types and to some extent I do just that. I carry a really big Fortress FX-85 and the monstrous FX-125 as well but I have seen little need for them over the years.

The only negative for the not fully buried anchor is that the chain can wrap around it when making circles around the anchor in light conditions. For when high winds are expected, I always recommend to re-anchor when the wind has turned to the direction the blow will come from. For anchors not fully buried this is even more important, but Steve’s videos show it is better in virtually every case.

[Kettlewell]

If your anchor fully buries in hard sand, then it has reduced holding power in soft bottoms where the big anchor that didn’t fully bury in hard sand, does fully bury just like the smaller anchor. That bigger anchor has more fluke area and more weight and will improve holding power in that bottom.

Just for kicks I have used a 5lb Danforth to anchor my big boat as an experiment and it worked just fine in under 15 knots of wind. I suspect it could hold my big boat most nights. Of course it would be harder to set. The Chesapeake is the only place I have ever encountered bottoms too soft for my main anchor, but even there I find it eventually works its way down through the ooze to better holding. Sheer weight might be an advantage in penetrating the thick layer of ooze, but I don't know. OTOH when the main anchor has dragged in one of these oozy bottoms I have successfully deployed a 15lb Fortress FX23 which held perfectly, even in a tornado once. My main point being that the OP's assertion that sheer weight trumps design is just silly.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

Just for kicks I have used a 5lb Danforth to anchor my big boat as an experiment and it worked just fine in under 15 knots of wind. I suspect it could hold my big boat most nights. Of course it would be harder to set. The Chesapeake is the only place I have ever encountered bottoms too soft for my main anchor, but even there I find it eventually works its way down through the ooze to better holding. Sheer weight might be an advantage in penetrating the thick layer of ooze, but I don't know. OTOH when the main anchor has dragged in one of these oozy bottoms I have successfully deployed a 15lb Fortress FX23 which held perfectly, even in a tornado once. My main point being that the OP's assertion that sheer weight trumps design is just silly.

Well… the anchor models go by weight but of course one size up is not only heavier but also has more fluke area. It is the combination of those two that increases holding power.

Of course the OP is wrong, we can agree about that, but he knows this as well which is why he wants a 50lb vs 30lb advantage… even though it seems he is now braven enough to reduce that to 40lb vs 30lb so we’ll wait a bit more until he agrees to pound for pound and then we can just grab the table from Steve to see if he is right or not

[Kettlewell]

Well… the anchor models go by weight but of course one size up is not only heavier but also has more fluke area. It is the combination of those two that increases holding power.

Agreed. In general, a heavier anchor of the same type will provide ultimate holding greater than the lighter anchor. But, that doesn't mean that 50kg hoop anchor B will always be better than 30kg hoop anchor M. Look at comparisons of genuine steel Danforth anchors to Fortress anchors, for example. Same basic design, different weights, and the lighter version has higher holding power because of greater surface area.

[pbiJim]

I make the following as a general statement.

I have encountered many experienced sailors with firmly held beliefs regarding the performance of various anchors. Each belief appeared to be rooted in solid empirical data that was personally observed. Often it was well documented. Often when more than one of these well experienced & legitimately opinionated individuals compare notes, they find that their conclusions vary, sometimes by a wide margin. This is likely the root cause of the reputation that anchor discussions have for being spirited & sometimes even combative in nature. Despite each participant having the best of intentions & genuinely wanting to share useful information that might aid another who lacked his personal experience, there is a well know history of the discussion often becoming argumentative.

I will contend that in different places, you will encounter sea beds with different properties & that difference will skew the results of any anchor test enough to change the results in a very big way. There are certain conditions in which a Danforth will outperform a delta of the same weight & there are certainly other circumstances where the opposite will be true. There are areas where soft tine rock hooks are the very best choice & there are areas where they are pretty close to worthless.

Anchoring is very much NOT a one-size-fits-all proposition. I try to listen more than I speak when anchors are discussed. I find that I still constantly learn from others. I appreciate the posts that have been provided here.

[MicHughV]

oh goody...another anchor thread...

[s/v Jedi]

The first sailboat I spent 17 years with was a steel Dutch built 30 footer. It came with a steel Danforth anchor but it was a knockoff, welded together by the builder of the boat. It worked miserably. So Danforth anchors were miserable, until I tried a real one, which worked remarkably well.

So there will be big differences with buegel anchors too (see, buegel means the hoop in German as it was a German invention afaik)

But at a 50lb to 30lb advantage…

[MicHughV]

Our local shrimp boats favor the Northill anchor....well, their version of the Northill, usually welded up from scraps of steel, but interestingly, they all have it on their bow, everyone of them. Instead of the "buegel" they seem to prefer a straight arm.

In the event of a possible hurricane, they leave the docks and they head into the swamps and marshes to ride out the storm. You'd think they must know something.

I have one too, a s/s collapsible version....not sure of the weight, but probably around 50 lbs or so.
I view it as my storm anchor. It has only seen service once in it's lifetime with me and I can attest to the fact that it never budged.

Old school or not, I'd never trade it for a "buegel" anchor.

[Fuss]

Ok, then lets stick with the Buegel, it clearly makes the grade as an inferior anchor.


So the heading could be....


How much have the new generation Loop anchors really improved after all these years. Stay tuned to find out!!!


We pit the original 40 kg Buegel against one of latest and best of the new generation 30 kg loop anchors.

We know its controversial, threatening and annoying for some, scary for others. But for the real sailors amongst us well...its just another anchor thread....until...


.... so there it is, all set to go, potentially, the most interesting anchor test of the year or possibly, the last 10 years.


Settle down Mr Weebles, we're not using your anchor.

[Kettlewell]

We pit the original 40 kg Buegel against one of latest and best of the new generation 30 kg loop anchors.

Sure, why don't you do it, make a video, and report back? By the way, I'm not sure how available 40kg Buegel anchors are here in the USA. This site only shows up to 14kg on their ordering form. In any case, they are quite rare here in the USA so hard for many of us to have any idea about them. I don't know of anyone that uses one, and I haven't seen one on a bow in a long time. https://www.swi-tec.us/products/wasi...teel-aisi-316l

[rslifkin]

For those talking about a Danforth / Fortress, as much as other designs are somewhat comparable on a weight basis, the Danforth / Fortress is not as the design makes it so large for a given weight. It's just a drastically different design, and in my mind, kind of a special purpose one. In the situations where it works well, it works REALLY well. But it doesn't work in as wide a range of bottoms as modern designs and doesn't always handle direction changes well, so it's not well-rounded enough for a primary anchor.

[Kettlewell]

But it doesn't work in as wide a range of bottoms as modern designs and doesn't always handle direction changes well, so it's not well-rounded enough for a primary anchor.

I basically agree, but I have been cruising long enough to remember when a lot of boats had a steel Danforth on the bow as the primary. I sailed from Maine to Labrador and back using a steel Danforth every anchored night. I used nothing else for many years cruising all around southern New England. This summer I was anchored in a popular spot when a minor blow came through in the middle of the night, swinging everyone 180 degrees, sending a bunch of cruising boats flying away downwind. All the draggers were using modern hoop-type anchors of various sorts. Upwind of me was a powerboat that didn't budge, so I watched with interest when he hauled up his anchor in the morning and it was a very small Danforth. And, he was anchored in thick weed! Danforth anchors (and Fortresses) are highly underrated. Yes, I do use a Mantus as my main anchor, but if I lose that I would resort to using two Fortresses that I keep onboard for many uses. They have been tested many times in big blows and I believe they are still unequaled in pure holding power once dug in.