Why Are Next-Gen Anchors Considered 'Better' ?

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I dont agree, whiel such tests have a degree of subjectivity and and difficult to cross compare, you can extract overall results. Its is clear that the common and successful next-gen anchors are better then older variants I would out it as ( spade, rocna, manson), ( delta) , ( fortress) ( then CQR, etc) ( and bruce).

Dave

I'm glad you don't agree..

..so here's mine..I don't agree that anything is CLEARLY superior..and I base that on infof I read here..

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by Fortress

Sharpness is a huge factor in allowing the anchor to penetrate deeply into a sea bottom. This is why we sharpen the flukes and taper the shank, as evidenced by the image below.

Obviously, the deeper an anchor can penetrate into a sea bottom, the greater the resistance will be to it coming back out.

Safe anchoring,
Brian

I agree..used to sharpen my danforths to a needle point!

[Cormorant]

One more bit of cheapskate comparison shopping: if you buy from Overtons.com and use promo code V90121 before May 31, 2011 you get 10% off $100; 15% off $200; 20% off $300.

Sorry if I sound like an ad . . . I'm not affiliated in any way -- just happened to stumble across some promo codes in my web search.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I dont agree, whiel such tests have a degree of subjectivity and and difficult to cross compare, you can extract overall results. Its is clear that the common and successful next-gen anchors are better then older variants I would out it as ( spade, rocna, manson), ( delta) , ( fortress) ( then CQR, etc) ( and bruce).

Dave

GoBoatingNow,

As the OP some many hundreds of posts ago, I get the right to chime in now and again! Your post on "ranking" of anchors was my original question. For my 34 sailboat, Spade recommends a 33lb unit. I currently sleep very well with a 20lb Danforth. While I'm sure a 33 lb Spade would be very secure, a similar weight Danforth would be massive overkill.

Which gets to my original question -- if the recommended weights for the new anchors are so much heavier than the old anchors, is it really fair to say they are better? If I replace my 20 lb Danforth with a 2,000 pound cinder block, it is guaranteed to work. Never drag, never pull out, never foul, never capsize, never tangle -- and never be lifted by hand like my Danforth. Would it then be even better than a Spade?

The previous paragraph is slightly tongue in cheek, of course, but it is a touch confusing to see that I can anchor in moderate safety with an older technology anchor that I can pull by hand, or I can get a "better" anchor that, along with being "better" must be 50% heavier.

Harry

[Kettlewell]

If you want light, holding power, and something similar to a Danforth you could always upgrade to a Fortress. The FX-23 is similar in size to your 20-lb. Danforth, but weighs only 15 lbs. Or you could stick with your current weight and gain a lot of holding power by going to the FX-37. The Fortress would be considered the "Next-Gen" to the Danforth.

[markpierce]

I'll be sticking with a Bruce-like.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

we had some problems getting it to penetrate hard bottoms.

Was that related to shaft size?


FWIW I suspect that the new Gen anchors are "better". But a lot of the improvements come from upsizing the Anchor (in comparison to OE equipment which is generally sized down to a budget) and from selling to folks who Anchor more than average (otherwise why bother upgrading?) - anchoring is one of those things where practice helps a lot, and folks who Anchor regularly have more of an incentive to learn / try out different techniques when they drag....if you are only Marina based or lunch hooking then no need and no reason to become proficient.

Plus (on average) more likely (no guarantee though ) to already know how to anchor. and at time of purchase may have even read the Instructions

And finally of course before paying big bucks for a new Anchor the punter will already have become convinced the Anchor is better, and once bought will (unless things go badly wrong soon after purchase) use and therefore build up trust.

Not been anchoring myself for a few years - but over here with 40 foot tides many anchorages spend half the day ashore the upside is you get to see how anchors set, and also get the opportunity to dig it in. The track marks down the beach can be informative Truth be told much of the "holding" is from the Anchor chain lying on the seabed (those who have dragged mooring chain accross the beach (or through mud ) will understand the principles / effort involved). I am trying to carry my camera a bit more nowadays - will see what I can capture this summer......

[conachair]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Which gets to my original question -- if the recommended weights for the new anchors are so much heavier than the old anchors, is it really fair to say they are better?

