Why Are Next-Gen Anchors Considered 'Better' ?

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

(but Defender is pretty open minded -- they stock EVERYTHING!)?

Harry

Not Rocna.

PS Hey all. At how many pounds of pull will my 1/4 in Hi tensile chain break?

Plus there is some sort of swivel thing too. (don't know what it is supposed to do because every time, and I mean every time I have lifted the anchor it has come up backwards and has to be manually "spun" to come aboard. ) Bet that ain't worth many lbs.

And the cleat - Hah!

[Bash]

Originally Posted by Therapy

Not Rocna.

PS Hey all. At how many pounds of pull will my 1/4 in Hi tensile chain break?

I don't know what the breaking point is, but the working load for 1/4" high test is 2,600 lbs.

[Tom Spohn]

I have watched the development of this anchor that did not do so well as a prototype evolve into an aparently decent anchor. New gen. with no roll bar. Did well in PS mud tests. What does the group think?

[Maine Sail]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

If the folks have an anchor on their bow, it's likely they think it is a pretty good anchor at least for their cruising.

Not always Evans. As an owner I have the liberty to pick and choose which of my 9+ anchors to use because I own them. My only bias is on actual performance as I have been able to measure it for where I cruise.

I still choose the Rocna or Manson Supreme because pound for pound in my home waters, for a 36 foot vessel, it has performed better than a similar weight Bruce, which I also own.

When one can choose any anchor out of the stable, and all are bought and paid for, this owner currently chooses a Manson Supreme or Rocna.

If I could comfortably go multiple sizes bigger I would consider using a Manson Ray but I really don't want to be lifting a 60 +/- pound anchor vs a 33 pound anchor. I'd like to keep the discs in my back working as long as possible.

As I've said before I think the Bruce is a great performing anchor it just needs to be up-sized. Those of us with sub 40 footers can't always afford the muscle to do that, especially when one does not have a windlass. This is perhaps what makes anchors like the Rocna or Manson Supreme an easier choice for those of us sub forty foot owners.

Originally Posted by estarzinger/Practical Sailor

The Ray does make an excellent general-purpose anchor for serious cruisers likely to encounter such challenging conitions regularly; be sure to select a size that is one to two sized larger than the equivalent roll-bar anchor.

(Note: based on experience and anecdotal evidence they've collected, Leonard and Starzinger believe that Bruce-style anchors' effectiveness-relative to other styles-may be diminished in sizes under 44 pounds.)

Seeing as the vast majority of sailboats that have been built are still below 40 feet that really limits ones ability to use a Bruce style anchor if performance, as you & Beth say, is "diminished" in sizes below 44 pounds. For me that would put me at a minimum of a 56 Pound Manson Ray vs. the 35 pound Manson Supreme or the 33 pound Rocna. Why would I do that to my back when not absolutely necessary?

If I am misinterpreting your statements in Practical Sailor I'm not trying to. I typed them word for word.

It would be helpful if you could help us understand how someone with a boat between 30 & 35 feet, a very common size, would be better served with a Bruce / Claw if the appropriate size, as recommend by the manufacturer, has "diminished" performance below the size needed to suit that boat?

[estarzinger]

Maine Sail, Gee . . . all I said was (1) we fit International Drifter's search for someone with a ROCNA/Supreme (we had both) who thought it was only 'ok', and (2) most people like the anchor they have on their bow . . . which seems to fit you also. Do you have a problem with either of those points?

I have never ever said someone on a 30' boat would be better served with a Bruce. I don't know where you are getting that from. I have said that we had great success with a 44lb bruce on our 37'er, so I also don't know why you raise the minimum to 56lbs. And honestly we don't have enough experience with the Ray yet to know if it is a good Bruce copy or not.

You seem dead set to show that the rocna/supreme are better than the CQR in a hard sand bottom . . . and I agree. I think you have made that point extremely well. But the world is not all hard sand and the cqr is not the only 'old gen anchor' and the rocna/supreme are not the only 'next gen' anchors (just as a side note the brugel seemed to have better success in Chile than the ROCNA/supreme, not at all sure why).

Why are you attacking me? I was just simply stating our experience and opinion. I told the OP he should get a danforth or a supreme - you have some problem with that recommendation?

[Maine Sail]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Why are you attacking me? I was just simply stating our experience and opinion. I told the OP he should get a danforth or a supreme - you have some problem with that recommendation?

