How good is the Rocna?

[a64pilot]

Well if you want your anchor to shed mud, polish it, that will make it shed mud likely better than anything.
You won't find me polishing either my anchor or Solar panels though, I have yet to polish the boats hull
There is no best anchor, I thought we had established that years ago?
For instance I still want a Fortress when I can find one at a good price, until then I will have to live with my Danforth quick set.
I conceded there are times the Fortress is superior to my Rocna's, neither has let me down yet, but I am sure that day is coming. I'm the guy that believes if I anchor enough, eventually I will find an instance the anchor will first appear to be set, but then will let me down.


Sent from my iPad Pro using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[boatman61]

As good as the person using it..

[cortezsailor]

I agree with Boatman61, when I used a CQR and / or Bruce , technique and know how played a big part of setting the anchor properly. That being said I will now contradict myself. I switched this past spring to a Rocna, I went with a 33 which really is my storm anchor as well, I have a Corbin 39. This damn thing sets instantly, I'm actually amazed so far. Ive used it in sand and mud mostly. Last week I anchored with a Fraser 42 rafted up to us, it has a displacement of 26 000 lbs, we experienced 25 knots winds over 10 hours and never once did the anchor budge. I'm convinced the Rocna is a better anchor then a CQR or Bruce for sand and mud. I still keep a Bruce on hand but have no decided on a full time back up anchor as of yet

[Hudson Force]

My first primary anchor was a Danforth and it did me well, but later I kept a North-Hill as my primary anchor and I liked it. For a few years after that my primary anchor was a CQR. For many years I trusted my HarborFast Hi-Blade as my primary and I thought it was the best ever. I spent about five years with a Bruce as my primary,- no problems. For the last couple of years my primary anchor has been a Mantus and I'm very pleased with it.

I've never had a Rocna or a Mason or a Delta or a Fortress, but if I did, I bet I could make them work for me and I'd be pleased with them too!

These are anchors. You use them all with care to set them well and you always remain prepared to act if they drag. They're not magic,- you just use them well and remain a little suspicious.

[DocBrauer]

This is primarily a response to problems galvanizing a spade anchor. Mine is a 70 pound. Yes I know they don't make that size. It was a 66. When they galvanized it the lead melted out. They welded shut the holes and filled the cavity up with zinc. Covered over the bolt used to disassemble. No problem for me as I didn't do anyway. Looks and works great.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Hudson Force

My first primary anchor was a Danforth and it did me well, but later I kept a North-Hill as my primary anchor and I liked it. For a few years after that my primary anchor was a CQR. For many years I trusted my HarborFast Hi-Blade as my primary and I thought it was the best ever. I spent about five years with a Bruce as my primary,- no problems. For the last couple of years my primary anchor has been a Mantus and I'm very pleased with it.

I've never had a Rocna or a Mason or a Delta or a Fortress, but if I did, I bet I could make them work for me and I'd be pleased with them too!

These are anchors. You use them all with care to set them well and you always remain prepared to act if they drag. They're not magic,- you just use them well and remain a little suspicious.

What Hudson says .

I have a Rocna and like it very much. I think it is a better bower anchor than my previous CQR/Danforth bower combination, but no anchor will just magically work. Proper technique and use are as important, or more important, than the choice of which pointy metal thing you hang off your bow.

[pdenton]

Hudson's claim that all anchors are equal is an amusing insight. He claims that the apparent differences among anchors is an illusion which can be dispelled by learning the sophisticated techniques that only he possesses.
One wonders, if all anchors are the same, why has he used different ones.
Perhaps it is not a question of physics, but of aesthetics.
Since so many of us do not have his skill, he should explain in detail just what techniques the rest of us are missing.
pdenton

[LakeSuperior]

To all anchor manufacturers, integration of an alternative non-stick coating on the anchor may reduce mud sticking to the zinc.

