Rocna Doesn't Fit . . . Do I Go with Ultra or Delta ?

[Fishspearit]

sorry, I already deleted my post when I reread your statement "35-40Kg" which I misread as lbs.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

35 lb CQR? If your boat is the 58 footer pictured you need a LOT bigger anchor... the Delta will set a lot better than the CQR. I would have about a 100 lb anchor on that boat...

there is 2.2 kilo to a pound. so his statement of 35 -40 KGS means a 77 to 88 pound anchor.

The whole world doesnt work in pounds guys.

[MarkJ]

We have a Delta and its fine.

[RaySea Lady]

Originally Posted by Factor

there is 2.2 kilo to a pound. so his statement of 35 -40 KGS means a 77 to 88 pound anchor.

The whole world doesnt work in pounds guys.

So true !

However, it is 2.2 Lbs per Kilo.

[Factor]

Whoops - sorry - typo there - yes obviously 2.2 pounds per kilo. My humble apologies. Well that is what it was in terms of imperial pounds, I dont know if the Amercians have different pounds, they certainly had different gallons.

[Cheechako]

In sand, shell and mud the Delta will grab the first time. Never really used one much in rocks. I loved the Delta over previous anchors I had... mostly CQR's. Just watch for major wind shifts..... which can be an issue with all traditional anchors.. For an occassional anchorer, which it sounds like you are, the Delta should be fine. The new generation anchors sound great, but if it wont fit it wont fit. I hate being price gouged also. Some of the new gen anchors dont look any harder to fabricate than the Delta.... but they are asking a lot more money... Hopefully the copies will be coming out soon....

[S/V New Sensation]

If the Delta will fit my opinion is it's a fine anchor. I had a Delta and switched to a Rocna, I chose the Rocna over the Supreme because of the shank design. I did not want to modify my bow (I have a teak piece that flips up and down and covers the shank of the anchor) which the Suprenme would have required. The Rocna and the Delta are very close in shank design. I found the Delta to be better than the CQR but it does not set as easily as the Rocna. On my boat I had the best luck "easing" onto the Delta. Once set it held just fine. Also I found that if you need to be on short scope with the Delta I had to use at least 5/1 to get it to set then after soaking and backing down I could shorten scope (probably smart with any anchor but the Rocna sets at short scope)

[Hiracer]

I couldn't get the roll bar anchors to fit on my boat either. I bought a Delta.

Then I sold the Delta and bought a Spade. Been happy ever since.

So happy that I bought a back up Spade. Got two now.

NavStore - Your Pro Marine Source - Product Catalog

Don't get the aluminum version. Get mild steel or SS.

77#: http://www.navstore.com/detail.aspx?ID=1872

[Cheechako]

The spade looks a lot like the Delta, does it really do anything better for $650 more (44lb price)? Without the roll bar or unusual scoop shape.. will it reset when the wind shifts?

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

The spade looks a lot like the Delta

Cheechako I have to respectfully disagree. The spade has a concave blade Verses the Deltas convex. The spade has a thick triangular tip verses the deltas thin profile. The spade has a hollow shank verses the deltas solid shank. The Spade's fluke can be separated from the shank verses the fixed shank of the delta.
In short the 2 anchors are as completely different in design.

Whether or not its worth the extra money is a much more difficult question to answer.

[Cheechako]

Yea, I was looking for reasons why it's different, cant really tell from the pics, thanks. But I still wonder if it resets once dug in... in a 180 degree shift. I never really dragged in good bottom conditions with my Deltas, except with a big shift.

[Hiracer]

The Spade has a higher tip weight, so it sets and resets more dependably than the Delta. Also, the face of the anchor is a spoon shape instead of a wedge, so for any given surface area it offers more holding power than the Delta.

The Delta is a good anchor. The Spade is even better. But the Spade costs lots more too. If money is tight, I would go with the Delta.

I got lucky as I purchased my new 44# Spade back when they were much more affordable, and my 66# I picked up used for a mere song. I got about US $650 total into my two Spade anchors (three years ago). At the time, I didn't realise what a great financial investment I had made--not to mention solid anchoring gear too.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

I never really dragged in good bottom conditions with my Deltas, except with a big shift.

I have dived and observed many Delta anchors. They set quickly so it surprises me that they do not cope with shifts well, but other owners have complained about this aspect of the Deltas performance, so you are not alone.
From my diving observations my biggest criticism of the Delta is that it can drag (slowly ) even when deeply set. It sets and digs in easily but does not offer the high resistance of the new generation anchors when set.
The "moving sand" around a well set Delta is something that I have observered diving on several occasions with a Delta anchor, but never seen on a concave blade.
I still think the Delta is a significant imrovment from the CQR and Bruce Anchors.

[Hiracer]

To specifically answer the OP, I would opt for the Ultra over the Delta, on acccount of the concave shape. It's not totally spoon shaped like the patented Spade, but the concave surface should work well and the bend at the tip should facilate setting.

The only thing that would make me hesitate about the Ultra is that I'm not aware of lots of real-life field use, so you are a bit of a beta testor. For anchors, that's not my style. But by all means, buy it and report back on how it works. I suspect it is a genuinely good anchor because it is a copy of the Spade, with the addition of the curved tip but the deletion of the spoon shape.

I believe the tip weight in the Ultra is totally encompassed by SS. Plus, being SS you don't have to ever worry about regalvanization, which is significant. Any of the tip-weighted anchors, like the Spade, are going to present problems when it's time to regalvanize because that lead must be removed and then added back after regalvanization. Not just any shop can regalvanize those anchors. SS offers more than just pretty looks.

[James S]

Originally Posted by RaySea Lady

I don't think you're a smart ass at all.

The price of the rocna AND the modifications, similar to what you have done, would be less than the 3000$ cost of the Ultra.

The issue is I don't want to modify the boat, I think modifying it would lessen the value of my boat by at least 10 times what the anchor is worth.

I would have to remove the bow beaching ladder (can also be used as a bow passerelle) to be able to move the anchor above the bow like you did, It works, just something I don't want to do.

Another option may be to remove the ring above the rocna but then it would just be another anchor and may present a whole bunch of other problems.

That makes sense not wanting to reduce the value of your boat. I think removing the role bar on the Rocna may render it useless....or at least not as useful.