Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

[Sondor]

Originally Posted by congo

Knoelex thank you for your congratulations, funny I congratulate you on your mission---sorry holiday.

You have been a busy man, are you sure you do not have an agenda...

You amaze me though, most people go on holidays to holiday, you must come over here to photo graph bent Sarca copies? Well you keep saying, reporting the lack of Sarca designs yet you have so many, must have been a long and arduous and targeted hunt for you to find so many, Maybe because you have photographed the same anchor several times, not much time being left for holidaying.

Never mind you are very convincing.

Regards Rex

Congo/Rex,

It's difficult not to personalize things when your product and livelihood is challenged and your latest response seems sincerely contrite, so I'll respond with all due respect in the hopes that you do simply wish for an honest dialogue.

You started your post (rant) in an accusatory manner, and ended in one as well. That is not endearing. It's especially bold when it's directed at a well-respected member of CF.

It's too bad really, because your message which was lost in the middle was quite apropos.

You are correct about the influence a moderator has on opinions and one can make the argument that Noelex should have known better based on the photographic evidence, however, what was submitted by you in the "heat of the moment" did your cause no good.

I'll politely bow-out now.

As contentious as anchor arguments are here, it's nice to have an actual manufacturer who clearly takes pride (even if to a fault) in their product contributing to the forumn. I look forward to hearing more from you in the future.

Sincerely,

Sondor

[gspeak]

Originally Posted by Sondor

Ty Congo/Rex for proving an excellent guide addressing "How Not to Act as a Commercial Vendor on CF"

The fact that you spend so much effort attacking Noelex77 in your latest post does you absolutely no credit.

You tell the guy to post some proof, and when he does, you scorn and ridicule him for doing exactly what you asked.

I don't know what your problem is, but it is squarely yours, and no-one else's, it seems to me.

I believe that Congo/Rex's only problem is his wish to passionately defend his excellent products from constant criticism from people who have never used them. Strange how a one liner about "bent toes" (or was that bait) is so quickly followed up by numerous suspect photos. Where are the photos of bent Rocnas, Supremes, Spades, Fortresses etc.

Just to clarify here are a couple of photos of my Excel when it was just unwrapped upon delivery. Take a look at the toe. Bugger it's bent .... hmmm maybe it was designed that way ... oh & the toe is made of bis alloy (whatever its called).

All this after a couple of people posted some unsolicited testimonials about their great satisfaction with their Excels. No wonder Rex gets upset .... As a fellow passionate business owner .... I would too.

Dave

[congo]

Sondor wrote:

It's difficult not to personalize things when your product and livelihood is challenged and your latest response seems sincerely contrite, so I'll respond with all due respect in the hopes that you do simply wish for an honest dialogue.

Rex replied
I have no reason to bag or personally attack anyone.
Sondor wrote:
You started your post (rant) in an accusatory manner, and ended in one as well. That is not endearing. It's especially bold when it's directed at a well-respected member of CF.


Rex replied
Well if you look back through the forum you will find many a post from customers real world report of our anchors, Noelex will appear almost every time with a unfavorable comments on our products that is not researched and cannot be substantiated and mostly untrue, just like his last effort.

Sondor wrote:
It's too bad really, because your message which was lost in the middle was quite apropos.


Rex replied
Well I live in the real world of hard work and don’t understand educated dialog and don’t mince words, If that’s how I see it then that’s how it comes out unfortunately.

Sondor wrote:
You are correct about the influence a moderator has on opinions and one can make the argument that Noelex should have known better based on the photographic evidence, however, what was submitted by you in the "heat of the moment" did your cause no good.

Rex replied
Well if you agree Noelexs post was arguable and should have known better with his shoddy photo’s and research then maybe you can understand one doesn’t need matches to light a fire, I ask again please remove the photo’s of these damaging copies of our product, I am not saying it is impossible to bend our anchors but with rubbish like that what do you expect.


Sondor wrote:
I'll politely bow-out now.

As contentious as anchor arguments are here, it's nice to have an actual manufacturer who clearly takes pride (even if to a fault) in their product contributing to the forumn. I look forward to hearing more from you in the future.


Rex replied.
Not sure what you are implying here (even if to a fault) looks like another box of matches to me so I will pass.
Regards.
Rex.

