Catalina 34

General Activities => Main Message Board => Topic started by: jpaulroberts on February 13, 2006, 09:05:58 AM

Title: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: jpaulroberts on February 13, 2006, 09:05:58 AM
I've been using a Delta22 lb on my #296 and I like it, but I want to get a bigger anchor for peace of mind in a blow. West Marine says the best all around anchor is the Delta, and I'm thinking of getting the 35 pounder. I know a lot of people use Bruce and CQR. West says they are not as good in mud as Delta, and I sail in Long Island Sound which is pretty much all black mud-clay-sand.  I will eventually sail as far north as Nova Scotia.

I will sift through old projects and message board threads, but I would just like to hear some recent first hand thoughts on the relative merits of Delta, CQR and Bruce.
I intend to install a bow roller mount and use a chain/rope spliced rode. I will eventually add a winch.

Thanks for your thoughts. Jerry
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: reedbr on February 13, 2006, 10:05:57 AM
Sometimes anchors are like religion.  Everybody has their own beliefs.  I was raised in a Danforth house and that's all I knew.  About 3 years ago, I tried a 33 pound Bruce with 25' chain and 1/2" 3-strand nylon line.  I have been more than happy with this setup.  It has held me through two bad squalls, one was a raft up and I had to deploy quick when the other boat's Danforth broke loose.  I can manage it up and down without a winch and it hangs well on the roller.  It is my primary and I sleep well at anchor even if the wind picks up and shifts.   I have effectively changed religions. 

That being said, I've never tried a Delta or a CQR.  If you are looking for opinions (and we know what those are worth!), I would use my heavy as my primary.  Once the wind picks up it's no fun re-setting anchors.  For extended cruising, I would have two different types on-board.  If for some reason the Delta doesn't bite after several tries, it might be nice to toss down something different.  Also check out Practical Sailor which seems to do anchor tests every year or so.

My cruising ground is the Chesapeake and my anchoring is mostly mud. 

Good luck.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Joe Kern on February 13, 2006, 10:25:30 AM
The most recent issue of Practical Sailor had a very comprehensive test of anchors.  I think they focused on mud holding and I believe the Bruce/Bruce-Type anchors did the best for the money.  Lots of good detail in the article.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Stu Jackson on February 13, 2006, 11:14:56 AM
Jerry

Two major issues (beyond weight) that affect anchor choice

--- Bottom conditions

--- Shifting currents (rivers, tidal areas)

The Bruce, CQR, Delta types can reset after a current shift.  Danforths usually can't.

The bottom conditions also are a consideration.  I recommend simply checking West Marine or other catalogs - usually they have anchor charts that discuss the types of bottoms that the anchors are good in as well as sizing.  Sometimes the individual anchor selection / descriptions includes that information.

Sounds like you are going to have a great season ahead of you with all the god work you've done on "Resolution."
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ted Pounds on February 13, 2006, 02:19:41 PM
I second what Joe said - get a copy of Practical Sailor and check out their anchor test.  They're the "Consumer Reports" of Sail boating.  Good, unbiased (they don't take advertising) data.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ron Hill on February 13, 2006, 05:01:41 PM
Jerry : You can read the tons of stuff praising/damning the merits of each brand/type anchor.  In the end you'll have to decide for yourself.  Here are a few helpful tip that you should consider -- which ever 30+ lb anchor you choose:

1.  Use a length of chain similar to the length of the boat.
2.  Make sure that you use a swivel between the anchor and the chain so the anchor can do it's OWN thing!!
3.  Carry two types of anchors onboard, so you can change when bottom conditions change.

Good Luck in your quest!!!    :wink:
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: jpaulroberts on February 13, 2006, 08:22:55 PM
I always carry three anchors. Right now I've got the Delta 22 as my primary. I have the largest danforth that fits in the locker grooves as a storm anchor, and I carry a small danforth in the stern. I have been in bad sutuations on some cruises where I have found myself extreamly exposed in 35 knot winds and substantial seas all night long and I want the best holding power I can get. Last sumer I was in an anchorage with 50 knot gusts and that was a long night. I've got an 11 month old daughter now and I want to know I am going to hold through a blow.  I'll get the practical Sailor issue. But I don't mond spending over their $200 limit. I want the best I can buy.

By the way, do people actually use 30 foot chain on their rodes? I thought 10 was plenty. Jerry
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ted Pounds on February 14, 2006, 09:00:21 AM
For the conditions you describe you want at least 30 feet of chain.  Many serious cruisers use all chain.  Though our boats aren't really set up for that.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: jpaulroberts on February 14, 2006, 09:21:32 AM
Don't get me wrong, I do not make a habit of anchoring in those conditions. They are extremely rare. In fact I am always careful to choose as safe an anchorage as I can, but conditions change at night and then you need to decide whether to move and reanchor in the dark, or tough it out.