I'm actually not trying to attack you at all Evans. Sorry you took it that way. My bad if you did, and I'll own that lock stock and barrel as I sometimes type very fast. I do try and get some work done during the day too and have often hit send before a full read over..

My holding expereince with a 33 pound Bruce was less than I would have liked but it always set very well. Perhaps a 44 would have been the magic bullet as it was for you guys but I never got there.


I now understand, good thing I asked, that you did not include the 44 pounder in your statement in PS. That statement, I assumed incorrectly, included the 44 pound model that's why I mentioned the 56 pound model for my boat and PS mentioned one or two sizes bigger.

Originally Posted by estarzinger

I told the OP he should get a danforth or a supreme - you have some problem with that recommendation?

I have no problem at all with that and actually I suggested a Fortress in a previous post myself because he said he wanted light.

Originally Posted by Maine Sail

If you want light a Fortress is a great anchor and should have minimal trouble with re-sets in the soft Chess gunk

Evans I am not trying to attack you at all please understand that. Your statement as published in PS was not all that clear to me and I clearly misinterpreted it to include the 44, when added to the PS recommendation of one to two sizes.

I still think the Op can do fine in the Chess with Fortress or even a Danforth but if he wants light the Fortress would fit that profile.

Please accept my apology for making you feel attacked. I only mean to have a good dialect & banter on anchors.

[Vasco]

Originally Posted by Maine Sail

My holding expereince with a 33 pound Bruce was less than I would have liked but it always set very well. Perhaps a 44 would have been the magic bullet as it was for you guys but I never got there.


.

I found the same on a CS36 Merlin with a 15 kilo (33#) Bruce. In 50 knots, in soft sand with a scope of 15:1 she dragged in 50 knots, very slowly, but she dragged. It never broke out but just dragged slowly through the sand. I had 50 ft. of 3/8 chain and the rest was 3/4" nylon.

Now my experience with the Supreme was much better. With the 45# Supreme on the 393 she dug in so well after two days of 40 knots in Fernandina Beach (mud) I thought I was snagged because it was so hard to break the hook out.

[Hiracer]

Evans,

36.5' steel sloop full loaded displacement upwards to maybe 23,000#, what size Ray would you recomend to go anywhere?

44 lbs? Or more?

TIA.

[RaySea Lady]

QuicklineUSA - Ultra Anchor

Has anyone ever compared this Ultra Anchor to a Rocna?

The advertising seems to bring up some good design points, heavily weighted in the tip to insure the angle of attack etc... but no advertising can replace a recomendation from someone who has used it.

I currently have a Delta plow 35lbs with 200 ft of 3/8 chain rode, but the delta simply does not grab all that well and takes several attempts, although I have only anchored three times with it. It Seems to act like the cqr mentioned above.

Right now I am debating between the Rocna above and this Ultra Anchor. Both seem to recomend around 100lbs for my boat.

[sildene]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Sword says they only have one US distributor for the Spade and none for the Sword but "are working on a distribution network" and they "have more goodies in the works" but agree that there is a problem for US buyers at this time.

Thanks for clearing that up, Harry.

Martin

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Hiracer

Evans,

36.5' steel sloop full loaded displacement upwards to maybe 23,000#, what size Ray would you recomend to go anywhere?

Hiracer,

The short answer I suspect 44lbs would be just fine for 'normal' locations. I would think about a size larger for Chile and the rest of the south. We got RTW never dragging with a 44lber on Silk.

The long answer - I don't know

We don't have that much experience with our Ray yet to know if it is a good Bruce copy or not - we suspect it is but can't say with certainty yet.

I also don't know how much of our (or any-one's) anchoring experience is due to the captain rather than the anchor - I suspect a lot, but can't say with certainty. I am VERY careful picking my anchoring spot - looking for the best protection and the best bottom in a harbour. I am VERY aware if my anchor is well set or not (usually diving on it in the tropics and backing on it in the cold water) and will leave if the weather becomes unsettles and the set is suspect. When its possible, we really enjoy sailing on and off our anchor, and that creates an incentive toward a good setting design (although I might add that lin/larry also obviously do this, and quite successfully, with a CQR). I am VERY careful to create an exit plan for any anchorage that does not have 360 protection, so I can leave at night if the wind shifts to the unprotected quarter. A lot of cruising boats will try to sit that out, but we leave and go to sea. I use quite short scope (down to 2:1) in many situations (but quite long scope in bad conditions) and that probably affects my anchor choice and sizing. We do not use two anchors very frequently, preferring one large anchor and if it is not big enough for any particular harbour/situation we go elsewhere. If I have to make a trade-off, I prefer to have more weight in the anchor and less in the chain/rode (but not less than 75' chain in coral). We do explore the more remote corners of the world and do probably see great bottom variety and more wind than most.