[noelex 77]

I certainly don't want to publish photos of bent anchors that are home made, or counterfeit (without making this clear)

I have some wider angle and higher resolution photos of most of the anchors which show the overall design (rather than just concentrating on the tip), which should help resolve if any are not genuine Sarca anchors

I will send these photos to Rex so he can comment.

To my eyes the anchors I photographed all looked genuine.

In the meantime I have temporarily deleted the post showing the seven bent anchors . I will reinstate it when the matter is resolved.

Edit:
I have sent these photos to Rex and asked him to comment on features of each of the anchors that make him convinced they are not Sarca anchors.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by gspeak

Where are the photos of bent Rocnas, Supremes, Spades, Fortresses etc.

I have not personally seen bent tips (although I have heard of few) of the above types apart from a Supreme and I published a photo of this some time ago on Cruising Forum.

Despite the hype bent anchors are not very common.

There are photos on the web of bent models of most anchor designs. It is difficult to gauge, given the extraordinary numbers of photos and people on the internet, how this translates into the real risk of bending an anchor. There has also been some suggestion that some of these photos on the web have been taken of anchors following proof load tests, or even of anchors deliberately bent.

Photos taken by one person help put the magnitude of the real risk into perspective. There are only so many anchors an individual can see.

It is worth remembering that there are performance advantages in making the tip thinner and sharper (or making the shank thinner, or less deep). We need to be careful that we don't force manufacturers into producing very strong anchors that have poor performance.

Anchor Right anchors (both the Sarca and Excel) have a thinner tip and edge profile than their rivals from other manufacturers. This helps in cutting through weed and setting in hard substrates. Anchor Right are one of the few manufacturers that will replace a bent anchor (Fortress, Mantus, Rocna and Ultra are the others) so in some cases the risk of bent tip is an inconvenience that may be a worthwhile trade off for better performance.

To get back to the topic of the thread, a bigger anchor will also have a stronger tip, So one way of keeping the improved performance inherent in a design that has a thin tip and still ending up with an anchor that is unlikely to bend, is to oversize the anchor.

Bigger is better .

[congo]

Re: Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

Noelex wrote:
I certainly don't want to publish photos of bent anchors that are homemade, or counterfeit (without making this clear)


Rex replied:
Well you should have thought about this before your eagerness to post not one, but a ready made kit bag full, you have posted unsubstantiated photo’s that regardless of the outcome discredits the very thing our Company has worked toward for twenty years, integrity and quality, damage has been done.

Noelex wrote:
I have some wider angle and higher resolution photos of most of the anchors which show the overall design (rather than just concentrating on the tip), which should help resolve if any are not genuine Sarca anchors


Rex wrote:
There are two fizz boat size Sarcas that are perfectly normal, they must be twenty years old, don’t know what they are doing on boats of those sizes though.

Noelex wrote:
I will send these photos to Rex so he can comment.


Rex wrote:
I have already responded to that in an earlier post, I am not going to nitpick over a situation that you Noelex have created, I will post some photo’s of the Sarca anchors, (if I am aloud that is ) showing I.D. the rest- you Noelex can compare to the photo’s you have taken, you do the work as you have taken up much of my time from your blunder.

Noelex wrote:
To my eyes the anchors I photographed all looked genuine.


Rex wrote:
Not good enough, you my friend if you are going to comment post photo’s on a commercial forum you are guided and have ethic’s surley that you are legally bound to stick to, primarily- checking your research so as not to discredit from false information.

I have already stated that after some twenty years plus on the market I am sure somewhere there are bent Sarca anchors, really Noelex, seven in one post? Your words.
May I ask why this effort on Anchor Right? Surely if you equal this effort on other brands you may find similar.

Noelex wrote:
In the meantime I have temporarily deleted the post showing the seven bent anchors. I will reinstate it when the matter is resolved.


Rex wrote:
It doesn’t get any better,( you say seven bent anchors) Isn’t it seven photo’s and maybe 3 or 4 bent anchors, I think an apology is more resolving.


Noelex wrote:
Edit:
I have sent these photos to Rex and asked him to comment on features of each of the anchors that make him convinced they are not Sarca anchors.

Rex wrote:

Once again Noelex I have identified two that look genuine and the toes look fine as they are turned down as part of our design they are at least twenty year old models and fitted to larger boats than they were designed for, so they have stood up well.

Make no mistake I am convinced totally of your counterfeit copies, but does it really matter if one two or all are counter fit, fact is not one counterfeit product should be used, demonstrated in a way that could affect a Companies credibility.