From personal experience of rocna / cqr ignoring a little extra weight they do seem to dig in MUCH MUCH quicker in many different kinds of bottoms.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

.

Not been anchoring myself for a few years [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Skipper/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image001.gif[/IMG]- but over here with 40 foot tides many anchorages spend half the day ashore [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Skipper/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image002.gif[/IMG]the upside is you get to see how anchors set, and also get the opportunity to dig it in. The track marks down the beach can be informative [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Skipper/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image003.gif[/IMG]Truth be told much of the "holding" is from the Anchor chain lying on the seabed (those who have dragged mooring chain accross the beach (or through mud [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Skipper/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image004.gif[/IMG]) will understand the principles / effort involved). I am trying to carry my camera a bit more nowadays - will see what I can capture this summer......

David more informative is diving on anchors. In strong wind there is no chain lying on the bottom at all.

[SailFastTri]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

Was that related to shaft size?


FWIW I suspect that the new Gen anchors are "better". But a lot of the improvements come from upsizing the Anchor (in comparison to OE equipment which is generally sized down to a budget) and from selling to folks who Anchor more than average (otherwise why bother upgrading?) - anchoring is one of those things where practice helps a lot, and folks who Anchor regularly have more of an incentive to learn / try out different techniques when they drag....if you are only Marina based or lunch hooking then no need and no reason to become proficient.

Plus (on average) more likely (no guarantee though ) to already know how to anchor. and at time of purchase may have even read the Instructions

And finally of course before paying big bucks for a new Anchor the punter will already have become convinced the Anchor is better, and once bought will (unless things go badly wrong soon after purchase) use and therefore build up trust.

Not been anchoring myself for a few years - but over here with 40 foot tides many anchorages spend half the day ashore the upside is you get to see how anchors set, and also get the opportunity to dig it in. The track marks down the beach can be informative Truth be told much of the "holding" is from the Anchor chain lying on the seabed (those who have dragged mooring chain across the beach (or through mud ) will understand the principles / effort involved). I am trying to carry my camera a bit more nowadays - will see what I can capture this summer......

Actually your first few paragraphs are completely off base. You assume way too much, and there should be no need to "practice" getting your anchor to set unless you use one that is deficient in design. Basic technique can make a difference in difficult bottoms, but in equal conditions it's safe to say some anchor designs are better than others.

The reason the Aluminum Spade does not set as well as the steel one is more likely lower density for the same tip cross-section. The tip sharpness of the Spade is comparable to a Delta or CQR (a 3-d triangle). However, the CQR is less likely to orient the tip in a setting attitude than those others. Once penetration (set) is achieved; shape, angle of fluke, and fluke area have a lot to do with depth of set and holding power.




Tip cross-section (or sharpness) has a lot to do with how well an anchor penetrates, and some bottoms are more resistent to penetration than others. It seems pretty logical that:

1. Penetration is the first prerequisite of getting an anchor to set
2. Ability to penetrate (all else equal) is affected by shape and density
3. A sharp shape with tip oriented in a penetration position increase likelihood of penetration. Overall geometry and weighting are two methods of achieving the proper orientation (and in most designs a heavy shank is detrimental to that purpose).

None of the above has anything to do with the experience of the skipper or crew.

The new generation designs that have been more successful are simply better tools that have evolved. BTW, check the prices of the genuine CQR vs a Spade, Rocna or Manson Supreme before you argue they're overpriced.

[boatman61]

In a strong wind on my 21ftr I'd be lying on my normal 20m + depth and drop.. and I'd have laid out another 10m off chain...
if I was in more than 10m depth I'd put out 20m extra to normal..
Talking winds 25k+ here....
I like to try and maintain the best average angle of pull on the anchor... the extra chain makes this possible... and acts as a shock absorber... rope rode only gives a fractional decrease of angle in comparison.
I use Bruce normally.. currently have a Plough... intend to upgrade to a Bruce primary... with plough kedge chain + rope.
I've seen many a boat jerking back on their rope rodes where 90% of the time I'm just riding freely over the swells...

