Manson Supreme in Weed

[JonJo]

It would be interesting to see how a new Manson Boss performs, anywhere!

Its been around for many months, I've not yet seen a comparative review - any links?

[gettinthere]

Cuttyhunk has weeds in the shallower spots, 10'. We got a good set at first with our Supreme. Then throttled up full and pulled up a giant weed ball. Without powering up we would not have known. Deeper water had no weeds. Scary watching boats anchor upwind of us in the weeds, luckily the wind did not pipe up.
No anchor is perfect.

[foggysail]

AAHHhhhh CUTYHUNK! I know it well.......and yes, ell grass prevails!

I'll share my experience at Cutty both inside and outside the harbor. Years before ell grass, my old trusty Bruce 33 & 44# anchors worked well. After weeds, forget it. Next I graduated to a 55# Delta for my 40' Silverton aftcabin. Now the Delta worked inside Cutty harbor but failed miserably over at Vineyard Haven. I thought the answer was just a larger, heavier Delta. I purchased an 88# Delta and anxiously set it inside Lagoon Pond at Vineyard haven.

That sucker held well........until about 3AM, the only time I find that anchors seem to fail. Great experience! Scream wind between 15-20 and we had to find a mooring. I GAVE UP ON DELTA.

If anyone in the Massachusetts area is interested I have an almost unused Delta 88# along with a Bruce 33# I can sell right.

OK, enough of that nonsense. I got smart and purchased an 80# Manson Supreme. My rode through these exercises was 5/16 HT chain pulled with a Maxwell HWC2400 windless operated from 24vdc.

My Manson has held every place it was dropped using a scope 5-6. One night inside Cutty harbor last summer a front came through. The rain was horizontal, couild not see outside at all. My guess is the wind was in excess of 50K. I was afraid we were slipping because of the wind. I check my GPS which I always leave on (just dim the screen to conserve power). The boat had made almost a perfect circle on the GPS display.

As Noelex remarked about size, size is important. I can strongly vouch for my 80# Manson Supreme to be one fine reliable anchor. I sleep well at night!

Foggy

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

...
There is also a "scale effect". Anchor manufacturers would like you to believe large and small anchors of the same design on appropriately sized boats will perform identically. With weed this is not the case. The weed roots do not change size. A large heavy anchor on a large boat will cut through weed that a smaller lighter anchor of the same design on the smaller boat will not penetrate.

...

Absolutely, when I am running charters aboard larger vessels this "scale effect" is very noticeable. Ran a charter last week aboard a Lagoon 50 which had about a 110lb Delta and it rocked in weeds. Dove down to check it and it was well buried. I've anchored in the same spot in smaller vessels with lighter anchors and was glad the wind did not pick up. Big difference in weed performance when the weight goes up. In my experience this applies across anchor types.

[cwyckham]

Originally Posted by Livia

The only time we had problems setting our Manson Supreme was on a thick kelp covered bottom. We moved over a bit and found less kelp and set fine. Our old CQR which we no longer have had problems in kelp as well. Seems a trick set for any anchor and I would guess the sharp tip on our Supreme helps.

Kelp anchors itself to rock on the bottom. It may not have been the kelp causing issues, but rather the fact you were trying to anchor on rock!

[JonJo]

I identify a common theme in many of these threads. People upgrade their anchors from, say a 15kg CQR, Delta or Bruce, to a 20kg modern anchor. They are then supremely, no pun intnended (but it is the theme of the thread) happy. It is always difficult to tell if their satisfaction is becuase they upsized or got a better anchor.

The whole basis of the newer designs is that, in theory, you should be able to downsize (or at least keep the same size). Evidence suggests people do the opposite.

[Bash]

Originally Posted by cwyckham

Kelp anchors itself to rock on the bottom. It may not have been the kelp causing issues, but rather the fact you were trying to anchor on rock!

This little bit of natural history is 100% true, and should be familiar to all who cruise. Where there is kelp, there is rock, regardless of whether you're talking bull kelp, macrocystis, strap kelp, et cetera. Kelp holdfasts need rock to anchor the stipe. Kelp NEVER anchors in sand or mud--it's physiologically impossible.

[Cotemar]

We anchor inside Cuttyhunk all the time. Never anchor in the grass in the NE corner.
Was there in a 12 hour blow (48 knots) one night and all the trimarans that anchored in the grass NE corner broke loose. What a mess. We stayed put with the Rocna, but boats where passing us at 10 knots backwards. You could actually smell fiberglass in the air from all the collisions. That was one of the saddest boating days of my life seeing all the damaged boats up against the coast guard building pilings. Will never forget those sad images and smells.

