Help me whittle down my anchors

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

It's kind of hilarious that Sarca says their Excel "is not a plough anchor." It looks like a knock-off of a Delta. Surely it's an improved version, but let's face it - it's a plough-style. That said, I think plough anchors are good complements to scoop anchors (rocna, mantus, spade, etc) as they usually perform better in certain bottoms. I notice the alloy Excel is also demountable, so one of them would make a perfect back-up to your Rocna/Danforth mix.

Based on testing (and user reports), the Excel doesn't behave like a Delta. The general shape idea is similar, but the Excel different angles, plus the flat area at the bottom. And a very different tip as well. But I do agree that appearance wise, it certainly looks like a plow to me, despite not functioning like the classic plow designs.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

It's kind of hilarious that Sarca says their Excel "is not a plough anchor." It looks like a knock-off of a Delta. Surely it's an improved version, but let's face it - it's a plough-style. That said, I think plough anchors are good complements to scoop anchors (rocna, mantus, spade, etc) as they usually perform better in certain bottoms. I notice the alloy Excel is also demountable, so one of them would make a perfect back-up to your Rocna/Danforth mix.

I initially thought the same about the Excel, until I looked at the tests and data. It's clear this anchor is radically different from the generally poorly-performing Delta.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I initially thought the same about the Excel, until I looked at the tests and data. It's clear this anchor is radically different from the generally poorly-performing Delta.

It's no doubt got improvements over the Delta, but remember the Delta is regarded as a second-generation anchor, that had generally offered improved performance over the previous generation (mostly CQR and Danforths). Yet, you'll still have CQR and Danforth fans on this here forum extolling the virtues of these. Likewise there are plenty of Delta users that have no complaints. Horses for courses.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

despite not functioning like the classic plow designs.

How does it differ in its functioning?

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

It's no doubt got improvements over the Delta, but remember the Delta is regarded as a second-generation anchor, that had generally offered improved performance over the previous generation (mostly CQR and Danforths). Yet, you'll still have CQR and Danforth fans on this here forum extolling the virtues of these. Likewise there are plenty of Delta users that have no complaints. Horses for courses.

IIRC, in the SV Panope tests the Delta has managed to put in a worse showing than the CQR. The Danforth is old tech, but in my mind, it's a separate grouping from just about every other design. It's not a general purpose anchor. It's one of those that's only good at a limited range of stuff, but for the things it's good at, it's really good (and the modern stuff isn't better).

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

It's no doubt got improvements over the Delta, but remember the Delta is regarded as a second-generation anchor, that had generally offered improved performance over the previous generation (mostly CQR and Danforths). Yet, you'll still have CQR and Danforth fans on this here forum extolling the virtues of these. Likewise there are plenty of Delta users that have no complaints. Horses for courses.

I think you need to look at the data that's available. The Delta may be a newer design, but it generally performs near the bottom of the list in most circumstances. It's greatest plus seems to be its cost and ease of fit on most existing bow rollers. The Excel, on the other hand, performs near the top in most tests.

I'm not an anchor designer, but clearly these two are quite different beasts. BWT, I own neither (although have used a Delta). I just felt I should respond to your Delta comparison because I too initially thought they were very similar. I was very wrong.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I think you need to look at the data that's available. The Delta may be a newer design, but it generally performs near the bottom of the list in most circumstances. It's greatest plus seems to be its cost and ease of fit on most existing bow rollers. The Excel, on the other hand, performs near the top in most tests.

I'm not an anchor designer, but clearly these two are quite different beasts. BWT, I own neither (although have used a Delta). I just felt I should respond to your Delta comparison because I too initially thought they were very similar. I was very wrong.

The only comparison to the Delta that I made, was that they look very similar - that's a self-evident fact. I'm not disputing the Excel is a vastly-improved take on the plough-design, but it is quite clearly a plough-style anchor.

I have never used a Delta, nor would I recommend them, but I'd characterize them as a mid-performer. In certain situations, they still outperform some modern anchors - see here where they reset faster than 3 hooped scoop anchors (incl. the other Sarca) after a 180º shift: https://www.practical-sailor.com/sai...esetting-tests

[HankOnthewater]

It is funny how threads go on after the original questions has been answered (like in this thread, post #35), but then again...... many other readers would be in a similar situation, and many other contributions might still be useful.

I don't think any poster said to keep the CQR, and the advantages of a Fortress over Danforth is just weight (and maybe being able to be taken apart).
If the OP goes to far away places and have to rely on anchors to stay put, the 20 kg Bruce might be marginal in size, and even the Rocna might be tad small as main anchor. Although both sizes would be OK for local cruising.
None of the anchors the OP has (including Danforth and CQR) are any good for a very weedy bottom.

When selecting anchors one would could use the following criteria:
- one for soft and sloppy bottoms
- one for more sandy bottom
- one for hard sand
- one for rocky/coral bottoms
- one for for sea weed
- one for kedging

When local cruising it is likely that not all these bottoms are present close to the homeport, therefore less anchors are needed. Of course if one anchor is suitable for several substrates (what a nice word) than so much better, saves on weight and storage.

On my previous boat I had 4 anchors, and the largest was an admiralty anchor, that I never used (except just to play with it). On my current boat I have three: a concave (scoop), a convex anchor (both suitable as main anchors) and a Fortress.
Both the main anchors on the bow, ready to deploy, Fortress in locker.
One main anchor all chain, the other 20 mt of chain and the rest nylon rode, Fortress has 5 mt of chain.

[Paradox111]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJnYRwZsieI

[Paradox111]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smgWTtFuk3U&t=69s

[Paradox111]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyRmRxxP_CQ&t=8s

[Marathon1150]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Given that I carry four anchors, I don't think you have too many. In fact, my compliment mirrors your to the 3/4 mark. I have a Rocna (25kg) a Bruce (20kg), a large Danforth (not sure the weight, but big) and an overly-large Fortress (FX-37).

Given this, I ditch your CQR but replace it with a large, collapsible anchor.

This sounds right to me - particularly getting rid of the CQR and replacing it with something that can be collapsed.

[Jim Cate]

Drift warning!

This thread has been around for a while now, so I've seen it numerous times... and every time I see the title I get a picture of the OP sitting on a wharf with an anchor on his lap and a pocket knife in his hand, looking at the now ragged knife edge and saying "whittling anchors ain't such a great idea after all"!

Ann says that I have a weird imagination...

Jim

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by sailingunity

I've heard great things about Excel's, but I've heard some accounts of Excel's being tripped by the chain on reversing currents. Has this ever happened to you? Supposedly if the anchor doesn't set deep enough for the flukes (or one of the flukes, if it sets sideways) to be completely buried, the chain gets caught on the edge and pulls it out. The roll bar anchors would seemed to be less prone to this as the bar would help guide the chain over the edge of the anchor.

I'm very interested in Viking and the performance numbers SV Panope has logged for it, but it's such a new company / design and very few accounts from people out there using them.

No, never had a problem as you described, I have had it drag once, but to be fair the bottom mud was so thin that it was hard to tell where the water finished and mud began.

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

It's kind of hilarious that Sarca says their Excel "is not a plough anchor." It looks like a knock-off of a Delta. Surely it's an improved version, but let's face it - it's a plough-style. That said, I think plough anchors are good complements to scoop anchors (rocna, mantus, spade, etc) as they usually perform better in certain bottoms. I notice the alloy Excel is also demountable, so one of them would make a perfect back-up to your Rocna/Danforth mix.

Tried the Rocna on my boat, proved to be an expensive mistake, the Excell has proven to be a far superior product.