As I said, that's entirely arbitrary, and evidently wrong. They will obviously fit some bowsprits. Any anchor should fit the boat - that is indisputable. The Ultra likely won't fit in a traditional hawse - that doesn't make it unsuitable for all boats.
I am so sorry, sir, but I have to disagree with you here again. Calling a boat with bowsprit "Poorly Designed" is a big mistake. Modern sailboats started to use straight bows to increase their performances, but then placing the anchor to these boats became a bigger issue. As the bow is straight, they have to place the anchors further away. Here the bowsprit solution is helping them so well; this way, they don't have to place the anchor too far away like it is at your boat.
Please take a close look to the below picture, that is a new Beneteau 46.1" at Miami Beach we supplied the UA27/60 + UFS10-35 right after the Miami Boat Show last week.
From a manufacturer's point of view, everything looks perfect here.
The Ultra user guide implies that a boat owner should “try to avoid anchoring in rock” and that “a trip line with a floating buoy should be used”. All good advice.
But suppose a forum member buys an Ultra anchor and anchors (presumably accidentally) in rock without a trip line. The anchor is bent on recovery because of the excessive force needed to free the anchor from the rock. There is no question of a manufacturing defect. Is this covered under warranty even though it can be argued that the user violated the user guide?
It tells you on their selection chart:
Quote:
using excessive enginepower to free the anchor might lead to deformation and void the warranty agreement.
The purpose of the “dark brown piece” is to protect the gel coat on the platform from the chain dragging over it. There are no gaps there, it is purely cosmetic. It is a factory installed standard item, including everything else in the picture, such as two bow rollers and a chain stopper.
I have two anchors now, Rockna and Fortress, and will be adding a third one soon. Still have not decided which one, hence my attention to this discussion.
Sir, I keep on looking at the picture of your boat, and there is surely something wrong there. Even if they are the factory-installed standard items, they didn't design the boat to accommodate these items. They decided to use these items after they designed that boat (you can check it with them). That boat has a bowsprit just like the new Beneteau 46.1", and they made changes to be able to put an anchor with roll-bar.
Why do you think the chain is dragging over that platform, and they had to put that "dark brown piece" to protect the gel coat? It is just because they placed that anchor too far away from the windlass due to its roll-bar doesn’t accommodate with their original bowsprit. You are calling boats with bowsprit “Poorly Designed” and I am deeply sorry to put it this way but unfortunately your whole anchor setup looks like “Poorly Designed” to me. Once again I am so sorry to put it this way.
Boats with bowsprit don't have that chain dragging over gel coat issue when they use the ULTRA. That is why once again, the ideal bow anchor shouldn’t have a roll-bar.
As I said, that's entirely arbitrary, and evidently wrong. They will obviously fit some bowsprits. Any anchor should fit the boat - that is indisputable. The Ultra likely won't fit in a traditional hawse - that doesn't make it unsuitable for all boats.
These are about the bow anchors. Traditional hawse anchors / stockless ship anchors are totally a different story.
The ideal best bow anchor shouldn’t have a roll-bar. Why did they design their other anchor without the roll-bar if it wasn’t an issue to have the one with roll-bar fit to boats with bowsprits?
Here the bowsprit solution is helping them so well; this way, they don't have to place the anchor too far away like it is at your boat.
But he is able to place a second anchor alongside the bower - that Bendytoe won't be able to. This is of course not a requirement for everyone, but may be for others. Almost everything boaty is a compromise.
On a complete tangent, I was looking through the Ultra site, but couldn't find the fluke surface area described for your anchors. What is the surface area of the fluke on your 35, for instance?
These are about the bow anchors. Traditional hawse anchors / stockless ship anchors are totally a different story.
The ideal best bow anchor shouldn’t have a roll-bar. Why did they design their other anchor without the roll-bar if it wasn’t an issue to have the one with roll-bar fit to boats with bowsprits?
Again you're making an entirely arbitrary statement. The ideal anchor fits your boat's particular arrangement and provides superior performance under all conditions, and costs next to nothing - such a beast doesn't exist, so we compromise where we are most comfortable. Everything boaty is a compromise.
The "ideal bow anchor" doesn't have a roll-bar only if that type won't fit. Mantus/Rocna et al plainly state that fit should be ensured before purchase and provide fitment guides, cardboard mock-up instructions and the like. If they fit, then they might be the ideal anchor. Roll-bar anchors fit on my bow, so that has absolutely no bearing on the suitability of that type for me. Others may have an issue, and that is why they offer other types. No one single anchor performs perfectly in all bottom types - boaty/compromise.
