How'd You Pick Your Anchor ?

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by craigsmith

If we're honest neither sets particularly well - the substrate isn't as wet as ideal and load is applied immediately - although the Rocna as expected does a lot better (as the guy points out, listen to the engine tone of the pull vehicle). In any case even without anything like secure sets and therefore relatively no resistance to speak of, I like these because they show how the chain goes almost completely straight. Sorry for the off-topic.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you are saying about chain. Are you saying more/less/mixed; can you explain some more?

[craigsmith]

Just that the benefits of catenary and hence heavy chain (and lots of it) is largely a myth, w.r.t. the performance of the anchor. The sort of statement I was addressing annoys me as it's patently wrong.
Rode optimizations (Rocna Knowledge Base)
Scope vs catenary (Rocna Knowledge Base)

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by craigsmith

Just that the benefits of catenary and hence heavy chain (and lots of it) is largely a myth, w.r.t. the performance of the anchor. The sort of statement I was addressing annoys me as it's patently wrong.
Rode optimizations (Rocna Knowledge Base)
Scope vs catenary (Rocna Knowledge Base)

This in my opinion is somewhat misleading. Your post addresses catenary issues which I do agree with but your reference "Rode optimizations" suggest the benefits of nylon for stretch and strength. It also mentions polyester with another pointer to ropes which I did not read and if there was something important there, it should have been presented in the discussion of rode optimizations.

Nylon has well understood limitations of chafing....as does polyester but polyester has better chafe resistance. Nylon suffers from internal heating that can cause failure when repeatedly load stressed. The heating cause by loads can occur anywhere in the line, not just in chocks or cleats. But the heating in chocks where line stresses and sometimes sharp angles under high stresses is even worse.

A Google search will give many examples of documented failures of this nature.

So chain should not be preferred because of catenary effects! But chain does not have the failure modes found in nylon or other fiber material rodes. Polyester is much better than nylon but again, it is not as good as chain. I am with the group that recommends all chain rodes if possible.

Foggy

[mrohr]

Had most every type,most work well in sand with the danforths exceptional if they do not need to reset. CQR type will hold well IF you can get them to bury them selves roblem they may seem dug in , but may only be partially so and then drag when the wind pipes up. All will drag if scope is insufficient.
IMHO one of the hghest acts of seamanship is to anchor and depart under sail alone and this is where the danforth type and the ronca/manson type have an advantage :very positive digging in with little sliding along the bottom so less need to power up and back down on the anchor to make sure all is set. This is a skill that will save your bacon sooner or later.

[Roaring Girl]

How did we choose - well like most people we started with what came wiht the boat which was a 60lb CQR primary, 50lb CQR secondary and a heavy danforth for stern/kedge.

We still have all those anchors but the primary is now a 55lb rocna. The CQR, haivng done fine in mud, was really struggling with much deeper anchorages (20m plus) and with the thick weed you find in parts of teh Med. We havered a bit between a spade and rocna, partly on price but also just reading lots of different reviews. In the end some pals with a lot of experience in Scottish weed said their rocna had done really well in those conditions, and that decided us for the rocna.

We also have a 25lb fisherman's anchor, bought cheap in Port Napoleon. We've not used it, but it's another back up for those cirucmstnaces where (heaven forbid) we want four anchors out or are in a very rocky bottom where that might do best.

Of course the question does need to encompass the whole system - ie rode, windlass etc which is why the thread drift. Our primary anchor has 80m of 10mm chain, and the secondary has 10m chain and then 40m of 18mm rope. The stern anchor has 10m chain (probably too much) and then 40m of rope again.

[marshmat]

Originally Posted by kb79

I'm curious as to why so few people seem to have "new age" anchors.

IMHO, the main factors here are cost and the "my old one usually works OK" factor. The four-figure price tags on some "new gen" anchors are daunting, to say the least, especially given the remarkably shoddy lamination and welding I saw on one (extremely expensive) example recently.

1. A lot of people have Bruce's. Everything I've heard or read leads me to believe it's a poor choice. Why do people still buy them when they do so badly compared to almost everything else on those performance tests?

The Bruce's shape lends itself to simple (cheap) casting. I'd guess that something like 75% of the Bruce-style anchors I've seen are shoddy, porous third-rate castings from generic manufacturers. The original Bruce had a pretty good reputation, but it was just too hard for the average buyer to tell the real thing from the bad knockoffs.

3. There are virtually no Rocnas, Mansons, Ultras or other "new age" anchors. I get that they're expensive, but plenty of those Bruce boats have $3500 chartplotters... I just don't believe that expense is the main reason.

At least in my part of the world, the vast majority of yachts spend most of their time at the dock. Anchoring out is typically a nice-weather activity, done for perhaps a couple of days at a time. (You can always tell the one serious cruiser in the group by his 3x oversize anchor!) If the CQR sets OK in the local bottom conditions and holds in 20 knots, people won't feel the need to upgrade to something better- not when there are flashier, more exciting things to spend the money on.

I'm not trying to start a fight about anchor designs. I'm just wondering if there's something I'm missing that people consider when making their choices.