[foggysail]

I anchor more toward the NW corner to stay out of the fray. A few years ago, we had a mooring that bordered on what is called Harvey's Hump. That is the shallow just west of the mooring field. But that entire area should not be ruled out to anchor. With my old Hunter 30, we use to take it far west in the harbor, almost to the rocky shore.

It is shallow there, the Hunter drew 5 1/2'. I made sure to always enter when the tide was no lower than mid tide, drop the anchor and really enjoy privacy. At moon low tides there sometimes was 3-4" of water line showing. The only potential problem was if the wind shifted because the keel just buried itself into the mud. Of course, you had to plan the time you needed to leave also.

If you ever see us at anchor, stop over, say hello. The boat is entirely enclosed, has a davit crane on the bow for the dinghy and the name is Mary Ellen's Chambers

Foggy

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by JonJo

I identify a common theme in many of these threads. People upgrade their anchors from, say a 15kg CQR, Delta or Bruce, to a 20kg modern anchor. They are then supremely, no pun intnended (but it is the theme of the thread) happy. It is always difficult to tell if their satisfaction is becuase they upsized or got a better anchor.

JonJo-- I don't want to get into whose anchor is better. But you above mentioned some upgrade their anchor from a 15 older style to a 20 newer stye. Sure, that is not apples to apples.... I do agree.

But in my case, I had a brand spanking new 88# Delta purchase from Defender...I drove there to pick it up. I down sized...not by much but my Manson Supreme is only 80#. One anchor worked, one anchor did not. And it was not the heavier one that worked in my case.

Foggy

[svmariane]

Just stumbled across this.

"Laugh! Laugh at the giant Manson Boss Anchor."

Laugh at the giant Manson Boss Anchor. | Sundowner Sails Again

Sorry, but somebody DID mention the Boss!

And here I was thinking about getting a 100 pounder for Mariane... Until I showed the pictures of that 60 pounder to my wife.

[JonJo]

Foggysail,

My comments were in no way focussed at anything you said - I was generalising. You have done what we did, we had a brand name CQR copy, 40lb (it was embossed on the side of the shank). I had not realised how heavy 40lb was, until I weighed it, to discover it was actually 50lb. It was a really good anchor, as long as you restricted yourself to sand, no wind and no tide. We jettisoned it for a 36lb Excel - and never looked back. Ours is a 38' cat. We have tried the 18lb Excel alloy, prototype - works as well as the steel version, so its not weight but design. We know of someone with a 40' cat, they bought a 56lb Rocna, seemed like overkill to me. Sadly they had one of the bendy ones and under the replacment policy ugraded to a 74lb Rocna! (this also bent and they replaced it with yet another 74lb one, there's no accounting for taste) So they swan about with a 74lb anchor on the bow of a yacht not much bigger then ours with our tiddly 36lb one. We do not drag anymore - but neither do they, but we know we do not drag because we have a good anchor, they might not drag because they have a fetish for (lots of) steel or because its a good anchor. In the latter case (and my point was) - how do you tell, good anchor or simply weight (as the decision to upgrade commonly goes with a heavier anchor)?

[gettinthere]

I went from a 45 lb cqr to 45 lb manson supreme. Dragged in several different places with the cqr. Went back to the same places, same conditions and did not budge with the manson supreme

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by JonJo

So they swan about with a 74lb anchor on the bow of a yacht not much bigger then ours with our tiddly 36lb one. We do not drag anymore - but neither do they, but we know we do not drag because we have a good anchor, they might not drag because they have a fetish for (lots of) steel or because its a good anchor.

Focusing on changes in anchor weight is often misleading. The difference from 36 to 74lb sounds impressive, but it does not have much impact on the total weight of anchoring gear. If you have 70m (230 feet) of 10mm chain, for example, the chain is going weigh over 350lb.
Cats are very sensitive to weight, but is 38lb going to make a big difference to 38 foot cruising cat?

For a cruising boat get the best anchor.
If you want to obsess with weight there is plenty of junk that can ditched from most cruising boats,that will not increase the chance of drifting on the rocks in he middle of the night.

[JonJo]

Noelex,

I cannot fault your post, at all. The big difference is possibly in the wallet! and the income of anchor makers (who must love it if every time people buy they buy bigger!)

It does make it difficult to judge comment - if the CQR of 20kg was replaced with, say, a Supreme, or Spade, of 25kg. Of course its better, but why? But maybe my straw poll suggesting people upsize, when they upgrade, is wrong anyway?

But I am at fault for encouraging a thread drift