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

[Montanan]

Ah, the anchor debate over weather, and if size matters.

If an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, what is a pound or kilogram of prevention worth? Just asking.

[JPA Cate]

Originally Posted by MicHughV

There should be a rule.

No opinions about anchors on this forum until the poster has a certifiable grey beard.

Pls. note: I'm not going to grow a "certifiable grey beard"!

Ann
[who started with a Danforth 20 lb. HT (which we still have), and a CQR type (not a genuine CQR); then a bruce -- bent a fluke; then a 60 lb claw; finally the Manson Supreme, which has been good enough for us for quite a while now. Also have a spare plow type that came with the boat.]

[Kettlewell]

Still, knowing how to properly deploy and set an anchor is key to any successful anchoring endevor.

^^This^^ I regularly anchor most summers in the same harbor with somewhat challenging anchoring conditions. I have literally anchored there hundreds of times. I have been observing how others anchor and what they use since 1980 when I first dropped a Danforth there. I have dove on probably close to a hundred anchor sets just to see what is going on. A huge percentage of the time people use too short a scope because it is crowded and then don't set the anchor properly with enough power to know it is well dug in. 99% of the time this gets everyone through the night, but once in awhile this anchorage gets the classic midnight blow that comes in from 180 degrees to the prevailing wind that was present when their anchor dropped, or an afternoon thunderstorm sweeps through with gusts up to 40 knots. I have observed most of the previous and current generation anchors being dragged through the harbor, including hoop types that are very popular now. Last summer I was in a blow like this where a Bruce and a Spade did not drag up ahead of me, while a Delta and a Rocna on nice modern cruisers went whistling away in the wind--one of them ending up in a tangle amongst the moored boats. The Spade was on all rope rode holding a big old wooden schooner. The Bruce was holding a 40-year-old fiberglass boat. Another power boat with an old-school steel Danforth held perfectly. A big cat near me hung in there with a huge Rocna on all chain, but he was constantly adjusting his anchor and/or moving about the anchorage. Not very trusting of his own anchoring. Not scientific, but it shows that there is more to anchoring than just choosing a good design.

[MicHughV]

In lieu of a grey beard....grey hair will do

[Fuss]

Hey, this is some awesome thread drift , but to be expected especially with such a scary proposition for so many.
If you like we can talk about my solution to protect your alternator from spike disconnects caused by a lithium BMS.
The new generation extreme high holding power loop anchors would then be free to carry on their merry way and Mr Weebles and Kettlewell could relax again.

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by MicHughV

I've been a diehard Bruce anchor fan for 35 years and I wonder how much these new anchors is a business scheme to drum up new anchor sales. Seriously, there are many anchor designs on the market available to the boater these days.

Your old time boater likely already has an array of anchors at his/her disposal, but a newbie boater is likely to want the latest and greatest or whatever the sales people sell him/her on.

1933 CQR
1971 Bruce
1986 Bügel
1990 Delta
1999 Spade
2004 Rocna
2006 Sarca, Sarca Excel
2008 Manson
2013 Mantus M1
2014 Vulcan

The Bruce is a good anchor but inefficient in terms of holding power for its weight; to the OP's original point a larger Bruce will underpeform smaller, newer anchors.

Performance of the major-brand anchors introduced after the Delta is all roughly similar with most of them having unique drawbacks of one kind or another.

I don't see much replacement of one modern anchor (in good condition) with another. What I see is replacement of undersized anchors, no-name clones, and obsolete Delta and CQR anchors.

Originally Posted by MicHughV

Still, knowing how to properly deploy and set an anchor is key to any successful anchoring endevor.

Technique does matter less with the better anchors.

[MicHughV]

I am an unabashed diehard.....I've owned three sailboats in the 40' range, and all of them have been equipped with the Bruce.
It's kinda like being married. While my wife is showing her age (a little bit) lately, I wouldn't swap her for anything

[s/v Jedi]

In the pov of the OP: how about comparing a 50lb original Bruce to a 30lb Rocna or Spade etc. ?

Are their innovative improvements enough to overcome such a downsize?

I know that my 80kg Bruce outperforms a 50kg Delta in a direct real world comparison but I am not aware of many of such experiments.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

In the pov of the OP: how about comparing a 50lb original Bruce to a 30lb Rocna or Spade etc. ?

Are their innovative improvements enough to overcome such a downsize?

I know that my 80kg Bruce outperforms a 50kg Delta in a direct real world comparison but I am not aware of many of such experiments.

That would be a more interesting comparison, I think. Determine how much the generational improvements can be offset by weight, vs what behaviors or performance limitations are inherent enough in the design that you can't mask them so easily or would need an even bigger weight spread to mask them.