I have sailed with a Pearson Triton for 15 years and used a medium danforth and 8 feet of chain. I would think 30 feet of chain is hard to handle. Anyway, this is why I am taking a hard look at anchors, rode, etc as I continue to re-fit the C-34 I bought in September 2004. All this advice is really appreciated. Jerry
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ron Hill on February 14, 2006, 06:18:50 PM
Jerry : I not only use 35 ft of chain, I also send down a 15 lb. sentinel -- EVERY time I anchor!!  I spend alittle over 110 overnights each year for the past 18 years.  That's alot of anchoring.
I don't want to re anchor in the middle of the night(or day) and since using 35 ft of chain and a 15 lb sentinel - once the anchor (35#Bruce) is in, it stays in.   Even when a thunder storm comes with 40+ kts of wind and a 180 degree wind direction change  :thumb:
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: jpaulroberts on February 14, 2006, 06:34:33 PM
Ron, that's a pretty strong rig and I hear you. Do use and winch and if so which one? Whay bow roller do you have. Lastly do you think a Bruce beats out Delta and CQR for any particular reasons, or is it just what you use and it works. Thanks Jerry
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: jpaulroberts on February 14, 2006, 08:09:00 PM
Ron, what size rope and chain are you using?
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ron Hill on February 15, 2006, 06:58:50 PM
Jerry : I use 1/4" Hi Tensile chain and braid on braid 1/2" rode.  I like the Bruce not only for it's holding, but it ability to almost immediately re hook(if its ever dislodged). 
I don't have a winch.  Just remember that the only weight that you're really lifting is the length of chain straight to the bottom  and the anchor itself.  If you anchor in 10" of water that's only 43lbs - and BTW I'm 69 (for the 4th time)!   
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: jpaulroberts on February 15, 2006, 08:36:40 PM
Thanks Ron. Lots of great info and valuble experiance. I've ruled out CQR, and now it's just between Delta  and Bruce. From all the research I've done it sounds like Delta sets faster and is a bit better in mud and weeds, but Bruce probably holds better once it's set. Of course that's the real point, staying set, and re-setting if it should pull out. I used the 22 pount Delta last season and liked it. I've never used a Bruce but they sure have a great reputation. 
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Howard Armstrong on February 16, 2006, 05:34:07 AM
Ron, i use must the same anchoring system as you do. How close to the anchor do you put your weight? i normally put mine only deep enough to keep from having a keel wrap.
thanks
Howard
Title: Re: Anchors, Sentinels & Kellets
Post by: Joe Kern on February 16, 2006, 11:21:06 AM
I am interested in how the sentinel is used as well. 

Our first night at anchor on the boat after we got her in November we ended up in 30 knt widns plus a good 2 knot current and a nice keel wrap that I am not sure how I got us out of.  I would like to avoid that experience again.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Stu Jackson on February 16, 2006, 11:35:15 AM
Joe and others

A search on sentinel found this:  http://c34.org/bbs/index.php?topic=1943.0.  Scroll down to get to the sentinel discussion from Ron Hill.

It covers a lot of material on anchoring, too, some of which adds to this discussion.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Randy and Mary Davison on February 16, 2006, 02:21:05 PM
Jerry,  I also use exactly the same setup as Ron, including a 20 pound sentinel.  The sentinel can be a pain in wind shifts as it will wrap the sentinal line around the rode.  On the other hand, it really makes a difference in holding power, especially in deep water.  We've only dragged two times in 8 years with this boat.  Both times were in fairly shallow water with really soft mud and swirling winds.  The Bruce almost certainly would have reset but both times we were on the edge of a shelf and it ended up hanging straight down - scope of .5!  We drop the sentinel about half the depth of the water.

As we've worked further north in Brithish Columbia, I've noticed most folks using all chain as depths are often 70 feet with strong winds fairly often.  Even that 35 feet of chain looks pretty short and a scope of even 5 to 1 puts you into other boats or the beach.  I'm thinking of a chain gypsy for the windless.  Right now we just hoist the chain on the standard drum.  Works OK but makes a lot of noise when you're tryinig to get away early!   Nylon and chain rodes don't coexist very well in a tight anchorage so we need to make the change.

Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ron Hill on February 17, 2006, 01:40:16 PM
Howard : I usually put out about 15ft of pennant for the sentinel.  If anchoring in 15' of water I'll put out 20" of sentinel.   :wink:
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ray & Sandy Erps on March 20, 2007, 07:13:47 PM
I'm not sure of the etiquette on resurrecting old threads, but I thought it better than creating a duplicate thread.  I've been anchoring for about twenty years now with a wide variety of anchors on several different boats.  Last summer and fall I did a considerable amount of research on anchors in preparation of an upgrade.  I'm a thrifty person (cheap) who likes to get the most bang for my buck.  I was leaning towards one of the new generation anchors, either a Spade or Rocna.  I settled on the Rocna design and bought a knock off called the Manson Supreme.  I bought it last fall and when I put it on the bow roller next the the 35 lb CQR it was immediately apparent that the Manson had more surface area that gets buried in the mud.

