Only One Anchor

[wolfenzee]

Originally Posted by GMac

31ft, 7500lb but add another 1000lbs if the girls are with me, those 'essential' 15 handbags each can add up Low windage but easily out 'sails at anchor' any other boats inc multis. She hunts around like a hungry dog on a chain.

Note: The anchors are under manufacturers recommended size but as I have played extensively with them in assorted testing programs I was happy to use them. When put to the test (a few boys and rum bottles for a weekend) the system worked just as planned.

Note 2: I have tuned to rode to help as much as it can and that has a massive baring on how well an (any) anchor will work when pushed.

If I cruised this boat more I'd go up a size on everything.

Wolf, are you sure how well an anchor will stow is the best way to get the best option when you're downstairs having a snore off? Have you considered the new ones? They are worth very serious consideration if you are shopping for a anchor.

My boat is about 30' and conservatively 17,000lbs. My primary anchor (the Bruce) is on a bow roller, the 45lb Forfjord and 30lbDanforth type are lashed to either side of the boom gallows (with easy access to 38fathoms of line in the lararette) the kedging anchor (folding northhill is in the lazarette). I might retire the Danforth type and replace it with something of a new design as I can stow one anchor on my roller and the Bruce hooked over my bulwarks with two anchors being ready to deploy simultaneously from the bow if needed.

[FrankZ]

Originally Posted by colemj

... but something about the whole mud palm thing (give them away free and suggest that they be made permanent) leads me to believe they should have just built them that way.

They do change how you store the anchor. My fortress seems to set well without the palms, well, once I got my procedure sorted out.

[Ancora Latina]

[quote=wolfenzee;201017] I might retire the Danforth type and replace it with something of a new design as I can stow one anchor on my roller and the Bruce hooked over my bulwarks with two anchors being ready to deploy simultaneously from the bow if needed.[/quote]

How may time do you really need to deploy simultaneously two anchors from the bow??

If you have only ONE good anchor from the « New gen », you will rapidly realize that two anchors on the bow are useless and only ad undesired weight at the worse position..

[wolfenzee]

as I a said "if needed" and it usually isn't needed to have two from the bow, though I have had to deploy one from bow, one from stern when I am anchored in a narrow tidal river (for example). Two at once from the bow might be if I was caught is some horrifically nasty storm.

[Pblais]

How may time do you really need to deploy simultaneously two anchors from the bow??

Rarely, but then again if it was the time you should have then you are screwed if you can't.

One good anchor properly set is really most of the time. More often the second anchor is for a specific reason and it's the second rode you need. I also believe a third lunch hook on the stern rail is good for emergencies and casual stops.

[Agility]

Originally Posted by Pblais

Rarely, but then again if it was the time you should have then you are screwed if you can't.

One good anchor properly set is really most of the time. More often the second anchor is for a specific reason and it's the second rode you need. I also believe a third lunch hook on the stern rail is good for emergencies and casual stops.

When med mooring in Greece it was normal practice to deploy two anchors. If you left your boat without two you took a big risk. I could never leave for long without being paranoid that someone would leave having fouled my anchor and that my boat would drift back and crash on the quay. Having a second anchor easily deployable is a big requirement of my next boat.

[Highlander40]

I voted for the Spade. All chain rode and a Hazelett snubber.
I thought the CQR was good untill I bought a boat that came with a bruce. Say what you want about the ultimate holding power of the Bruce-but it never popped out and always reset in a wind shift.
Now that I have a couple seasons with the Spade, there is no comparison.
Yes, older anchors can be used but the new ones are BETTER. Better holding, setting, resetting and security.
All that is not the point. The point is- every part of the ground tackle has to be good.
Spade goes so far as to say, you MUST use a snubber with all chain or void the warranty.
The general boating public does not know what an effective snubber looks like. Anybody using 3 ft. of nylon line as a snubber is living in fantasy land.
A proper snubber has the ability to stretch several FEET not inches.

[High Cotton]

It's interesting that 25% chose ROCNA, and only 8% chose MANSON SUPREME which is basically the same, but MANSON SUPREME having the advantage of a "slot" and MUCHO CHEAPER!

Some of you will argue the point of different anchors, but those of us that use the MANSON cannot be swayed, NEVER had an issue with it, so I don't understand how the ROCNA could be better..... just speaking from my own experience on both coasts of FLORIDA, of course.

[GMac]

Highlander - you are SO right about some snubbers. Length is good, real good. Gotta love those one you see made from 1 1/2 line about 5 feet long, a container ship couldn't budge those

[Talbot]

Stupid Poll. Nobody in the right mind would put all their eggs in one basket.

[Ancora Latina]

Originally Posted by Talbot

Stupid Poll. Nobody in the right mind would put all their eggs in one basket.

Sorry Talbot, but this is again one MYTH.

Have different models of anchors on your boat, (usually one plow and one « flat » anchor) if one type doesn’t work, they are some chance that the other one will work!

-In reality, with the old generation of anchors, if one type doesn’t work... they are many chances that the other one will not work either (hard sand bottoms, weed, rock etc...)

-With the « New gen » type, if the « new gen » doesn’t work... the « old generation » models will not give better results.

- Yes, you can have a Supreme and a Rocna... but where is the difference between apples and apples ??

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by GMac

............
About the only difference which can't be seen is strength. One is physically a lot stronger than the other........

And the stronger one is..............?????????

[bobfnbw]

My 2 cents.....
Have a bruce and a cqr now.
Will scap the cqr for a Manson supreme soon.
The rocna is 2nd on my list.
3rd would be a fortress
4th would be a Paul Luke storm anchor.

On our last boat we used the cqr predominatly. It worked well enough in Florida with light winds. Never dragged but then never seriously tested.
Lots of chain as well, and a damn good windless to pull it up.

[gobugme]

Wow, what a long thread, but very informative.
I was unaware of the XYZ before reading this post and am intrigued now, but wonder about their Cutting-Edge Saw Blade Insert and contact with line. My Bruce and Deepset II have served me well, and the 75l b CQR on 65' Appledore IV never dragged when anchored out in over several yrs of trips. I'm thinking I may sell off my 25 and 20 lb CQrs and go with one larger. XYZ, Manson supreme, spade & Rocna are interesting as is a 35 or 45 lb CQR just for the bigger fluka area. Not so worried about weight as just want it to hold when properly set right for the conditions.
Thanks for the links.

[bobfnbw]

Originally Posted by High Cotton

It's interesting that 25% chose ROCNA, and only 8% chose MANSON SUPREME which is basically the same, but MANSON SUPREME having the advantage of a "slot" and MUCHO CHEAPER!

Some of you will argue the point of different anchors, but those of us that use the MANSON cannot be swayed, NEVER had an issue with it, so I don't understand how the ROCNA could be better..... just speaking from my own experience on both coasts of FLORIDA, of course.

Hey cotton, what roller do you use with the Manson Supreme and is there any issues launching and retrieving on the E40?

thanks.
Bob