Rocna or Manson Supreme? (OP Ducks His Head)

[jazzgtr]

No, look I think they are great anchors, my main anchor is a Manson Supreme, great holding and setting. Mine has no rust is in good condition after 5 years, but the fact that people were complaining to the supplier and that they are no longer stocking them citing problems with the galvanizing? and the condition of some of the ones around the marina.

[Davo1404]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

The Rocna is just as good except in mud. The turned up edge of the Rocna keeps it from digging in as deep into soft mud.

A lot of soft mud in the rivers of Queensland, with strong tidal currents. My Rocna is a pain in the arse to break it out & then have to remove a huge amount of mud that is stuck to it. Even the deck wash struggles.

[Davo1404]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

See the turned up back edge of the Rocna? It prevents it from setting deeper in mud.

Not the case with mine. It sets to well.

[Davo1404]

Originally Posted by Chotu

Oh, damn. I see the turned up lip you’re talking about at the rear of the fluke.

I’m in mud plenty. I got the wrong anchor? Ugh.

Maybe I should sell this and get another Manson Supreme?

No don't. They set really well in mud. I have been using one for years in muddy Queensland rivers and its always a hell of a job trying to remove great lumps of it
Even a deck wash struggles.

[Doek]

I'm always confused when I see someone offering comments about the Rocna and saying that it has problems in either design, construction, or bottom type. I anchor over 200 times each year (according to logs) in every bottom type imaginable. As a Delivery Captain, I have used or owned many of the anchors and most of the generations of anchors that have been produced in the past 4 decades. This has been my experience:
1) The new generation of "Scoop" anchors far exceed the abilities of the past generation of anchors.
2) Scoop anchors work well in all conditions of bottom types. Certainly better than the older anchors.
3) The Rocna was carefully designed and tested over several years in extreme conditions and bottom types by hardy cruisers in severe conditions. It is very well thought out, designed, tested, and constructed by a full time cruiser.
4) Many of today's "Scoop" anchors are Rocna Clones and not as well designed or constructed as a Rocna.

5) Most "Scoop" anchors are a cut above the Bruce, Danforth (Fortress), and Plow Anchors, etc etc of yester-year.



I have used a few different sizes of Rocna Anchors for years and have found them to be superior to every other anchor I've tried. In the Cruising community, They have become the anchor that all the others are measured against. Period.


Side note: West Marine was the largest proponent for Manson Anchors and now they don't even list them on heir web site. Not sure why, but I doubt it is because they were so great and made them so much money.


I have no idea why a competent cruiser would suggest that the Rocna was an inferior product in any condition or bottom type.

[Lost Horizons]

Originally Posted by Davo1404

A lot of soft mud in the rivers of Queensland, with strong tidal currents. My Rocna is a pain in the arse to break it out & then have to remove a huge amount of mud that is stuck to it. Even the deck wash struggles.

To remove mud, I run the boat at idle speed with the anchor in the water, just below the surface. Mud washes away in a few moments. Mud on the chain, however, is a different problem.

[cndcruiser]

Originally Posted by Akapeterc

Forget them both and get a SARCA EXCEL great holding

I have to agree with this. The Rocna anchor served me well on two boats and over 15 years, but it has one serious flaw: the design depends on the roll-bar to prevent it from settling up side down. Once set, the roll-bar serves no positive purpose but does create several negative effects. The serious problem occurs in seabed substrates (certain combinations of rock/mud/weed) which choke the space between the flukes and the roll bar. The anchor then becomes a dredge bucket and can fail to set/reset. It's also a pain to clear away the debris. The SARCA EXCEL is at least as good as the Rocna in most commonly encountered seabed substrates and it has no roll-bar to get choked. It comes up clean. Also, I have found that it self launches and retrieves from my bow-roller much better than the Rocna did. Another problem with the Rocna is that the roll-bar does not allow me to fit a bow-sprit for use with a cruising spinnaker or Code zero sail.

Summary: The Rocna is a great anchor that has served me well, most of the time. The SARCA EXCEL is a better anchor for my boat and in my cruising areas (Bass Strait Islands and Tasmania).

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by quackedo

I'm always confused when I see someone offering comments about the Rocna and saying that it has problems in either design, construction, or bottom type. I anchor over 200 times each year (according to logs) in every bottom type imaginable. As a Delivery Captain, I have used or owned many of the anchors and most of the generations of anchors that have been produced in the past 4 decades. This has been my experience:
1) The new generation of "Scoop" anchors far exceed the abilities of the past generation of anchors.
2) Scoop anchors work well in all conditions of bottom types. Certainly better than the older anchors.
3) The Rocna was carefully designed and tested over several years in extreme conditions and bottom types by hardy cruisers in severe conditions. It is very well thought out, designed, tested, and constructed by a full time cruiser.
4) Many of today's "Scoop" anchors are Rocna Clones and not as well designed or constructed as a Rocna.

