How'd You Pick Your Anchor ?

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by kb79

it's interesting to see how many people just kept what's on the boat by default...

assuming people aren't lazy or too dumb to know the difference, i wonder if that points to there being less of a difference between all these anchor types than we really want to admit?

Possibly - I don't know, I've never used one of the newer designs.

But my old design anchor drags on so few occasions that I don't see the point in replacing it.

It's not the end of the world if an anchor drags every now and then.

[Delfin]

One of the problems with anchor tests is that they are frequently incomplete. It's pretty hard to beat a Bruce style in heavier sizes, but if all you need is 30 - 50 pounds, there are better choices, especially in newer styles like the Rocna. I used a 35# CQR for awhile, but it lived up to its name by routinely plowing rather than setting. We sailed the Pacific on a 44# Bruce, and it only dragged once, but once is all that sometimes matters. Now, having gone over to the dark side, we use a 176# Bruce on 1/2" chain, and I have ridden full gales without budging. Bottom line, I don't trust anchor tests unless they are the exact size I am thinking about.

[maxingout]

I ended up choosing a Beugel anchor after cruising with Germans and South Africans in New Caledonia. All three yachts had Beugels that instantly held on the hard coral bottoms, while I relentlessly fought anchor battles with my 60lb CQR in the same location. By the end of one month in New Caledonia, I was convinced. I got a Beugel anchor and have never looked back. Totally awesome anchor for my Privilege 39 catamaran.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by bewitched

It's not the end of the world if an anchor drags every now and then.

Quite so, but it can (and has been) the end of ones boat, of ones cruise, and, less often,ones life.

Cheers,

Jim

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Quite so, but it can (and has been) the end of ones boat, of ones cruise, and, less often,ones life.

Cheers,

Jim

True - and I appreciate where you are coming from - but the same argument could be applied to rigging, sea-cocks, engines, weathered jack lines etc etc etc.. And if I were to have all the newest, highest rated pieces of equipment on my boat, I simply could never afford the boat...so I make a compromise.

I don't think any anchor manufacturer could ever claim the "this anchor will not drag". So dragging is inevitable at some point and if your own anchor drags more than you find acceptable (and this will vary from person to person), then you should consider changing it.

But if it drags very rarely, and you employ additional measures to reduce the risk of loosing your boat (anchor alarms, don't leave the boat when expecting bad weather etc), Then I believe that you have mitigated the risk to acceptable levels (or at least acceptable to me)

I don't think one can ever say "I have an X type anchor, so my boat is safe"

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by bewitched

It's not the end of the world if an anchor drags every now and then.

So, to move forward on the OP, Lets say on the basis of this thread that the #1 decision process is people "just keep the anchor that came with the boat".

Then the question is when would they switch/change that anchor?

For us there have been two answers: we were forced to once when our main anchor was broken (by a regalvanizer). I imagine that so rare as not to count in any decision process ranking.

But we have switched by choice 2 1/2 times . . . when the anchor we had dragging three times in a short period of time (a month or two). We don't react when we drag once - figuring that's just a really really bad bottom or we screwed up in the anchor setting; and even after two drags (in a short period) we get a little nervous and start being extra careful about setting but still stick with the anchor. But after three drags we just simply loose faith in the anchor - and it is a complete break if people are holding around us while we are dragging. This is an emotional thing not, like most 'faith', and is not really susceptible to analysis.

But 3 drags in a short time period (a couple months perhaps) is our break point. That's happened to us three times now. With the too light cqr that originally came with Silk, with the locally made anchor we got in Chile when our Bruce broke and with the rocna in South Georgia. The second two incidents really surprised me because, despite Craig's feelings, I had fully bought into the 'next generation' hype. Beth would chuck the rocna out today, but I consider the kelp (And other things) in south georgia extraordinary and am willing to give it another chance. But that get's us off track . . .

For the thread there are two interesting questions:

1. how many/frequency of drags is enough for other people to 'lose Faith' and buy a new anchor?

and

2. is there another common reason people switch from the anchor the already have other than dragging? . . . how many people do 'an upgrade' while still having had perfect experience with the current anchor?

[Healer52]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

So, to move forward on the OP, Lets say on the basis of this thread that the #1 decision process is people "just keep the anchor that came with the boat".

Then the question is when would they switch/change that anchor?

For us there have been two answers: we were forced to once when our main anchor was broken (by a regalvanizer). I imagine that so rare as not to count in any decision process ranking.

But we have switched by choice 2 1/2 times . . . when the anchor we had dragging three times in a short period of time (a month or two). We don't react when we drag once - figuring that's just a really really bad bottom or we screwed up in the anchor setting; and even after two drags (in a short period) we get a little nervous and start being extra careful about setting but still stick with the anchor. But after three drags we just simply loose faith in the anchor - and it is a complete break if people are holding around us while we are dragging. This is an emotional thing not, like most 'faith', and is not really susceptible to analysis.

But 3 drags in a short time period (a couple months perhaps) is our break point. That's happened to us three times now. With the too light cqr that originally came with Silk, with the locally made anchor we got in Chile when our Bruce broke and with the rocna in South Georgia. The second two incidents really surprised me because, despite Craig's feelings, I had fully bought into the 'next generation' hype. Beth would chuck the rocna out today, but I consider the kelp (And other things) in south georgia extraordinary and am willing to give it another chance. But that get's us off track . . .

For the thread there are two interesting questions:

1. how many/frequency of drags is enough for other people to 'lose Faith' and buy a new anchor?

and

2. is there another common reason people switch from the anchor the already have other than dragging? . . . how many people do 'an upgrade' while still having had perfect experience with the current anchor?

Thanks for a cogent discussion.

