Rocna 55 (121lb) vs Mantus M1 (125lb)

[Anders]

I'm very happy with my 15kg Rocna but if I was shopping today I would probably buy the Mantus M1.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

. . . Getting back to the anchor question - I’ve owned a Rocna 44 pounds, and used it for about 12 years (I had the pre-China version made under license by Canada Metals in Canada). It only dragged in soft mud. It came up with half the bottom of every anchorage, so I’d say it’s essential to have a washdown pump if you use one (probably the same with other hoop anchors).. . .

My experience was exactly the same, and this, plus the balance issue, was why I didn't like it.


I have not used other hoop anchors so I can't really testify to them, but I have a feeling, as apparently you do, that these qualities are common to hoop anchors, so after getting rid of the Rocna, I went back to a Spade (I had been using Spades for years before on the other boat, since they first came out in the late 90's), then recently the very similar Turkish Ultra. These are well balanced (especially the Ultra), work well in all bottoms including soft mud, and don't bring up half the bottom with them when you raise them.


It's more expensive to make an anchor this way, as you need lead ballast in them, so they're more expensive, but in my experience it is really worth it.

[noelex 77]

I have owned both of these exact models and used them on the same boat Around 1600 nights at anchor with the Rocna and 2000 nights with the Mantus, so there has been plenty of opportunity to evaluate the performance in many varied substrates.

The Rocna is an excellent anchor, but the Mantus M1 is better. I have not had any problems with the bolt-together construction. I did bend the original mild steel shank, but Mantus upgraded all of these to Hi tensile steel. I have not managed to bend the stronger shank despite using the (oversized) Mantus in some atrocious conditions including around a dozen named storms and winds up to 81 knots.

One caution is in photos the two anchors appear to be a very similar shape. In reality they are quite different. Make sure the Mantus M1 fits before ordering.

The photo below shows the relationship between the size of the Rocna and Mantus rollbar. It was taken by simply balancing the unbolted 57kg Mantus rollbar on the fluke of the 55kg Rocna. There are other significant differences, for example, the Mantus fluke is much longer and more tapered.

[rslifkin]

I'd lean to the Mantus over the Rocna personally. But I'd also give a look to the Excel as a non-rollbar option. And being that you've been happy with the smaller version, is there any reason you're not looking to buy the 55kg version of the Vulcan?

[jordanbigel]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

I'd lean to the Mantus over the Rocna personally. But I'd also give a look to the Excel as a non-rollbar option. And being that you've been happy with the smaller version, is there any reason you're not looking to buy the 55kg version of the Vulcan?

Lots of great feedback here - thanks so much.

I guess the reason is I keep hearing how much better the roll-bar version is and that the Vulcan is a compromise (obviously built to accommodate bows which cannot handle the roll bar).

When I first bought my Vulcan 40, I had a mid-platform bow roller, as seen in this first photo. Because of this placement, I could not accommodate a Roll bar anchor. But, once I mounted the Vulcan in this position, I concluded there was a different problem which was conflict with the bobstay (specifically, when lowering the Vulcan would catch on the Stbd bobstay). My CQR never had that issue having much narrower flukes.

SO, I added a new roller to the end of the bow platform as seen in the second photo. And of course, now I can accommodate a roll-bar type anchor.

I've had the Vulcan about 3 years, but only used it a 6 or 8 times (due to an almost constant refit going on since then including new reefer, electrical systems, etc., etc.) and as I said, I have not been disappointed with it, but I can't help thinking the Vulcan is as second-best choice, but it would make great backup anchor.

[SailFastTri]

Originally Posted by jordanbigel

Lots of great feedback here - thanks so much.

I guess the reason is I keep hearing how much better the roll-bar version is and that the Vulcan is a compromise (obviously built to accommodate bows which cannot handle the roll bar).

When I first bought my Vulcan 40, I had a mid-platform bow roller, as seen in this first photo. Because of this placement, I could not accommodate a Roll bar anchor. But, once I mounted the Vulcan in this position, I concluded there was a different problem which was conflict with the bobstay (specifically, when lowering the Vulcan would catch on the Stbd bobstay). My CQR never had that issue having much narrower flukes.