But he is able to place a second anchor alongside the bower - that Bendytoe won't be able to. This is of course not a requirement for everyone, but may be for others. Almost everything boaty is a compromise.
On a complete tangent, I was looking through the Ultra site, but couldn't find the fluke surface area described for your anchors. What is the surface area of the fluke on your 35, for instance?
The ULTRA digs in deeper and creates higher holding power thanks to not using a roll-bar as reported by a 4-year roll-bar anchor plus 4-year ULTRA user here in this forum today. That is why you will never need the second anchor, but if you still want to carry one on the bow. Please refer to the below picture of Fleming 58. They place the main anchor through the bowsprit so you can use it without chain dragging on the platform issue, plus you can place the second anchor you will probably not need to use at all over the bow.
The fluke surface area alone doesn't mean much. The Danforth for example has a large surface area, but it is a big problem to get it to hold on harder sea bottoms and grass so that large surface areas don't mean anything. You didn't like our characteristics, but one characteristic alone doesn't mean anything at all.
You can find the answer to your question in that study of ours.
Again you're making an entirely arbitrary statement. The ideal anchor fits your boat's particular arrangement and provides superior performance under all conditions, and costs next to nothing - such a beast doesn't exist, so we compromise where we are most comfortable. Everything boaty is a compromise.
The "ideal bow anchor" doesn't have a roll-bar only if that type won't fit. Mantus/Rocna et al plainly state that fit should be ensured before purchase and provide fitment guides, cardboard mock-up instructions and the like. If they fit, then they might be the ideal anchor. Roll-bar anchors fit on my bow, so that has absolutely no bearing on the suitability of that type for me. Others may have an issue, and that is why they offer other types. No one single anchor performs perfectly in all bottom types - boaty/compromise.
"The "ideal bow anchor" doesn't have a roll-bar only if that type won't fit."
That is our point the ideal bow anchor should fit the majority of boats.
You cannot make two best anchors. If your new design without the roll-bar is as good as the one with roll-bar, you then don't need to sell the one with roll-bar any more as the new one fits more boats.
I understand your saying, "No one single anchor performs perfectly in all bottom types - boaty/compromise." we claim that we changed it, and there is no sea bottom that another anchor does better than the ULTRA, so all you need is one ULTRA Anchor.
Once again, there was only one way to change this, which was trying to make the best anchor design without worrying about any manufacturing easiness. This is what we did and when the best anchor design features came together, our design looked so beautiful, too. Shortly the beauty of the ULTRA comes from its extremely secure design.
By far the most common reason for bending an anchor is having the anchor stuck under debris or rock. In these circumstances bending the anchor is not really the fault of the anchor, but nevertheless some anchor manufacturers will cover this type of damage.
The Ultra user guide implies that a boat owner should “try to avoid anchoring in rock” and that “a trip line with a floating buoy should be used”. All good advice.
But suppose a forum member buys an Ultra anchor and anchors (presumably accidentally) in rock without a trip line. The anchor is bent on recovery because of the excessive force needed to free the anchor from the rock. There is no question of a manufacturing defect. Is this covered under warranty even though it can be argued that the user violated the user guide?
Finally, you mention that the anchor must be returned to the original purchaser. Is another dealer acceptable? Cruising boats travel large distances and the original dealer from whom the anchor was purchased may often be many miles away, or even half way around the world.
Are delivery costs for the new anchor payable even if the anchor is returned to a dealer?
Sorry for the difficult questions, but far too many anchor manufacturers promise a great warranty, but in practice this does not work, at least for long distance cruising sailors. So forgive me for trying to nail down the specifics for forum members, but this is important, especially for an expensive anchor.
If anyone is interested in anchor warranties (and you should be if purchasing a new anchor, as there as significant differences), I started a thread a long time ago here:
These are all good questions, and thanks for asking them.
First of all, I need to note that it is so unlikely that you have a warranty issue with a correctly sized duplex shanked ULTRA.
Please see below the chain picture; they forced to recover the ULTRA once it was under a rock, and they broke their chain. You can see how the other chain links opened before it broke. That was at a Feretti 500 using our bow roller, swivel, and the anchor so that the weakest link became the chain. I shared the picture of that boat, as well. All our products, the ULTRA Anchor, ULTRA Flip Swivel, and ULTRA Bow Roller, are the strongest ones in their categories.