Regards Rex,

[noelex 77]

If there are really 5,or 6 (I understand you only feel one or two are geninuine) counterfeit non Sarca anchors that have been photographed, bent, by one person this indicates there must be enormous number of counterfeit Sarca anchors in use.

You should be very keen to point out the difference between these anchors and the genuine product, if for no other reason than to help Cruising Forum members avoid inadvertently purchasing, and using, a fake Anchor Right anchor.

I am familiar with your anchors (and the stamped logo that you use) and when I photographed these anchors they looked entirely genuine. I have looked back at the photos and can see no discrepancies.

Can you point out the specific features that indicate these anchors are not Sarca anchors. You must be able to see these details to be convinced that they are not genuine.

At the moment I am not even sure which anchors you feel are Sarca anchors and which are not.

Is the welding incorect, or the geometry, or the number and angle of the slots etc. Relate this to a particular photo and this will help Cruising a Forum members identify these counterfeit non genuine Sarca anchors. I will withdraw the photo of the particular anchor if your explanation makes sense and cannot be resolved with reference to other photos etc. (at the moment I have temporally removed all the photos to give Rex a chance to point out any specific discrepancies)

I am also convinced all the anchors are bent (or broken in one case) and do not conform to the normal Sarca tip geometry. I am surprised you cannot see that from the photos, but sometimes this is less obvious if you have not seen the real thing. If you indicate which anchors you feel are not bent I may be able show photos from different angles that will clarify, but once again I am not sure which of the seven anchors are in dispute.

[congo]

Re: Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

Quote: from Noelex.
Originally Posted by gspeak
Where are the photos of bent Rocnas, Supremes, Spades, Fortresses etc.

I have not personally seen bent tips (although I have heard of few) of the above types apart from a Supreme and I published a photo of this some time ago on Cruising Forum.

Despite the hype bent anchors are not very common.

There are photos on the web of bent models of most anchor designs. It is difficult to gauge, given the extraordinary numbers of photos and people on the internet, how this translates into the real risk of bending an anchor. There has also been some suggestion that some of these photos on the web have been taken of anchors following proof load tests, or even of anchors deliberately bent.

Photos taken by one person help put the magnitude of the real risk into perspective. There are only so many anchors an individual can see.

It is worth remembering that there are performance advantages in making the tip thinner and sharper (or making the shank thinner, or less deep). We need to be careful that we don't force manufacturers into producing very strong anchors that have poor performance.

Anchor Right anchors (both the Sarca and Excel) have a thinner tip and edge profile than their rivals from other manufacturers. This helps in cutting through weed and setting in hard substrates. Anchor Right are one of the few manufacturers that will replace a bent anchor (Fortress, Mantus, Rocna and Ultra are the others) so in some cases the risk of bent tip is an inconvenience that may be a worthwhile trade off for better performance.

To get back to the topic of the thread, a bigger anchor will also have a stronger tip, So one way of keeping the improved performance inherent in a design that has a thin tip and still ending up with an anchor that is unlikely to bend, is to oversize the anchor.

Bigger is better .

Noelex your following quote:

Anchor Right anchors (both the Sarca and Excel) have a thinner tip and edge profile than their rivals from other manufacturers. This helps in cutting through weed and setting in hard substrates. Anchor Right are one of the few manufacturers that will replace a bent anchor (Fortress, Mantus, Rocna and Ultra are the others) so in some cases the risk of bent tip is an inconvenience that may be a worthwhile trade off for better performance.

To get back to the topic of the thread, a bigger anchor will also have a stronger tip, So one way of keeping the improved performance inherent in a design that has a thin tip and still ending up with an anchor that is unlikely to bend, is to oversize the anchor.

Rex Wrote:
Thanks for acknowledging our anchor designs advantages in weed-hard soils, re the tip, thin tips don’t mean weaker tips, you may assume on a visual and counterfeit anchors that this the case, it depends on the material type, quality, from the beveled edge of the thin tip as from where it is extended, remember half inch thick steel can be replaced with five mm Kevlar, more importantly make sure they are a certified designs so as you know they meet a standard such as we do, we do not trade between strength and performance.

I agree on bent anchors, regardless of design there will always be bent anchors for many reasons, anchors two small with stand out holding being deployed from boats way to big, anchor won’t fit, hits the hull when located in roller, solution-have the toe pressed down, one of the most common is a well jammed anchor in rocks being reefed out, this can also happen if an anchor is well buried in good holding, patience is the answer.