[Pip Armitage]

Just spent 6 months cruising around Tasmania with a SARCA Excel. Made in Oz. It sets instantly in sand and never looked like dragging, but we did have a couple of failures in really soft mud which were solved by letting out more chain. Some interesting video on their website dragging different anchors attached to the ends of a steel bar to compare setting and holding power. First time I have seen reasonably scientific/reproduceable testing of anchors and it was what attracted me to buy one. Tidal Anchor Test Skid T.A.T.S - anchorright.com.au

[tdenney]

This topic never ceases to amaze me. One thing that we sometimes do not address is technique. We all focus on anchor design and the basic math of anchor weight, rode, and scope.

When we first set out we were told "a pound of anchor per foot of boat". This is certainly the maximum anchor weight not the minimum. So we set out with a 45# CQR and a 22# Danforth knock off for our 40 footer. We had no windlass and that 45# CQR with 30 feet of 3/8" chain was a back breaker.

Technique is important. If I don't know the area, I get conservative. I use two anchors set pretty close to 180 degress from each other. Many times I have taken the second anchor out in the dink when what I really wanted was a beer. Another thing to consider is the other boats in the anchorage. If I put out two anchors, I will not swing much, but a boat with one anchor will. So in an unfamiliar area, I will be the guy in the "back row" with plenty of room.

After five years in the Bahamas and Eastern Caribbean, I understand that the old timers were right that more chain is better than less. However, I am a fan of chain backed up by nylon for most areas. In "typical" weather, I like a scope of 5 with 3 for chain and 2 for nylon. It gives a nice balance. In the Bahamas where 10 feet is considered deep water this means about 30 feet of chain with maybe 100 feet of nylon behind it. Some people swear by "all chain", and they are probably right in high lattitudes, or anywhere with lots of coral/rock, and deep anchorages. However, chain is heavy and expensive so you have to work the trade-offs, and consider where you are going to anchor. The chain with nylon saves weight and expense. Just don't forget the chafe guard on the nylon.

I agree with Evans that the Danforth or any decent knockoff is the best bang for the buck with the only weakness that it can clog on a 180 degree wind shift and not reset. It has happened to me. I have also bent the shank on a Danforth knockoff (in coral), so I just went out an bought another one. They are cheap and they work fine.

During a frontal passage in Nassau, we had both anchors out because of the weather and crowded anchorage (and most other boats had two anchors out). We ended up hanging on the little Danforth with 20 feet of 5/16 chain and 75 feet of 1/2 nylon (started out with 30). The front produced 20-30 knot winds for about 24 hours. We sailed around a lot on that stretchy nylon and it was a pretty nerve racking because we were so new. The Danforth didn't move an inch, and the next day I snorkeled it and could not even see it.

The last two paragraphs do not mean that I am sold on Danforths alone. We like to have different types of anchors on the boat for various bottoms. I like the plow style just fine. My "big" anchor on my current boat is a 35# CQR because it came with the boat. I will keep it for a while. The new anchors are probably better. When were were out the first time, the Delta plow was the "new" anchor and everyone loved it. Then along came the Bruce and everyone loved it also. There will continue to be new anchor designs, but if you have decent anchors on the boat, save your money until you lose one or it gets so rusty that you don't trust it anymore.

[noelex 77]

I think a lot of these posts are talking are discussing different things. At 20 to 30K the chain will be lying on the bottom and your anchor will be doing very little work. If its even slightly set and a reasonable size you will hold. It really doesn’t matter what kind of anchor you have at these wind speeds. If you can get it to dig in, even slighty, you will be fine.


Many of you will know I am not very impressed with CQR anchors but only once have dragged a CQR (or CQR copy) in less than 35K of wind. At wind strengths above this the forces start to go up dramatically. In Mud and soft sand I have never dragged a CQR period, but in hard sand and weed I have never had a CQR hold in more than 45k (I am quoting here average wind strengths the gusts will be considerably higher.)

[Shawn67]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

if the recommended weights for the new anchors are so much heavier than the old anchors, is it really fair to say they are better?

Harry,

They are not always heavier. For example the 33 pound Spade has 800 square cm of surface area. The no longer available Raya 800 (same 800 cm/2) weighed about 16 pounds.

Shawn