"It came with the boat" is a big one. The theory being, the builder makes/sells these, he should know what works well for them. It's an incorrect assumption, but a common one. When it comes time to replace or upgrade, "My neighbour has this one and it works OK for him" is a common factor, and of course the cheap generic anchors look pretty appealing on the chandler's shelf with their price tags hanging right beside those of the Rocnas.

I cruise in rather small boats and in relatively protected conditions. A generic Danforth lunch hook is the current choice- I don't like the thing, but it works just well enough that I can't justify replacing it.

I would rather have a Rocna, and will be on the lookout for it or something similar to fit on the new boat. (High holding power for low weight will be important, as we won't have a power windlass.) It's too bad they're so expensive.

[Tom Spohn]

I was influenced by a 1995 study made in Puget Sound of various anchor's performance. (No longer on the net) Based on that I use a fortress for mud and a Davis Talon for weeds or gravel. Rock is never a issue here. I have many friends that swear by their Bruce anchors and the ones that I have seen that work fairly well are always two or three sizes larger than recommended with all chain rodes. On a recent trip to Desolation Sound my buddy tried 4 times to set his bruce in mixed mud and gravel and got no set at all. When his windlass gave out on the fourth try I set my Fortress 16 (10 lbs.!) on the first try and we rafted not only that night but for the week after. Admitedly there was no huge wind or current and we were stern tied but the experience did not make me want to rush out and get a Bruce. Oh yes my buddy's is oversized with all chain rode.

[Islandmike]

Before leaving on our trip South I researched the hell out of anchors and came to the conclusion that the Rocna/Manson was going to be the best for our 30,000 lb sailboat. We also have 300 feet of 3/8 HT chain, (overkill? maybe) but we have never dragged in many gales and one named storm. Without a doubt the $700 we spent on the 60 lb Manson Supreme is some of the best money we have spent. I want to be able to sleep at night....I also have a CQR that came with the boat, never use it.

[zeehag]

thought we werent spozed to have the great debate yet again---we were hanging well until someone invited the pusher of the brand new expensive rocna--was spozed to be a where did you find your anchor thread ., now is a great debate thread. the kind of anchor is irrelevant in this thread. we donot neeed this debate any longer. is ridiculous. we can play at being 3 yrs old and fighting over our toys elsewhere. the vendor and the following testamonials are inapropriate in this thread. just my humble opinion. we donot need to be attacked by someone who inappropriately enters into a debate we were not having, per orders of mods?? i donot understand why this is allowed to happen when was warned in advance wouldnt be.

[Ex-Calif]

Well that didn't take long - as usual.

Here are a couple of guidelines -

- We don't "exclude" anyone from newbie to "boat God" posting on threads.
- We insists there are no personal attacks. This means challenges to someone's credibility and experience have a narrow area of discovery.
- You can relate you experience and you really need to understand that with all the variability in weather conditions, anchor setup, bottom conditions, tide and current conditions that each experience can and might be different with the same or different anchors.

If you really don't want to rehash anchoring, please, please don't read this thread.

But to state the thread is off-topic for boating and shouldn't be discussed is not appropriate. We get 10-20 new members a day and almost every topic is going to be rehashed over and over.

The OP asked specifically "How did you Pick your anchor" - certainly a bit of a different question than which anchor is best but there will be some thread drift and we will tolerate some thread drift as we do in all threads.

If you are happy with your anchor choice and really don't want to "hash" it out please go read something else.

In the meantime play nice.

Thanks everyone.

[Stillraining]

I bought the boat I wanted and it was attached to it..

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by fishwife

My favorite moan when I see flash boats with an inadequate rode (IMHO) but I've never been brave enough to start yet another anchor thread



P.

Very subtle

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by Stillraining

I bought the boat I wanted and it was attached to it..

I chose two anchors that way. I'm pleased with both though I've only used the one

[Sabbatical II]

Originally Posted by Eleebana

How did I pick my anchor?

Easy! I searched numerous forums and independant anchor tests for my new and yet to be launched boat and sought as many opinions as possible. Conclusion was a Rocna 33kg primary & a Rocna 25kg secondary

Ooops, just changed my mind because I've read another "independant" report, this one coming down in favour of the Manson Ray. I've ordered the 40kg Manson Ray today and already have the 25kg Rocna as a back-up. Any opinions on how this will go for a 12.5m boat that will displace about 15t loaded? Too late anyway, I've done the deal. Cost $1500 (Aus) although I could have got a knock off for about half that.

Greg

[craigsmith]

Greg if you mean the travesty by Evans Starzinger or as re-published by Practical Sailor I for one could rip that 'test' to shreds. The testing, I hate to use the word, itself is so flawed as to be absolutely useless and I believe betrays a strong bias from Evans in favor of his long used Bruce types. The Manson Ray is a Bruce knock-off, and in the opinion of Peter and myself a fairly poor example. The Bruce is designed for casting and the compromises Manson make to fabricate it just cause heads to shake down this way. Something's very wrong when the Rocna is a back up and the Bruce knock-off is the primary but I guess it could be worse.