This would help in mud on a reset if the above testimonies are true and it would help make cleaning the anchor easier when pulling up.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by pdenton

Hudson's claim that all anchors are equal is an amusing insight. He claims that the apparent differences among anchors is an illusion which can be dispelled by learning the sophisticated techniques that only he possesses.
One wonders, if all anchors are the same, why has he used different ones.
Perhaps it is not a question of physics, but of aesthetics.
Since so many of us do not have his skill, he should explain in detail just what techniques the rest of us are missing.
pdenton

No, that is not what he said, that is what you think he said.
Way I interpreted what he said was that boats were successfully anchoring long before these new generation anchors came into existence, that given just about any anchor, with experience you will adapt to it.

Myself, until I bought a sailboat, I was a died in the wool Danforth believer, if it didn't hold, well it must be a bad holding bottom, not my anchor. I'd move and find a place it would "hook".

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by pdenton

Hudson's claim that all anchors are equal is an amusing insight. He claims that the apparent differences among anchors is an illusion which can be dispelled by learning the sophisticated techniques that only he possesses.
One wonders, if all anchors are the same, why has he used different ones.
Perhaps it is not a question of physics, but of aesthetics.
Since so many of us do not have his skill, he should explain in detail just what techniques the rest of us are missing.
pdenton

You should try reading a bit more carefully before firing from the lip.

[Steadman Uhlich]

Originally Posted by pdenton

Hudson's claim that all anchors are equal is an amusing insight. He claims that the apparent differences among anchors is an illusion which can be dispelled by learning the sophisticated techniques that only he possesses.
One wonders, if all anchors are the same, why has he used different ones.
Perhaps it is not a question of physics, but of aesthetics.
Since so many of us do not have his skill, he should explain in detail just what techniques the rest of us are missing.
pdenton

I think you are mischaracterizing or have misinterpreted Hudson Forces's post above, and have done so in a way that sounds rude too.

As I see it, his post is about not expecting an anchor to "magically" be perfectly safe, or foolproof, and that there will always be a need for some caution on the part of the sailor. That is prudence or wisdom.

And his post points out that each generation has a new design that supercedes the previous "best" and so we use what is the best available at the time, as he has done.

But, even using the best available design, the wise sailor should use best practices too (selecting the anchorage, setting the hook, protecting against chafe, allowing for swing, etc.).

As I see it, Hudson Force's post said it clearly, and with wisdom.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by LakeSuperior

To all anchor manufacturers, integration of an alternative non-stick coating on the anchor may reduce mud sticking to the zinc.

This would help in mud on a reset if the above testimonies are true and it would help make cleaning the anchor easier when pulling up.

Answer: Stainless steel 316. It's already available by Ultra, Delta, and many others.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_grade_stainless

[LakeSuperior]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Answer: Stainless steel 316. It's already available by Ultra, Delta, and many others.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_grade_stainless

A little pricey for most folks. A coating would also work perhaps better and cost less.

[chris95040]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Answer: Stainless steel 316. It's already available by Ultra, Delta, and many others.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_grade_stainless

I've never had a stainless anchor, does it really seem to come up cleaner? Makes sense.

I wonder if something like a Spade's yellow paint job were actually faired and smooth, would it help mud slide off, too?

I know some have experienced mud sticking on Rocnas, possibly throwing off the weight and preventing reset (in severe, underscoped examples), I wonder, would a smooth paint job on the inside of the fluke help? I know mine comes up with serious globs of mud stuck there *every* *time*, and it takes a while to get it off with the hose...

Anyways, just spitballin'...

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by chris95040

I've never had a stainless anchor, does it really seem to come up cleaner? Makes sense.

I wonder if something like a Spade's yellow paint job were actually faired and smooth, would it help mud slide off, too?

I know some have experienced mud sticking on Rocnas, possibly throwing off the weight and preventing reset (in severe, underscoped examples), I wonder, would a smooth paint job on the inside of the fluke help? I know mine comes up with serious globs of mud stuck there *every* *time*, and it takes a while to get it off with the hose...

Anyways, just spitballin'...

Here's what an Ultra 45kg with an Ultra swivel looks like after four seasons of use (600 days dug into the bottom). Does Rocna offer a stainless? It would definitely come up cleaner than our old galvanized Rocna did.