Of course, in the real world, if the 50 lb Bruce fits on the bow and weight isn't a concern, there's probably no reason not to get the 50 lb version of something newer even if it's a little bit overkill. Heck, I've occasionally wondered if the 88lb Vulcan would have fit on my bow as well as the 73lb does, even though the 73 is already bigger than recommended and has performed well.

[Kettlewell]

Of course, in the real world, if the 50 lb Bruce fits on the bow and weight isn't a concern,

I personally think the ability to manhandle your anchor onboard every day is a huge safety factor, so that is another disadvantage of going too big. After busted refrigeration, broken windlasses were the #2 item being repaired in Cartagena when I was down there. Also, it is not just how the bigger anchor fits on the bow roller, but shank length, hoop size, and other dimensions can be limiting factors.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

I personally think the ability to manhandle your anchor onboard every day is a huge safety factor, so that is another disadvantage of going too big. After busted refrigeration, broken windlasses were the #2 item being repaired in Cartagena when I was down there. Also, it is not just how the bigger anchor fits on the bow roller, but shank length, hoop size, and other dimensions can be limiting factors.

Shank length and such are all definitely factors in what fits or not. But once you get beyond fairly small boats, manhandling the anchor shouldn't be a concern, as you won't be able to manhandle any anchor that isn't undersized without some form of assistance.

[Panope]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

..........how about comparing a 50lb original Bruce to a 30lb Rocna or Spade etc. ?.........

Holding data for a 44lb Genuine Bruce, 22lb Rocna MK1, 21 Spade (Steel), and a 21lb Viking in 4 different seabeds:

SANDY MUD:

44lb Bruce --- 700lbs.
22lb Rocna --- 440lbs.
21lb Spade --- 1,325lbs.
21lb Viking --- 750lbs.


CLEAN(ish) SAND:

44lb Bruce --- 750lbs.
22lb Rocna --- 535lbs.
21lb Spade --- 1,150+lbs. (Maximum Unknown. Boat could not pull any harder).
21lb Viking --- 1,150+lbs. (Maximum Unknown. Boat could not pull any harder).


SOFT MUD:

44lb Bruce --- 790lbs.
22lb Rocna --- 580lbs.
21lb Spade --- 335lbs.
21lb Viking --- 690lbs.


COBBLESTONE:

44lb Bruce --- 150lbs.
22lb Rocna --- 180lbs.
21lb Spade --- 150lbs.
21lb Viking --- 140lbs.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by Panope

Holding data for a 44lb Genuine Bruce, 22lb Rocna MK1, 21 Spade (Steel), and a 21lb Viking in 4 different seabeds:

SANDY MUD:

44lb Bruce --- 700lbs.
22lb Rocna --- 440lbs.
21lb Spade --- 1,325lbs.
21lb Viking --- 750lbs.


CLEAN(ish) SAND:

44lb Bruce --- 750lbs.
22lb Rocna --- 535lbs.
21lb Spade --- 1,150+lbs. (Maximum Unknown. Boat could not pull any harder).
21lb Viking --- 1,150+lbs. (Maximum Unknown. Boat could not pull any harder).


SOFT MUD:

44lb Bruce --- 790lbs.
22lb Rocna --- 580lbs.
21lb Spade --- 335lbs.
21lb Viking --- 690lbs.


COBBLESTONE:

44lb Bruce --- 150lbs.
22lb Rocna --- 180lbs.
21lb Spade --- 150lbs.
21lb Viking --- 140lbs.

There you go… I think I would stick with the Bruce in that comparison. The Spade seems a winner until you get to the soft mud where it’s less than half the holding power plus I know the galvanizing is bad quality…

But this is double weight

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

There you go… I think I would stick with the Bruce in that comparison. The Spade seems a winner until you get to the soft mud where it’s less than half the holding power plus I know the galvanizing is bad quality…

But this is double weight

Or go for the Viking, which performs only slightly worse than the (much bigger) Bruce in the worst scenarios, but better in some despite the smaller size. Up-size the Viking to match the Bruce and it should be significantly better in all of the scenarios.

[Panope]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

.......Up-size the Viking to match the Bruce and it should be significantly better in all of the scenarios.

I agree.

However, because Bruce anchors are 'pound-for-pound' the most "compact" on the bow roller, many boats can physically accommodate a much larger (by weight) Bruce.

For example, 2 seasons ago I used with a 66lb Bruce. Even though it was technically "massively oversize", it did not add to LOA or look out-of-place. It just nestles around the stem and sorta blends in.

On the other hand, the 51lb. Viking that I have is colossal and sticks out like a sore thumb. It is much more likely to snag stuff and will be more likely to be damaged during collisions.

I have even entertained the idea of ditching the #2 bow anchor and just going with my 118lb Bruce. This would reduce total anchor system weight and not look as ridiculous as one might think.

The idea of being on a "mooring" every time the anchor goes down, is enticing.