This is all pretty distinctive technique and I could probably add another dozen points if I thought about it more. I am sure they dramatically affect our anchoring experience and selection and sizing.

[Extemporaneous]

Originally Posted by RaySea Lady

QuicklineUSA - Ultra Anchor

Has anyone ever compared this Ultra Anchor to a Rocna?

The advertising seems to bring up some good design points, heavily weighted in the tip to insure the angle of attack etc... but no advertising can replace a recomendation from someone who has used it.

I currently have a Delta plow 35lbs with 200 ft of 3/8 chain rode, but the delta simply does not grab all that well and takes several attempts, although I have only anchored three times with it. It Seems to act like the cqr mentioned above.

Right now I am debating between the Rocna above and this Ultra Anchor. Both seem to recomend around 100lbs for my boat.

The Ultra does "look" impressive and is consistent with "my" sense of logical reaction, but made from stainless? and the price is WOW.
If you did get one of these it would sure be nice to here back on its performance.

Extemp.

[speedoo]

Originally Posted by Extemporaneous

The Ultra does "look" impressive and is consistent with "my" sense of logical reaction, but made from stainless? and the price is WOW.
If you did get one of these it would sure be nice to here back on its performance.

Extemp.

When I saw it was stainless I did not even bother to look at the price. Plus, the hollow shank is a bit scary from a strength point of view..

[Eric ROGUE]

Maine Sail and estarzing thank you both for so generously sharing your vast knowledge about anchoring. This thread is by far the most informative of any information I have been able to obtain from many, many hours of web searching. Yes, I have read every test openly published on the web and been to various anchor manufacturer's websites. I still have some questions. I am especially interested to hear estarzing and Main Sail thoughts on the matters I raise.

Anchoring is a matter of anchoring system, not just anchor. In days before engines new sail vessels tested their anchoring system by reaching in force 5 and letting go the anchor. If the vessel turned head to wind, and everything held the anchoring system was considered adequate. In those days the anchor was a traditional kedge/yachtsman. What modern anchor will reliably set under this testing situation as well as it would set if one were taking care to set it on the same bottom?

My question is not idle. "Slow but firm" setting as advocated by Evans is not always possible. Without an engine, or when an engine fails, an anchor is what the safety of the boat depends on (assuming inability to sail out of the situation). I have been in said situation. My storm anchor was in the bilge. I was 500 yds off a windward shore that became a lee shore in a 180* wind shift when the wind went from calm to 30 knots in less than five minutes under clear skies. My sails were furled and I was under tow by an inexperienced dinghy operator. Under me was glacial gravel covered with weed. The working anchor is the anchor that must WORK! When I successfully dropped my working anchor over better holding ground I was sailing at or near hull speed. I was very lucky I was able to sail under bare poles at nearly 90* to the wind to get to better holding ground.

ROGUE is 26', weighs 8000 lbs, with high freeboard but free standing masts so windage ROGUE's windage is more like a power boat than a sailboat. ROGUE presently has no engine, and will never have an engine I would consider adequate for an emergency or high wind. ROGUE is a sailboat. I rely on sails and anchor(s). Presently I have a 13S Danforth, 15lb Fortress, and 50* plow. I am going to get rid of the plow. My working anchor will be my storm anchor. Hurricane will take more thought: backed anchor or 3 danforth types at 120* mooring style. I will dive to check for adequate set. I have no anchor windless. I can dangle my boat from the anchor cleat and shake it without worry. Cleats on the quarters are just as well attached. I can stand at the bow secure in a hatch to handle anchor and rode. I wish I had bought 5/16" instead of 1/4" chain, more so now that I hope to go with a lighter anchor than the 50 lb plow. (Interesting that that my 50 lb plow (not CQR) has about the same fluke area as a 22 lb Delta.)