5) Most "Scoop" anchors are a cut above the Bruce, Danforth (Fortress), and Plow Anchors, etc etc of yester-year.



I have used a few different sizes of Rocna Anchors for years and have found them to be superior to every other anchor I've tried. In the Cruising community, They have become the anchor that all the others are measured against. Period.


Side note: West Marine was the largest proponent for Manson Anchors and now they don't even list them on heir web site. Not sure why, but I doubt it is because they were so great and made them so much money.


I have no idea why a competent cruiser would suggest that the Rocna was an inferior product in any condition or bottom type.

Have you ever used a Mantus? You’ll notice a difference. rocna is of course very good too

[SailMoonShadow]

Originally Posted by Chotu

Right. Which is why I should sell the Rocna and get another Manson Supreme if the Rocna struggles in mud.

I've used my 15kg (35lb) Rocna almost exclusively in mud and never had a problem. Sets almost instantly and I sleep very soundly 👍.

I recently saw a comparison study on various anchors and the Rocna outperformed the Manson. I'll see if I can find a link for you.

[Bluechart]

The Rocha does NOT struggle in mud. Stick with a Rocna or Manson, “scoop” type anchors.
I do carry 2 danforth style anchors ( one fortress), but not in the bow roller.

I would stay away from all other types of “plows”, they plow in heavy wind.....
I disagree with “Forget them both and get a SARCA EXCEL great holding” It is another plow.

[Soldout2sailing]

Practical Sailor has done studies on anchors and holding so search their site online. In the end no one anchor is best for all conditions. You are better off with one for the bottom you mainly anchor in with a backup from another manufacturer.

[cndcruiser]

It is a common misconception that the SARCA Excel is a plough anchor. It is not a plough anchor. Check out the anchor tests by SV Panope, in particular Youtube "Anchor Test Compilation #56". The two top performers in these tests were the Spade and the SARCA Excel. The Spade is sourced from Europe but no Australian distributor. The Excel is Australian made and 1/3rd the price of the Spade. Also check out the AnchorRight website for Excel details. It is impossible to compare anchor holding in "mud" without comparing the "mud" which can vary from sloppy slush to wet concrete - all described as "mud" but as different as chalk and cheese. My Rocna took about 20 minutes to release from a "muddy" anchorage in Port Davey after a 30-50knot week-long gale. This "mud" was towards the concrete end of the mud spectrum. Re the turned-up trailing edges on the Rocna, it is my view that these will actually assist deeper penetration of the anchor, however, the roll bar will work against this. As I said in my earlier post, the sole purpose of the roll-bar is to force the anchor to settle pointy-end down.

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by Bluechart

The Rocha does NOT struggle in mud. Stick with a Rocna or Manson, “scoop” type anchors.
I do carry 2 danforth style anchors ( one fortress), but not in the bow roller.

I would stay away from all other types of “plows”, they plow in heavy wind.....
I disagree with “Forget them both and get a SARCA EXCEL great holding” It is another plow.

Perhaps in your experience Rocna doesn't struggle in mud, however in my experience it did on a number of occasions. The replacement Excell has not to date in the same locations and based on this actual experience I would recommend it.
Perhaps you could detail your Excell experience and just where it plowed in heavy wind.
The fact that they somewhat resemble a delta plow does not make them the same.

[Icarus]

Originally Posted by Chotu

I bough a well used 80lb Rocna anchor a CF member didn’t want anymore. It was too big for his boat.

I had my 80lb Manson Supreme stolen off the bow of my boat in Typical Florida style.

Can I trust the Rocna as much as the Manson Supreme, which held while the eye of a category 4 hurricane passed over my boat?

Hate to have that little feeling in the back of my head thinking about if my anchor is good enough.

200’ chain, bridle, etc... more about the actual anchor.

I have a Rocna 60lb, works ok, sometimes problems of reset.
Bought Sarca Supreme #6 MUCH better, no dramas on reaset. Cheaper as well.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Soldout2sailing

Practical Sailor has done studies on anchors and holding so search their site online. In the end no one anchor is best for all conditions. You are better off with one for the bottom you mainly anchor in with a backup from another manufacturer.

Frequently swapping anchors to try and match the substrate is very old fashioned thinking. One of the great advantages of modern anchors is their versatility. The better designs will work at least well in all reasonable substrates.

If you can oversize the anchor this helps further. The greater size will make up for any slight deficiency.

This removes one source of error. Finding accurate information abut the substrate is often not easy especially for long distance cruisers who will not be continually revisiting the same locations. In addition, substrates are rarely uniform over an entire anchorage. Distinct variations can occur in patches.

Any specialist anchor will be very poor in some substrates. So if you expect mud and there is weed, or vice versa you can end up with very poor holding if using a specialist model, especially if you have chosen a relatively small anchor so it can be more easily changed.

Dropping my oversized Mantus M1, I know my anchor will provide great holding in mud or weed, likely better than a smaller specialist anchor, without the problems of changing anchors or misinterpreting the substrate.