SO, I added a new roller to the end of the bow platform as seen in the second photo. And of course, now I can accommodate a roll-bar type anchor.

I've had the Vulcan about 3 years, but only used it a 6 or 8 times (due to an almost constant refit going on since then including new reefer, electrical systems, etc., etc.) and as I said, I have not been disappointed with it, but I can't help thinking the Vulcan is as second-best choice, but it would make great backup anchor.

I think you greatly underestimate your Vulcan.
(After looking at your pictures I also think having that roller out at the end of your sprit increases the leverage and will put a tremendous amount of stress on your forestay and entire rig when the rode is pulled hard. Lateral stress also, when the load veers. I hope it's a very beefy rig.)

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by jordanbigel

I guess the reason is I keep hearing how much better the roll-bar version is and that the Vulcan is a compromise (obviously built to accommodate bows which cannot handle the roll bar).

That's what Rocna says about it, but it's a bunch of BS. Take a look at the tests SV Panope has done. The Vulcan far outperforms the rollbar Rocna in most situations.

[SailFastTri]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

That's what Rocna says about it, but it's a bunch of BS. Take a look at the tests SV Panope has done. The Vulcan far outperforms the rollbar Rocna in most situations.

LOL I think Rocna painted themselves into a corner from many years of touting their hooped anchor as better vs the Spade. When they did the Vulcan (a Spade knock-off IMHO, with variations) they did a very good job, and so it seems the argument is settled.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

LOL I think Rocna painted themselves into a corner from many years of touting their hooped anchor as better vs the Spade. When they did the Vulcan (a Spade knock-off IMHO, with variations) they did a very good job, and so it seems the argument is settled.

Exactly. And based on testing, the Spade may be a hair better as an anchor than the Vulcan, but the Vulcan is significantly cheaper and IMO it's a more sturdy design and build.

[jordanbigel]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

I think you greatly underestimate your Vulcan.
(After looking at your pictures I also think having that roller out at the end of your sprit increases the leverage and will put a tremendous amount of stress on your forestay and entire rig when the rode is pulled hard. Lateral stress also, when the load veers. I hope it's a very beefy rig.)

Sigh. While I appreciate your concern, the capacity of the bow platform was never an issue in this thread and commenting on it only serves to cause thread drift.

But, in an attempt to not appear as a total idiot now that you brought it up, I will say that WRT the modification to the bow roller arrangement, the builder and designer of the boat were consulted and approved these changes before I made them (also, several other SB50s were delivered from the yard with this arrangement, just not mine).

Yes, it is beefy like the entire boat.

But again, I do appreciate your concern.

WRT the Vulcan being underestimated, you could be right! But I don't mean to do that. The thing is I still need a new backup anchor (my current backup is undersized and if I am going to carry a backup, I want it to inspire confidence) certainly it would make no sense to buy a second Vulcan 40 as a backup for my Vulcan 40, and why would I buy a "worse" (lower performing) anchor as my backup (compared to the Vulcan 40) - therefore (my brain-logic tells me) I should spend the money trying to find a *better performing* anchor and make the Vulcan my backup.

Maybe that means a Spade instead of a Mantus or a rollbar-Rocna, I am considering all options at this point, even though this thread was started to learn more about the comparison between these 2 specific anchors.

[SailFastTri]

Originally Posted by jordanbigel

Sigh. While I appreciate your concern, the capacity of the bow platform was never an issue in this thread and commenting on it only serves to cause thread drift.

But, in an attempt to not appear as a total idiot now that you brought it up, I will say that WRT the modification to the bow roller arrangement, the builder and designer of the boat were consulted and approved these changes before I made them (also, several other SB50s were delivered from the yard with this arrangement, just not mine).

Yes, it is beefy like the entire boat.

But again, I do appreciate your concern.

