Anchor types and General questions

[ClassicalBGP]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

I'm with you, Evans... this is just bizarre ! Craig Smith must be having hysterics if he's still around.

I'm expecting a lot of bent shanks or worse with these anchors, but i'm a card carrying skeptic. I guess we will see how it all plays out.

Jim

With my less than 70 post and newly joined status, I do not want to get into something I know nothing about. However, I took the post to mean, if I was going to only spend $100 on an anchor, I would be better off with the copy than the delta. Just like, I take the above to mean, that you believe I would be better off with the delta?

[AiniA]

Originally Posted by thomm225

An original 20 lb CQR should work just about right for you. My boat is about 6600 lbs and my 20 lb CQR has held in onshore winds near 30 knots plus the ocean/bay wave mix

I found the bottom quite muddy swimming in Senator Wash near Yuma, AZ so you should be fine with the CQR!

One advantage of CQRs is that they are very cheap on the used market since so many people are getting rid of them. I was a CQR guy for many years. Now I have hundreds of nights of experience with a Manson Supreme - there is no comparison.

[estarzinger]

^^ let me try to clear things up a little for you:

1. We know that a genuine delta is a perfectly adequate anchor.
2. We know that a genuine rocna will have somewhat better holding than the above delta (same weight)
3. We know that Rocna's using below spec Chinese steel bent their shanks in normal operation.
4. We know that making seemingly small changes to anchor designs (small changes to angles or weights) can have bigger than expected impacts on their performance.

What we don't know is how strong that copy is or how close it is to the actual rocna design.

You are then left with a decision - the low risk adequate delta, or the rocna which could either be a little better than the delta or a lot worse.

I will say that I am not inherently against making anchor copies. We had our main anchor broken in Chile, and it was going to take some time to get 'genuine' ones shipped in (I had 3 shipped in), so I had a local welder make a copy of an anchor off another cruising boat - BUT I knew what steel he was using and I could double check how close his copy was to the original. That copy worked ok (but not as well as the original I later tested) . . . we used it for a couple months in difficult conditions in Patagonia, but I did give it away and revert to originals when they arrived.

I hope that is fair and balanced

ps - there is a LOT of back history on anchors here, part of which is what I was (ironically) laughing about.

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by AiniA

One advantage of CQRs is that they are very cheap on the used market since so many people are getting rid of them. I was a CQR guy for many years. Now I have hundreds of nights of experience with a Manson Supreme - there is no comparison.

I've always just used the anchors that came with my boats.

Mostly when I was in my teens and twenties they were just used to hold the boat for fishing.

Then later when I started sailing, my boats didn't have anchors even though I was racing 30-100 miles on Beach Cats which was way further than on the power boats I used back in the day.

I paid between $300.00 and $700.00 each for my first 6 boats. On this cruising monohull sailboat, I went a bit above my comfort level and paid $2,000 for it.

So I just used the anchor that was on the bow of this boat when I bought it as I have always done and luckily for me it worked out even in some very bad situations

Btw, this CQR is old and worn and has never let me down as of yet. Also, there was a backup Bruce below that I found after I bought the boat but the CQR was the anchor the PO used for his 2 year voyage to the Bahamas from Massachusetts

[downunder]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

^^ let me try to clear things up a little for you:

1. We know that a genuine delta is a perfectly adequate anchor.
2. We know that a genuine rocna will have somewhat better holding than the above delta (same weight)
3. We know that Rocna's using below spec Chinese steel bent their shanks in normal operation.
4. We know that making seemingly small changes to anchor designs (small changes to angles or weights) can have bigger than expected impacts on their performance.

What we don't know is how strong that copy is or how close it is to the actual rocna design.

You are then left with a decision - the low risk adequate delta, or the rocna which could either be a little better than the delta or a lot worse.

I will say that I am not inherently against making anchor copies. We had our main anchor broken in Chile, and it was going to take some time to get 'genuine' ones shipped in (I had 3 shipped in), so I had a local welder make a copy of an anchor off another cruising boat - BUT I knew what steel he was using and I could double check how close his copy was to the original. That copy worked ok (but not as well as the original I later tested) . . . we used it for a couple months in difficult conditions in Patagonia, but I did give it away and revert to originals when they arrived.

I hope that is fair and balanced

ps - there is a LOT of back history on anchors here, part of which is what I was (ironically) laughing about.

A good sumation estarzinger.

