Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

[Delfin]

Rex, interesting comments on the CQR, and they help answer my question why so many people cruised the world for decades with this anchor but it still frequently comes up short.

It seems to me a diving anchor is always going to provide greater ultimate holding since the sea bed becomes denser as the depth increases so from my perspective this whole debate centers around how best to build an anchor that will dive. On a Manson, Rocna, or the anchor that can only be praised, the concave surface forces the soil into compression in front of the hoop and this has to inhibit diving. Not always a problem, but when one of these drags it is likely due to that phenomenon. Your Super Sarca seems to demonstrate that with a convex design, you can build an anchor where the soil moves away from the hoop so it doesn't build up.

Which leaves the question of whether once you toss the hoop that gets in the way sometimes, a diving anchor is best designed with a convex fluke, or a concave one. The Ultra and Spade seem to try to combine the attributes of both, with a concave upper side and convex lower. The upper provides compression in front of the fluke, and the lower convex provides compression below as well. The Delta has a flat bottom, and performs less well than the Spade or Ultra, which suggests the convex bottom is desirable.

Your Excel has a convex upper and convex lower and also performs great. Since it appears that since both convex and concave designs seem to be able to dive, the dominant shape may be less important than the sheer ability to bury itself.

Would you agree with this analysis, or am I missing something important?

[Cotemar]

Delfin,

I give you and your friends a deep diving Convave anchor design to keep you safe at night and your still giving Congo a belly rub.

When do I get mine?

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Delfin

The Delta has a flat bottom, and performs less well than the Spade or Ultra, which suggests the convex bottom is desirable.
Your Excel has a convex upper and convex lower and also performs great.

This is the underside of the Delta and the Excel. There is very little shape difference.

The Spade and the Ultra are very different to the Excel. The important upper side (which is the leading edge in contact with the substrate) is very different (concave verses very convex for the Excel ). Even the underside has no resemblance.

The Excel is nothing like the Spade shape wise, in fact in most ways it is the the exact opposite

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

This is the underside of the Delta and the Excel. There is very little shape difference.

Except that the Delta is flat and the Excel is convex. But other than that....

The Spade and the Ultra are very different to the Excel. The important upper side (which is the leading edge in contact with the substrate) is very different (concave verses very convex for the Excel ). Even the underside has no resemblance.

The Excel is nothing like the Spade shape wise, in fact in most ways it is the the exact opposite[/QUOTE] Not so much. As noted, both have convex undersides, which do come into contact with the sea bed when digging in. The convex shape provides resistance, a flat section not much, and a hollow section like the Rocna none at all.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Cotemar

Delfin,

I give you and your friends a deep diving Convave anchor design to keep you safe at night and your still giving Congo a belly rub.

When do I get mine?

Since I already have a Tern, your design seems a bit superfluous.

[scoobert]

Originally Posted by JonJo

I tried to raise the question:' is a bigger anchor better' on the terminated SARCA Excel thread. Its not about a specific design but about whether 'bigger is better'

i will say, a 2000# stockless anchor holds better then a 45# QCR. so yes. bigger is better.

but its not linear.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Except that the Delta is flat and the Excel is convex. But other than that....

The majority of the underside of the Blade of both the Delta and the Excel is concave.
The underside toe of the excel is very slightly convex, but it is a very subtle curve (see photo)

Both are of course are very convex on the upper surface as opposed to the Spade which is concave.

Do you really believe the shape the Excel is very different from the Delta and closer to the Spade? If so can you show a photo (from any angle) that illustrates this?

[Cotemar]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Since I already have a Tern, your design seems a bit superfluous.

Your not seeing what 99.99% of what every one else is seeing.
Do you really think a W profile looks like and A profile? Then no one can help you with that.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Cotemar

Your not seeing the what 99.99% of what every one else is seeing.
Do you really think a W profile looks like and A profile? Then no one can help you with that.

You might be right. The upturned edges that make the W on a Tern are pretty small. Now that I look at your design, it appears to be more of a rip off of the Excel than the Tern. The Excel has quite prominent wings. I'm sure REX is flattered.

[foggysail]

Has anybody changed their opinion/outlook after reading one thousand, three hundered and ninety (mine included) replies???

Has anybody even read them all???

Will there be greater understanding after another one thousand additional replies?

[Cotemar]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

The majority of the underside of the Blade of both the Delta and the Excel is concave.
The underside toe of the excel is very slightly convex, but it is a very subtle curve (see photo)

Both are of course are very convex on the upper surface as opposed to the Spade which is concave.

Do you really believe the shape the Excel is very different from the Delta and closer to the Spade? If so can you show a photo (from any angle) that illustrates this?

I would love to see Delfins pictures explaining that.
I think eye charts are on order for those pictures.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by foggysail

Has anybody changed their opinion/outlook after reading one thousand, three hundered and ninety (mine included) replies???

Has anybody even read them all???

mmmm . . . interesting question . . . . I think perhaps the thread has shifting my thinking more toward the Ultra than it was. . . . and a question related to that for you 'materials and shank strength guys' . . . what do you think of the ultra shank strength and its materials generally?

And I have certainly formed a distinct impression of Rex.

[Cotemar]

Originally Posted by foggysail

Has anybody changed their opinion/outlook after reading one thousand, three hundered and ninety (mine included) replies???

Has anybody even read them all???

Will there be greater understanding after another one thousand additional replies?

Absolutely not.

No one is budging on Bigger is better anchor, but JonJo is writing another Practical Sailor article, so we are here to make sure he gets all the data he needs.

You see, we are all good like that.

JonJo likes the small ones thats for sure.

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by Cotemar

Absolutely not.

No one is budging on Bigger is better anchor, but JonJo is writing another Practical Sailor article, so we are here to make sure he gets all the data he needs.

You see, we are all good like that.

JonJo likes the small ones thats for sure.

I thought about a smaller anchor before JonJo began this long ago. I thought that a smaller Delta...had an 88# one at that time..... might have a better chance of burying itself.

Now I think the only way a Delta can bury itself is if somebody dug a deep hole under it, grabbed it by the flukes and pulled it down into God's good earth

[Cotemar]

Originally Posted by foggysail

I thought about a smaller anchor before JonJo began this long ago. I thought that a smaller Delta...had an 88# one at that time..... might have a better chance of burying itself.

Now I think the only way a Delta can bury itself is if somebody dug a deep hole under it, grabbed it by the flukes and pulled it down into God's good earth

You may be onto something here.

If all the convex anchor guys just bring along a fish tank with a big octopus like the one that was under Noelex 77 anchor a while back.

The convex anchor guy's just anchor as usual then throw the big octopus on their anchor to give them the added holding power there not getting from a flat or concave anchor design.