Rocna Size

[skipmac]

I guess it's my nature but I do see some serious issues on both sides of the anchor debate.

First, I have a Rocna and love it. I anchored with the Rocna for a month on the Connecticut River where the flow reversed a couple of times a day, running several knots in either direction. Never budged an inch and I slept soundly every night. In the past had very different experiences with Danforths and CQRs.

BUT, there does seem to be a good deal of evidence indicating Rocna is "massaging the data" in regards to their certification, materials, and holding test results. For now, I am not looking at Rocna for a new anchor.

At the same time there does seem to be some animosity and even a campaign to "get" Rocna. I recall Mainesail, at his own expense, went out and purchased a number of different LEDs to test and reported the results online. I saw no one questioning his motives for doing this. On the other hand, I didn't see him contacting LED distributors to warn them about the lights that didn't make the grade.

At the moment, at the very least, I think Rocna has some explaining to do. The letter posted earlier claims they will address all the issues and I think it would be only fair to let them have their say. Since the previously vocal supporters have been very silent I do have some doubts that they will actually respond.

[ActiveCaptain]

Originally Posted by Ziggy

But others might feel cheated when they buy a more expensive product based on false advertising.

In all seriousness, what percentage of people who bought a Rocna like me know any of the hardness specifications of their anchor? I honestly never saw any numbers or looked into them when I decided to try the thing. All I cared about were the real world results that a variety of people were experiencing with the anchor.

My guess is fewer than 2% of people with Rocna's know what these ratings mean.

[CarlF]

I very much hope that boat builders and equipment manufacturers are following this thread. I also hope they take the opportunity to think about their own marketing claims, quality control and responsibility to their customers. This industry has fallen into a habit that would not be tolerated in other consumer industries. Consider the ludicrous fuel range numbers published for most trawlers or the amount of 316L stainless that isn't.

It's beside the point whether the Rocna is a good anchor (which it is). The problem here is what do we infer from Rocna's behavior. When were they planning to tell their customers about the December 2010 bad batch? If the shank isn't what was claimed, how about other parts of the anchor? The welds? The engineering?

If the letter from the CEO is accurate, it is now the apparent position taken by Rocna that they promise only "fitness for purpose" instead of the much stronger claims made in their marketing -- claims that was relied upon by purchasers. I'm hoping that this is just a misunderstanding or the letter is not genuine. Otherwise, Rocna is making the situation much worse.

Astonishing.

Carl

[Cormorant]

I read that ybw thread today till my eyes were bleary. What a train wreck this whole thing is. I hope it gets sorted out to everyone's satisfaction eventually.

Anyway, just wanted to add that the RINA involved in Rocna's claims is Registro Italiano Navale.
(Registro Italiano Navale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Not sure if that has any affiliation with the London RINA.

[Shawn67]

"a specimen of 1 doesn't exactly prove that Rocna's entire product line has a problem."

It is a specimen of two at this point. Along with the statements from Rocna's former production manager that the problem is going to be found in all of them with the made in China shanks, around 5000.

"Is it not possible that they reduced the steel strength of the 10 kg model because it didn't need the same strength as the 55 kg one?"

Wouldn't this be a bigger problem than a supposed 'bad batch?' Now instead of Rocna's claims of a batch made with metal lower than specified in your scenario they intentionally lowered the grade of steel but still marketed the model with claims of higher grade steel.

The 25 kg model that is being called the 'Venice Anchor' is said to have had a 400 mpa shank too which is why it bent.

I hate to do this...but - Page 42 - Yachting and Boating World Forums


Shawn

[markpierce]

Feels like we're going in circles.