Regards rex.

[noelex 77]

This is seven of the anchors with bent/broken tips that I have photographed recently.

I can see no indication that they are not genuine Sarca and Sarca Excel anchors, but I will leave CF members to judge the photos for themselves.

I agree any anchor can bend, or even break in some circumstances.

Edit: I have removed the photos.

[congo]

: Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

Noelex wrote:

If there are really 5,or 6 (I understand you only feel one or two are geninuine) counterfeit non Sarca anchors that have been photographed, bent, by one person.

Rex wrote:

There certainly is an enormous amount of Sarca copies, most of this took place over the years we sub let the manufacturing, we had a total of three manufacturers, through quoting a better price, we would move on to the best price, Due to the Sarcas success cad drawings went missing and counterfeits started popping up everywhere, yes we were successful in closing down the ones that were bold enough to expose themselves by advertising, still there are pockets that are hard to locate.

You say( that have been photographed, bent, by one person,) well I to have a problem with this, I know you visited JV marine world, CH smith marine and a marina in South Australia, how many others, were they all in the one location, what location or did you ware out shoe leather finding your bent Sarca kit.




Noelex wrote:

You should be very keen to point out the difference between these anchors and the genuine product, if for no other reason than to help Cruising Forum members avoid inadvertently purchasing, and using, a fake Anchor Right anchor.


Rex wrote:
Come on Noelex, you being only an hour away from me on your bent Sarca hunt, it would have been pure courtesy and respectful giving what you had in mind, you could have to called me to visit, then maybe your forum members would have appreciated that type of input rather than throw in a dirt bag of created controversy.

Noelex wrote:

( I am familiar with your anchors and the stamped logo that you use) and when I photographed these anchors they looked entirely genuine. I have looked back at the photos and can see no discrepancies.


Rex wrote:
This is the thing Noelex- your quote, ( I am familiar with your anchors and the stamped logo that you use) really strange, this logo I would have thought would been the first thing you would have looked for, forgive me if I feel you have a motive, this is all you and forum readers need to look for, same as our survey offices when inspecting vessel under survey, they do not carry a manual of our specifications.


Noelex wrote:
Can you point out the specific features that indicate these anchors are not Sarca anchors. You must be able to see these details to be convinced that they are not genuine.


Rex wrote: As above.

Noelex wrote:
At the moment I am not even sure which anchors you feel are Sarca anchors and which are not.

Rex wrote:
Really Noelex, I am sure there is at least one that even a blind man could see, the one of seven anchors you say, the underside shot of the anchor shows the toe has been cut off, all anchors of that size have a large reinforcement running under the fluke from the shank forming the tip, it doesn’t exist, so – tell me Noelex why is that photo there.

Noelex wrote:
Is the welding incorect, or the geometry, or the number and angle of the slots etc. Relate this to a particular photo and this will help Cruising a Forum members identify these counterfeit non genuine Sarca anchors. I will withdraw the photo of the particular anchor if your explanation makes sense and cannot be resolved with reference to other photos etc. (at the moment (I have temporally removed all the photos to give Rex a chance to point out any specific discrepancies)

I am also convinced all the anchors are bent (or broken in one case) and do not conform to the normal Sarca tip geometry. I am surprised you cannot see that from the photos, but sometimes this is less obvious if you have not seen the real thing. If you indicate which anchors you feel are not bent I may be able show photos from different angles that will clarify, but once again I am not sure which of the seven anchors are in dispute.

Rex wrote:
I have answered all above, but for the benefit of Cruisers forum I will add once again, small anchors up to approx 9 K.G are designed for fizz boats- not cruisers, these small anchor are made without a toe brace as they simply do not need them unless someone decides they will do the job on their 30 footer.

Noelex wrote:
(I have temporally removed all the photos to give Rex a chance to point out any specific discrepancies)


Rex wrote:
What chance, you have put the cart before the horse, I have to reach a conclusion to all this ongoing controversy over our disputes on specifically Anchor Rights anchors, sure I can get personal but you are like a blood hound chained to its kennel, the moment someone mentions their satisfaction with the performance of our product you are unleashed and on our sent,well thats how it seems.