Part of that history for the OP is that certain moderators certainly showed some bias pushing some anchor types.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by ClassicalBGP

With my less than 70 post and newly joined status, I do not want to get into something I know nothing about. However, I took the post to mean, if I was going to only spend $100 on an anchor, I would be better off with the copy than the delta. Just like, I take the above to mean, that you believe I would be better off with the delta?

G'Day BGP,

Really, I'm not offering advice about anchor selection in the above post. I'm commenting on the irony of folks who argued endlessly about relatively minor design issues in the Rocna anchor now advocating the use of a sorta copy with no provenance whatsoever.

When a knock-off product appears at a price WAY below any of the originals, one wonders where the economy in production has been found? Perhaps in having zero research and develop ment costs, perhaps in low labour costs, and just perhaps in the use of low cost and inferior materials. No third party testing of any sort as of yet, no certification by Lloyd's or Veritas, nothing to attest to the quality of design or manufacture. To me, this is scary in something as important as your bower anchor... but then, we live full time at anchor, and have done so for many years.

We will doubtless eventually hear some feedback from users of the knockoff. I personally would be happy if it is favorable, for it might drive down the costs of all anchors on the market. That is not my skeptical anticiipation, but I'll try to maintain impartiality for now.

For your proposed usage, I think the specific type of anchor isn't so important. Any of the ones mentioned, if of appropriate size and well set, will be adequate. Considering your lack of experience, I'd suggest that each time you anchor, be sure to back down on the set with considerable force, and for a full minute or so. If it stays put under such stress, it will most likely be good for the night. If not, pick it up and try again.

A final comment: folks here on CF tend to obsess about anchors and anchoring. Those of us who began sailing and anchoring before the internet and before ASA and before the proliferation of anchor designs just used whatever came with the old boat we bought, or whatever we could find at the chandlery... and mostly they worked ok. I hope that you can find comfort and security with whatever one you finally choose!

Jim

[ClassicalBGP]

Thank you for clearing and cleaning up the issues. I see the logic.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

^^ let me try to clear things up a little for you:

1. We know that a genuine delta is a perfectly adequate anchor.
2. We know that a genuine rocna will have somewhat better holding than the above delta (same weight)
3. We know that Rocna's using below spec Chinese steel bent their shanks in normal operation.
4. We know that making seemingly small changes to anchor designs (small changes to angles or weights) can have bigger than expected impacts on their performance.

What we don't know is how strong that copy is or how close it is to the actual rocna design.

You are then left with a decision - the low risk adequate delta, or the rocna which could either be a little better than the delta or a lot worse.

I will say that I am not inherently against making anchor copies. We had our main anchor broken in Chile, and it was going to take some time to get 'genuine' ones shipped in (I had 3 shipped in), so I had a local welder make a copy of an anchor off another cruising boat - BUT I knew what steel he was using and I could double check how close his copy was to the original. That copy worked ok (but not as well as the original I later tested) . . . we used it for a couple months in difficult conditions in Patagonia, but I did give it away and revert to originals when they arrived.

I hope that is fair and balanced

ps - there is a LOT of back history on anchors here, part of which is what I was (ironically) laughing about.

I think all that is pretty logical.

HOWEVER, I actually went from genuine Delta to genuine Rocna on my present boat, and the difference in setting behavior, at least in Northern European bottoms, is night and day. If severe budget restraints forced me to choose between a genuine Delta and a fake Rocna, I might take a chance with the fake Rocna. That would be a bet on better performance but with a risk of a bent shank.

The old furore over the out of spec steel on Rocnas was justified in my opinion, even if the tone was maybe somewhat exaggerated. It was a push-back on very aggressive marketing and very specific claims concerning the steel used. The furore was not over the out of spec anchors' being necessarily unacceptably weak -- after all thousands of them are still in use -- it was over their having been marketed dishonestly and aggressively.

I used a Rocna for a few years and I don't like a few aspects of the design, including the simple cheap to make cut plate shank, which seems to me subject to bending even if made out of good steel. But the Rocna works pretty well, incomparably better than the Delta, and if I couldn't afford a Spade, I wouldn't hesitate to use a Rocna, or maybe better a Mantus, and I might even use a Rocna copy if the geometry was good and it performed well.

Note that knock-off anchors may not have the right geometry, and so may perform much worse than the real ones. This is certainly true of many of the Claw copies I have used. So one would be taking a risk on this, on top of the risk on steel quality, going with a Rocna copy.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

. . . A final comment: folks here on CF tend to obsess about anchors and anchoring. Those of us who began sailing and anchoring before the internet and before ASA and before the proliferation of anchor designs just used whatever came with the old boat we bought, or whatever we could find at the chandlery... and mostly they worked ok. I hope that you can find comfort and security with whatever one you finally choose!. . .