I can confirm that if an ULTRA Anchor owner can still bend its shank, we will see it under lifetime warranty if it is sized correctly for the boat. There will be no questions about a manufacturing defect. We will not ask any other questions but the length, type, and weight of the boat together with the size and the serial number of the ULTRA Anchor.
The purchaser will have to cover the transport costs, but it will be okay to send it to our closest distributor. Let’s say you bought the anchor from Ultra Marine West once you were in the USA, and you went to Australia and bent the anchor there. It will be okay to send that anchor to our distributor Ultra Marine Products, in Australia.
One more total endorsement of the Ultra anchor! After 8 years of almost nightly anchoring - 4 with a Rocna & now 4 with an Ultra, the difference is simply amazing! While our Rocna dragged “only” a few times, it was very distressing that it almost always set at a 10 - 20 degree angle, which made it difficult for it to continue digging in deeper. Dozens of times I had to dive down to “help it”. I would joke that it’s rollbar was really a handle to push & jump on to set it.
Not only does our Ultra bury itself like crazy, it always does so completely vertically without any tilt. Even in grass (which we obviously attempt to avoid) it will work it’s way in thru the roots while the blunt tip of the Rocna would be stopped with even a couple of roots.
Considering we anchor almost 300 nights/year, the difference in cost isn’t even a consideration.
Russ
m/v Twin Sisters
Sir, thank you so much for sharing your first-hand experiences with a roll-bar anchor and the ULTRA. These are all so inline with everything I have been trying to explain technically from the beginning; therefore, it is so supportive. Thanks again.
I can confirm that if an ULTRA Anchor owner can still bend its shank, we will see it under lifetime warranty if it is sized correctly for the boat. There will be no questions about a manufacturing defect. We will not ask any other questions but the length, type, and weight of the boat together with the size and the serial number of the ULTRA Anchor.
The purchaser will have to cover the transport costs, but it will be okay to send it to our closest distributor. Let’s say you bought the anchor from Ultra Marine West once you were in the USA, and you went to Australia and bent the anchor there. It will be okay to send that anchor to our distributor Ultra Marine Products, in Australia.
Great. Thanks for the clarification.
I think that the requirement that the anchor size should be appropriate for the boat is perfectly reasonable, but I didn’t like the suggestion that a claim may be denied because, for example, the owner did not use a trip line, or needed a lot of force to extract the anchor. I am very glad to hear that this is not the case for the Ultra anchor.
It is also helpful that the anchor can be returned to a local dealer. This is much better than returning it to the dealer where the anchor was purchased, or even worse the anchor manufacturer. Some anchor manufacturers have this requirement and it can be an expensive imposition.
If I understand correctly, if a Ultra anchor was bent the owner will be required to pay for the transport of the replacement anchor from the manufacturer in Turkey to the local dealer, as well as returning the damaged anchor to the local dealer. Is this correct?
Please note that I am not criticising any of these costs, just trying to clarify what owners can expect if they bend their anchor.
OK, this anchor has digressed into the usual "my anchor is best"... but this time from the salesperson of a manufacturer.
What I liked about Spade was when I called to get sizing info one of the questions the rep asked was what I was currently using. I responded with a "real" CQN 35 and a Fortress FX-23... and he could not say enough nice things about the Fortress anchor's performance in mud/soft surfaces, plus the company itself. I ultimately bought an A100 for a boat unit and it's been a great anchor, amazing grip for something that light and in the Puget Sound we know about tide reversal. ;^)
So when a rep thinks his anchor is best at everything for everyone in every condition, all other designs can't be as perfect... I'm sure there is a large Kool-aid container somewhere that is is looking pretty empty.
I'm now hitting 'ignore' on his marketing thread. Good luck.
So when a rep thinks his anchor is best at everything for everyone in every condition, all other designs can't be as perfect... I'm sure there is a large Kool-aid container somewhere that is is looking pretty empty.
The fluke surface area alone doesn't mean much. The Danforth for example has a large surface area,
Thank you for the document. You'll have a hard time convincing folks around here that fluke surface area means nothing. The Danforth and similar designs (read Fortress) are all-stars in soft mud. Surface area=hold.
From the document you produced, your 27Kg model has a fluke area of 1232sqcm and held to 2530kgf; from the link I posted RINA tested the 25Kg Rocna (with 1415sqcm fluke area) held to an average of 6250kgf. Of course this isn't side-by-side testing in the same substrate, but it does serve to punch a few holes in your boasts.
Linear Mode
Recent Discussions