I was pretty well convinced from anchor tests and distributor propaghanda that I should get a Rocna or perhaps a Supreme. Then I read Evans' article in "Cruising World" about Rocna/Supreme not holding in rock when the claw did. However, independent tests, and a Rocna propaganda video show that the (22 lb? ) claw dragging and failing to set when the Rocna dug right in. In this forum Evans has stated that Rocna and Supreme do not do well in rock, weed, or on short scope. He and Maine Sail both feel that a claw of less than 44 lbs cannot be assumed to perform like a claw of 44 lbs or more. I can handle 44 lbs plus at least some chain, but I would prefer to go with a 22 lb anchor and 50 to 100 feet of 5/16" chain plus half inch three strand nylon. As I get older a 44 lb anchor will be less and less enjoyable to handle.

Will a Delta perform better in rock than the Rocna or Supreme? What about grass/weed? What can I expect for reliablity of setting with a 22 lb Delta? What about claws? are claws unreliable in weights less than 44 lbs? The performance of the claw in the Rocna test was as unacceptable as the CQR. Compare Delta and Spade regards ability to dig in (both have somewhat blunted, weighted tips). Under what conditions? Rocna and Supreme are clearly reliable in sand and mud. Maine Sail I would especially appreciate your comments because you have experience with Delta (which you gave up) and Spade (which you do not use?) as well as the Rocna and Supreme. What are your experiences with Rocna and Supreme in Maine weed?

Until reading this forum, and having already become less enchanted with the Rocna and Supreme, I had been wondering if the Delta might be my best all around choice for an anchor. It had the added advantage of being easier to stow than the roll bar anchors. (I do not carry my anchor on deck.)

I will be carrying the Danforth types. I am willing to carry two other anchors if I need to in order to deal with different bottom conditions. However, I think I would sail more comfortably, and sleep better, with one "best all around anchor" (even if not perfect) attached to my anchor rode ready to deploy in a sudden emergency of which I have already had experience. If that takes handling a 44 lb anchor, so be it. If I must carry three types of anchors, the third better cope with weed and rock well because I have mud anchors, and clear choices for sand anchor.

[estarzinger]

Eric,

First, congratulations on sailing engine-less. I think that is a great skill and achievement.

Second, I am certainly NOT an anchor expert. We have anchored a lot and thought about it a lot, and I went thru a multi-anchor testing exercise when we needed to replace our broken Bruce, but the intent has always been to learn what the best anchors are FOR US rather than in some more general sense.

Third, I have always had a real problem understanding why the anchor tests are generally so contrary to our own (And other cruisers like the Dashews) direct personal experience. We never dragged with the 44lb Bruce, but the anchor tests all say it has almost no holding power and is a complete failure. That's not a small minor inconsistency, it is in fact a major disconnect between the tests and the real world (at least our real world). It makes me heavily discount anchor test results. I don't completely understand the cause of the disconnect/inconsistency, except that for us setting ability in difficult bottoms is much more important than holding power in good bottoms and the tests generally focus on holding power. But this disconnect is one thing that makes me reluctant to recommend specific anchors - I feel comfortable enough with my understanding of the reason for the disconnect to intelligently equip my own boat but not enough be be comfortable making a firm recommendation to others.

Fourth, the forum generally disagrees with me, but I do think the skipper is more important that the particular anchor design. Each and every design has strengths and weaknesses. The skipper needs to be aware of what those are and use his skill and forward thinking to compensate for them. I believe a good skipper and a decent anchor weight can make any of the 'good' design work.

Fifth, you don't say where you sail or what sort of bottoms you anchor on. You also don't say if you have a windless. I think that would be important to know.

That all aside, what would do if I have your boat and were sailing worldwide (so a wide variety of bottoms). My initial preference would be to get a Ray 44 with at least 75' of 5/16 chain plus rope. My second choice if you were going to be almost all in sand and mud with be a supreme if your bow can handle the roll bar or a delta if not.

As I said in #4 above, these anchors all have strengths and weaknesses. The Supreme will have excellent holding power in deep sand/and mud. It will not have much holding power in thin sand over coral/rock - I dove and watched Dashew drag his Ronca in Mexico on this sort of bottom (the tip skated along the coral and plowed thru the sand) where our Ray created a big pile of sand in front of it and held. The Ray will have better setting in a wide variety of bottoms but there are a few where it will have much less holding power (soft sand) and you might get a danforth out for that bottom. The Delta is a good design - easier to stow than the supreme, will probably dig deeper than the supreme in some bottoms (because of no roll bar) will probably work better in very heavy grass/kelp (again because of no roll bar), but may have very lightly less holding power in a very few particular bottom. I think you could make either work for you.