If you were to replace the Rocna, what would you replace it with?

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Healer52

Thanks for a cogent discussion.

If you were to replace the Rocna, what would you replace it with?

Replied by pm to try to keep the thread focused on anchor decision making rather taling about specific anchor designs.

[Hiracer]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Beth would chuck the rocna out today, but I consider the kelp (And other things) in south georgia extraordinary and am willing to give it another chance.

I don't think experience in kelp is particularly relevent, so I agree with you. Kelp can be pulled off the rocks and when that happens it's not the anchor's fault that the kelp let go.

I am fortunate to be able to avoid anchoring in kelp by going somewhere else (here and in Alaska). Kelp is not a trust worthy anchoring medium IMO.

OTOH, if there is no alternative to kelp in many southern high latitude anchorages, then I don't know what anchor would be best, perhaps a fisherman or Bruce. I know you had good experiences with your late Bruce. But seems that tying to shore is the real answer.

On topic: I had fantastic experiences with the Max and SuperMax. In fact was able to weather a storm in a spot where local knowledge said the bottom was too soupy to hold, but the anchor burrowed about 15 - 20 feet deep and found denser mud.

But I lost faith when that anchor failed me in perfect shallow conditions in sand. Discussions with Andy P uncovered that that anchor will not perform well if too much scope is laid out, which I had done. Plus, it's one of those anchors that can give the illusion of holding while scoping up a rock and then drag slowly when the wind pipes up. The Bruce can do that too. Never could figure out exactly what was the reason for that draggging (too much scope or scooped up rock) but I lost faith in the scoop design (Max and Bruce) and switched after just one incident of dragging, probably because I came periously close to losing the boat that one time. Thereafter on next boat could not fit Rocna on the bow, so went with Spade. It does not like rock (big surprise, not) and I've had kelp give way. Nor does it handle short scope as well as the Max. But otherwise has been great. Like Eastwood famously said, "A man's got to know his anchor's limitations."

Unanswered question I have is whether in kelp a fisherman is the best answer, assuming alternate anchorage is not available. If the fisherman is big enough, can it find bottom underneath the kelp? My limit experience is that the Spade. Max, and CQR certainly don't. Maybe the answer is to stay in the tropics.

FWIW, I have purchased two boats, and soon after purchase switched out anchors for both boats: First from a CQR to the Max, and second from a fake Bruce to the Spade. I carry four anchors on board, lust after a Paul Luke, and don't admit that I have a problem.

[Hiracer]

Originally Posted by bewitched

It's not the end of the world if an anchor drags every now and then.

Totally fortuitously woke up one morning O'dark hundred to pee outside (just to check) and found unforecasted 20 knot wind (downdraft from glacier 10 miles away) had pushed us just shy of shore. Had a heart attack, as had literally less than a minute to get the boat off lee shore before the keel or rudder was going to be slammed onto the bottom. Boat was hopping backward about 4 inches with each wave. Still am amazed we didn't bottom out before I got the boat moving (in my underwear).

Disagree, violently so.

[Hiracer]

Originally Posted by Delfin

I don't trust anchor tests unless they are the exact size I am thinking about.

I had a 15 pound fake Bruce for a motor boat. Never, repeat, never was able to get it to set. Not even once.

Later used a 44 pound fake Bruce for most of one summer and it worked great.

Agree, anchor performance does NOT necessarily scale down in size.

[Hiracer]

Originally Posted by SkiprJohn

I have a 65lb real CQR that cost me $100

$225 for second hand 66# steel Spade. Found while searching for spinnaker pole.

Took nearly 2 more years to find that used spinnaker pole.

[Hiracer]

Originally Posted by kb79

I'm curious as to why so few people seem to have "new age" anchors. My "survey" (read: walk down the dock from the gate to our slip) indicates a few surprising things - in my mind anyway - about people's primary anchors.

If the operator is up to it, the older designs still work, same as they always did. The new ones work better, but that is not so say that suddenly the old ones no longer work.

Ergo, in the mind of many sailors there is no compelling reason to switch out. I think that is, by and large, a defensible proposition. Not one with which I can agree for my purposes, but defensible nonetheless.

BTY, I still have the el cheapo chartplotter that came with the boat.

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by Hiracer

Totally fortuitously woke up one morning O'dark hundred to pee outside (just to check) and found unforecasted 20 knot wind (downdraft from glacier 10 miles away) had pushed us just shy of shore. Had a heart attack, as had literally less than a minute to get the boat off lee shore before the keel or rudder was going to be slammed onto the bottom. Boat was hopping backward about 4 inches with each wave. Still am amazed we didn't bottom out before I got the boat moving (in my underwear).

Disagree, violently so.

This is where we differ - I would never trust my anchor (or any anchor) to be 100% reliable. I would expect it to drag at some point.

So I habitually set an anchor alarm to wake me up when it does drag - which to my mind is an inevitability, regardless of anchor type.

All anchors drag, some may drag less than others of a given size with a given bottom type and so may be more suitable for a given area. But if your boat came with X type anchor and it works better than 99% of the time. Why change it? All you will be gaining is a very small fraction of a percent in performance.

I think this is why you see so many older designs on some boats that are obviously cruised extensively. Despite all the negative reviews they have, they're actually not all that bad.

[sailingaway221]

I am sure a lot of people are never really in a situation to truly test their anchor. Look at the guys and gals that have gone around the world.... the boat is thrashed but theres always a couple of really big different design anchors on the bow rollers.

For me I fell in love with my oversized Rocna... has not failed me yet..... yet...... yet..... who's a good anchor. I find if you talk to them they are better behaved, also I tip my anchor after every goon nights sleep!