Quote:
Originally Posted by sailorboy1
Was there an answer that accepted?
|
The overwhelming concensus was that Bigger is actually Better.
This must please the
anchor makers
Most respondents had embraced the new style anchors, which covered:
Mantus, Spade, Ultra, Supreme, Excel, SARCA,
Fortress and
Kobra. There was little evidence of support for the Boss, maybe it is too new.
Most, except some Australians, who posted used modern concave anchors. Not many users of the
Kobra (a European derived, modern, convex model) posted (they have a European focussed forum?)
Most owners of concave anchors had upgraded from an older style and when doing so had taken the opportunity to upgrade in size of anchor at the same time. Some observations must thus be tempered by the idea comparison of performance was not entirely 'fair' - one would expect a heavier modern anchor to be better than a lighter older style. It never came through that people had bought a modern concave anchor of the recommended size, thought better of their decision, and then discarded it (sold it on ebay) and gone off and bought an even bigger anchor.
There was one notable exception where an individual had replaced their modern concave anchor with an older style concave anchor - but he believed in Bigger is Better, even for his older style anchor (I
recall a genuine Bruce, but it might have been a good clone).
There was little support for use of 2 smaller anchors deployed in a 'V' (instead of carrying one big anchor) based on fears that if the
wind turned through 180 degrees, or more, the entangled rodes were a major hazard. The idea of the
wind turning through 180 degrees might reflect the predominance of circular storms in America.
Though the original
concept of Bigger is Better was directly associated with use of lighter but strong G7 chain - there was no indication at all that G7 chain has gained any traction. Most respondents thought bigger is better, whether you used a lighter chain, or not (the chain makers must be horror struck
).
Virtually all of the comments were subjective as no-one, reasonably, had set a lighter anchor in 50 knots of wind and when it dragged set an identically designed anchor 2 sizes bigger - and not dragged.
The use, or popularity, of bigger is better has no restrictions in terms of seabed - it is believed better in soft, hard, muddy and weedy seabeds.
It was difficult to judge whether the comments that bigger is better was based on a generalisation (go to the next sized anchor bigger than recommended) or go for 2 sizes bigger which was the basis of the original question.
But reiterating
The concensus was that a bigger anchor is, without any shadow of doubt, better than a smaller one.
What have I missed?
Jonathan
Linear Mode
Recent Discussions