Indeed! Anchors are an infamous hot button topic on here, although I think in the last year or so they have calmed down considerably.

My advice to anyone starting out is to choose any latest generation anchor and don't worry about it any more -- concentrate on developing good anchoring technique.

You MIGHT even have good results with old types of anchors. Some people have. My own personal experience was bad, especially with CQRs, and modern anchors really transformed the experience of anchoring for me. Those who say they have had good luck with CQRs seem to me to be living in an alternative universe.

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Those who say they have had good luck with CQRs seem to me to be living in an alternative universe.

Yes it most probably is an alternative universe.

One of knowledge and experience. A universe where folks use what they know and what has worked for them for years

Not a universe where one buys a new boat (many times their first) after taking a sailing course or asking a couple questions on the internet then goes cruising

I believe I've read a few threads that read similar to this: I have zero sailing experience and have never been on a boat but could you recommend a boat that I can sail around the world? And which anchor should I buy???

Back in the day (1970's) my outboard motor wouldn't start and we were going out with the tide through a very narrow inlet which feed the Atlantic Ocean. I threw the old anchor over and it just bounced along the bottom for maybe 40 yards so I let out the last of the rope (rode) and cleated it. Finally it caught. It was an old anchor similar to this: (the boat was an old 17' power boat)
https://www.google.com/search?q=old+...=1495280973659

The problem ended up being a split fuel line. The split was near the tank. And wouldn't you know a storm was coming in at the same time. We got it just after dark.

I'm not sure what would have happened if the anchor didn't catch. Our parents had already called the Coast Guard but they didn't know whether we put in on the bayside or seaside

[malbert73]

Of all the things to skimp on, when we invest so much in our boats (even if cheap to purchase) I just can't understand why spending 300-400 on a great anchor is avoided. I'm not doubting that $200 may mean more to some than others, but when you divide it by the number of nights you spend at anchor and associated peace of mind...


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Factor]

Originally Posted by Spindrift NH

John Deere invented this device to move through the dirt with one horse, it wouldn't have gained so much popularity back then if it actually stopped the horse!
Notice that the direction of pull is probably greater than 7:1

And some person in pre history invented the scoop. It wouldn't have gained much popularity if you couldn't lift up what you scooped.

The whole Plough thing is way overdone,

The rhetoric goes like this;

A plough moves dirt
This anchor (ABCDEF) is called a plough therefore it must be crap because it is called a plough.

Can anyone spot the logic error there? It makes as much sense as saying because a sugar scoop helps you lift up lots of sugar an anchor called a scoop will help you lift up lots of the bottom.

BTW those that think a farm plough will if let to its own devices not dig in to the dirt have obviously never used one. Also John Deere did not invent the plough. Geez there were patents on it around the world in the 1600 and later the 1700. Notations from ancient egypt show ploughs in use a few centuries back.

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by malbert73

Of all the things to skimp on, when we invest so much in our boats (even if cheap to purchase) I just can't understand why spending 300-400 on a great anchor is avoided. I'm not doubting that $200 may mean more to some than others, but when you divide it by the number of nights you spend at anchor and associated peace of mind...


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

This is a very good point!

I have trusted the CQR that was on the bow of the sailboat I bought back in 2011. I never met the PO as he had passed a few years earlier.

The boat had been on the hard for 5 years

I heard from the boatyard owner that the PO was an old salt, had sailed the boat extensively and the CQR was still on the bow

So since I paid $2,000 for it I purposely put the boat in harms way and the anchor always held.

Btw, as a racer and daytime fisherman I didn't realize the importance of an anchor until I bought this boat.

I was like why does this salty old bastard have 6 anchors onboard?

[Kelkara]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Those who say they have had good luck with CQRs seem to me to be living in an alternative universe.

My boat came with a CQR on the bow, and I used it for the first few months ... and it did the job ... it set every time, and only dragged once when I didn't have enough scope out in 40kts.

However, I recently upgraded to an Excel ... And even from my novice point of view ... although the CQR works, the Excel just sets better every time.

So yes, I had good luck with my CQR. But I now have a reference point that says it is probably not the best option available, but I'm happy to keep it on board as a back-up.

[hsi88]

Was at West Marine today. Guess who now carries cheap new generation anchors with the WM name on them? And they back up what they sell. They had a 20 pounder the OP can afford. Is anyone still buying Bruce and Deltas anymore? LOL