WRT the Vulcan being underestimated, you could be right! But I don't mean to do that. The thing is I still need a new backup anchor (my current backup is undersized and if I am going to carry a backup, I want it to inspire confidence) certainly it would make no sense to buy a second Vulcan 40 as a backup for my Vulcan 40, and why would I buy a "worse" (lower performing) anchor as my backup (compared to the Vulcan 40) - therefore (my brain-logic tells me) I should spend the money trying to find a *better performing* anchor and make the Vulcan my backup.

Maybe that means a Spade instead of a Mantus or a rollbar-Rocna, I am considering all options at this point, even though this thread was started to learn more about the comparison between these 2 specific anchors.

I never mistook you for an idiot and the questions/observations that caused personal offense were intended as constructive feedback and real concern, which you have addressed.
As to your central question, I think the best answer you've received so far is from Steve Goodwin. Perhaps others are also well qualified, but Steve has done controlled comparisons. Few of us take the time/effort do do that, and our opinions are based on subjective experience over time in differing situations and places.
Good luck, whatever you decide.

[jordanbigel]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

I never mistook you for an idiot and the questions/observations that caused personal offense were intended as constructive feedback and real concern, which you have addressed.
As to your central question, I think the best answer you've received so far is from Steve Goodwin. Perhaps others are also well qualified, but Steve has done controlled comparisons. Few of us take the time/effort do do that, and our opinions are based on subjective experience over time in differing situations and places.
Good luck, whatever you decide.

I understand completely. Didn't mean to imply you did. was just being moody. It's a valid issue of course, and I should have anticipated it would come up.

Agree re: SteveG's feedback, unique and invaluable.

[Lee Jerry]

Originally Posted by jordanbigel

WRT the Vulcan being underestimated, you could be right! But I don't mean to do that. The thing is I still need a new backup anchor (my current backup is undersized and if I am going to carry a backup, I want it to inspire confidence) certainly it would make no sense to buy a second Vulcan 40 as a backup for my Vulcan 40, and why would I buy a "worse" (lower performing) anchor as my backup (compared to the Vulcan 40) - therefore (my brain-logic tells me) I should spend the money trying to find a *better performing* anchor and make the Vulcan my backup.

Maybe that means a Spade instead of a Mantus or a rollbar-Rocna, I am considering all options at this point, even though this thread was started to learn more about the comparison between these 2 specific anchors.

One of the benefits Mantus gives (spins?) for the bolted construction is for easier storage below of a backup anchor. So maybe keep using the Vulcan as primary and get a bigger (either the 105# or 125#) Mantus for the backup.

I'll also throw out one more question...what do you have for rode for the backup?

[BlueH2Obound]

We were on the fence regarding purchasing a Mantus M-1 or the Rocna. Finally went with the Mantus 105lb M-1, but I think we would also have been satisfied with the Rocna.

The Mantus held just fine, anchored in 90' of water in Ocean Falls, BC, 3:1 ish scope, 300' of 1/2" chain rode, when a surprise 69 mph measured blow, 3 hours long blew up out of nowhere. (Forecast was for 6 kts of wind for the next 24 hours) Our boat was about 85,000 lbs at the time. Anchorage location was limited. Anyway, it made a believer out of us!

Our backup anchors are 87lb Mantus M-1, stored flat, unassembled, and two Fortress 44lb anchors stored on deck. Rode for backups is 3/8" chain, and 3/4" three strand nylon. Haven't needed it yet.

One other point, the Mantus M-1 didn't play well with our original bow roller assembly, so we replaced it with a new Mantus BR3 bow roller, which was designed for the M-1. Much nicer!

[jordanbigel]

Originally Posted by Lee Jerry

One of the benefits Mantus gives (spins?) for the bolted construction is for easier storage below of a backup anchor. So maybe keep using the Vulcan as primary and get a bigger (either the 105# or 125#) Mantus for the backup.

I'll also throw out one more question...what do you have for rode for the backup?

My backup rode is also 3/8" chain -- 200' 3/8" G4 with 200' 3/4" octoplait (same size chain as the primary so I can use it on the windlass if I lose the primary rode).