[impi]

Originally Posted by Alecadi

Your post is a great contribution and clarify a lot of things here
I have one question: When did Rocna's CEO send you that letter? Can you clarify this?
Alec

Hi Alec
The letter was actually sent to me by the supplier in Cape Town who emailed the manufacturer as I was concerned after reading all the bad news about the anchor I had just purchased - this was attached to the reply email.
I hope this whole negativity about Rocna turns out to be a storm in a tea cup, but I must admit I am being cautious.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by skipmac

At the moment, at the very least, I think Rocna has some explaining to do. The letter posted earlier claims they will address all the issues and I think it would be only fair to let them have their say. Since the previously vocal supporters have been very silent I do have some doubts that they will actually respond.

I received this PM from an individual who owns a Rocna and felt I was being unfair in testing an anchor and publishing the data. This individual had been badgering me to send the information to Holdfast so they could respond, which I didn't think necessary. I figured they would respond when they had something to say and was certainly aware of the controversy.

"Since you seemed unwilling to do it I sent the link to the Rocna discussion to Rocna yesterday morning. Yesterday afternoon at work I was fairly amazed to recieve a phone call from a very highly placed person in the Rocna organization. He told me they were well aware of your and other's allegations about their product as other customers have sent themt the links or the posts to them as well.

He told me that while the test data you recieved from the metallurgy outfit you had test your anchor is not flawed your interpretation of that data is. I agreed not to convey any of the details of the expoanation I was given as the Rocna orgnanization is currently determining how, when and if to respond to the allegations against their product. If they do so it will most likely be as a press release, not as individual postings to amateur boating forums on the internet, although you never know.

After hearing the explanation of the situation from the Rocna representative I have no doubt that their anchors are made from exactly what they say they are made of. And the reason your test came out the way it did is very clear, even to a layman like me. If and when they issue a statement it will become clear to you, too, I expect.

Needless to say I was extremely impressed with Rocna's response to me. I would never have guessed a person at that level in the organization would make an individual, personal response like that, although he said that he did so because it's imporant to hiim that Rocna customers know the truth about the anchor they have purchased.

This is all I will say on this subject. You will have to wait for Rocna's official statement to learn why your interpretation of what is correct data is flawed."

This is interesting. Perhaps we will hear from Rocna soon, and find out why the data presented in my test is correct, including presumably the lab's statement that the anchor didn't meet the ASTM 0514 steel grade, but my conclusion that 626 MPa is not the same as the steel they promise on their website, or equal to the 810 MPa steel used in the Manson is incorrect. I can't wait....

[s/v 'Faith']

Originally Posted by Delfin

I received this PM from an individual who owns a Rocna and felt I was being unfair in testing an anchor and publishing the data.....or equal to the 810 MPa steel used in the Manson is incorrect. I can't wait....

Delfin,

I am glad you are here, and appreciate your efforts to get to the bottom of this. Some of the replies have seemed strange. Folks buy a product, and develop an allegiance... it does seem like some of the Rocna owners are... (how to put this gently)....

Well, let me just say that it is interesting how much anchor discussions really do resemble political discussions.

[boatman61]

$10 says I can guess the PM'r.... know that style anywhere....

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by s/v 'Faith'

Delfin,

I am glad you are here, and appreciate your efforts to get to the bottom of this. Some of the replies have seemed strange. Folks buy a product, and develop an allegiance... it does seem like some of the Rocna owners are... (how to put this gently)....

Well, let me just say that it is interesting how much anchor discussions really do resemble political discussions.

You're right there. Once this thread is exhausted, I am going to start one on why blondes are better than brunettes, then duck for cover....

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by boatman61

$10 says I can guess the PM'r.... know that style anywhere....

Now don't get me in trouble....Truthfully, this is a person from another forum altogether who as far as I know does not visit this forum at all.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Delfin

why blondes are better than brunettes,

Ah, but redheads are best of all!

[avb3]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Ah, but redheads are best of all!

Shhhhhhhhhh don't tell everyone... we don't want to let everyone in on the good thing!

Now, back to anchors, and why galvanized makes more sense in salty water then stainless. (ducking and running)

[olaf hart]

Originally Posted by Delfin

You're right there. Once this thread is exhausted, I am going to start one on why blondes are better than brunettes, then duck for cover....

I volunteer to do the testing.