This latest episode started on your arrival back from Australia, you have baited me at least three times on previous threads waiting for the right moment to pull the trigger, I have been advised- if you are going to post someone’s intellectual property ,in this instant anchors-you must supply the I.D and anchor size- both of which is hard stamped, check that its application is for the boat your evidence has come from , none of this have you done.

Give it up Noelex and leave threads like this to continue the wonderful example of discussion and colors, BIB is truly a great thread with many contributors, it doesn’t need to be crashed from ongoing disputes between you and myself, it is clear to me our rivalry will remain so exercise your agenda in ways that you will, on behalf of our customers allow their satisfaction of our product to be expressed without your interventions and aggravation.

I was pm by your forum again two days ago inviting me to advertise as a valued contributor, very generous rates, I am very tempted , but under the circumstances that I believe exist between you and myself how would that work.

As you have reposted before I had responded to your request, I ask once again to remove those photo’s unless you can provide them with the appropriate info, if not- then let it be judged, only hope your ethic’s attract some attention in terms of judgment as well.

This is my final word on this subject, so now hopefully the BIB thread can get back on track, I apologize to all for this diversion, but I didn’t start it this time.

Kind Regards.
Rex.

[Andrew Troup]

Rex, I know you're trying to get a fair shake for your anchors, and I think they deserve that.

I don't have any dog in this fight, but please believe me, for whatever reason, the way you post here greatly damages your credibility, and the reputation of your anchors.

Is there no-one, either close to you or in your organisation, who could take over the job of defending them and promoting them?

Because it is evident to me at least: that requires a very different skillset from designing and making fine anchors.

[congo]

Re: Anchors - Bigger is Better ?


Andrew Troup wrote:

Rex, I know you're trying to get a fair shake for your anchors, and I think they deserve that.

I don't have any dog in this fight, but please believe me, for whatever reason, the way you post here greatly damages your credibility, and the reputation of your anchors.

Is there no-one, either close to you or in your organisation, who could take over the job of defending them and promoting them?

Because it is evident to me at least: that requires a very different skillset from designing and making fine anchors.

Rex wrote:
Andrew I really appreciate your post and fully agree, I am truly a one man band in our marketing, I come from a family of 13- pulled out of school to support my family, so yes skill level in this field is poor and difficult to manage so I would rather use that as an excuse than a lesser.

Noelex has been quoted as being influential, respected and Knowledgeable, well I have pride, integrity, honesty and do not take advantage of the lesser, so how about a little respect my way, I have a son and a great team doing all of our manufacturing, I don’t apologize for being proud.

My down side never raises it's ugly head until Noelex starts beating the drum, my best side is a freindly disscussions on topic and you will extract from me what it is you want to know.

Any way thanks for your post it was much appreciated so as to not raise my heckles.

Regards Rex

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by congo

Really Noelex, I am sure there is at least one that even a blind man could see, the one of seven anchors you say, the underside shot of the anchor shows the toe has been cut off, all anchors of that size have a large reinforcement running under the fluke from the shank forming the tip, it doesn’t exist, so – tell me Noelex why is that photo there.

Rex, the anchor with the snapped off tip was a small one on a small boat.
I think it was the same size as this new one which as you can see has an identical underside (except it's not snapped off ).

The photo of the new anchor is from JV marine, one of your major distributors, so I presume the new anchor is genuine.

The offer still stands, I will remove any of the seven photos where you can point out features (either on the photos on CF or the large file photos shots of the same anchors from different angles that I have sent you) that indicate it is not a Sarca anchor

Edit:
One photo of an anchor with a broken tip removed

[s/v Jedi]

Watching the pictures, my impression is that these are failures of genuine anchors and Noelex is right. Rex seems to say anything in an effort to save what can be saved from this catastrophy, but refuses to back his accusations on the failures being illegal knock off anchors with detailed descriptions on what makes the anchors fakes.

[congo]

Neolex,

So you think the toe is snapped of, yet no rust? enough questions as you duck all of mine, I am finnished with your questions, if you want I will post you genuine anchors and you can do the comparrisons, it's your baby you can continue to rock it as you do.

Ther are many of our anchors entering the U.S. as you have probably noticed, three more as aresult of these discussions, sooner or later more will post then you can start again, we have no complaints from bent anchors, if we did we would replace them.

As you have no proof they are our anchors kindly remove them and give back the bigger is better thread to your forum members, if they want to side with you so be it.

Regards Rex