Winter finally broke hear in February, so we've been out a few times and I just wanted to share our experiences with this new anchor.  WOW!!!   I used to worry whether our anchor would set on the first try or not.  Now I worry whether we'll be able to get the anchor back up after setting because it sets so firmly.  My previous anchor experiences have been with Danforths, a Bruce, a CQR, and a Navy type anchor.  This Rocna copy sets fast and deep.  Last weekend when we pulled it back up, there was evidence that the anchor buried all the way over the shank and a couple of links of chain.  When I set it, I applied full reverse to dig her in, something that used to cause our Bruce to drag.

Anyway, I can't say that this new anchor is a pretty anchor but it's a darn good one.  I think the Rocna website has some video of their anchors being set on the beach next to a Bruce and CQR.  Up here in the PNW, Bruces, Danforths and CQR's appear to be the old standbys.  Deltas are starting to show up on the docks and I think we'll be seeing a lot more of these Manson Supremes/Rocnas in the future.

Regarding the use of a sentinel.  We used one quite a bit in crowded anchorages with our mixed chain and rope rode.  It worked well for us, especially when the wind was calm.  It's my understanding that their influence is negligible when the wind really picks up though at which time you really need to rely on a well set anchor.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Mike and Joanne Stimmler on March 20, 2007, 07:27:02 PM
If anyone knows of a source for Bruce anchors please post it. I have a Bruce 22 and would like to also get a 33 but have been told Bruce is no longer making anchors for the recreational market

Mike
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Stu Jackson on March 21, 2007, 11:50:52 AM
Mike, shortly after the time that Jerry started this thread, he did some research and reported this on availability of Bruce anchors: http://c34.org/bbs/index.php?topic=2955.0
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ron Hill on March 21, 2007, 02:48:29 PM
Mike : I saw a Bruce 33 in Bacon's in Annapolis last weekend.  It's used, but in good shape.   :thumb:
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Mike and Joanne Stimmler on March 21, 2007, 07:49:34 PM
Thanks Ron and Stu, thanks for the info.
I had heard rumors that a company in Canada is taking over production of Bruce anchors but haven't been able to find any solid information on it.
Ron, how can I get in touch with Bacon's? Do you have any contact info?

Thanks,
Mike
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Stu Jackson on March 22, 2007, 10:55:58 AM
Mike, Ron comes and goes, and is not always here daily.  I just did a Google Advanced Search on Bacon's Annapolis and got some hits, why not try that approach?
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Bruce & Sandi L on March 22, 2007, 05:26:00 PM
I use and love a 35lb Delta on 150 feet of 5/16 BB chain and 100 feet of 5/8 nylon. In two years of cruising in the Sea of Cortez it has never moved more then a few feet in some difficult conditions. It has been in sand and some mud, and some shallow sand on top of shale. We had a night of 40 to 50 knot gusts coming straight into an ancorage, with about 3 to 4 feet of chop. Waves almost breaking over the bow at anchor, and a rock wall behind us. We decided to move to a safer place, but in the mean time the anchor held. We have experenced the famous "La Paz Waltz", with 4 or 5 knots of current running one way, and 20 to 30 knots of wind running 180 degrees to that, and then the tide changes and you go the other way with the wind. Here I think the anchor moved a few feet when it reset, but we were in tight quarters for three days, and we would have noticed any lengthy drift. I have seen a lot of boats down here with both a Bruce and a Delta on the bow, but I am not sure what kind of bottoms each anchor is preffered in.

We have an electric windless, but I have weighed it by hand in 35 feet of water just to make sure I could do it if the windless gives out. If I had a lot of time I would rig up to use a sheet winch, but in a rush I can to it, although I am probably in better shape then the average 65 year old.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: John Langford on March 22, 2007, 09:07:57 PM
Mike,
What about the Lewmar Claw which is the same as a Bruce but very reasonably priced. My understanding is that the Bruce patent ran out and they stopped production because of the availability of cheaper clones. See: http://www.lewmar.com/webcat/features/anchors.html
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ray & Sandy Erps on March 25, 2007, 08:38:01 PM
Here's that Rocna knock-off next to a CQR.
(http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t46/sv_nikko/IMG_0303.jpg)
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Wayne on March 26, 2007, 09:56:43 AM
Get plenty of chain--better too much than too little.  My boat came with only 20 feet of chain, and getting my anchor to stick in SF Bay mud was pretty iffy-usually took a second or third try.  I replaced with 75' to chain, and now I hold nicely, even in tight conditions where I'm not putting out as much scope as would be preferred.  Having a little more chain than is necessary makes life soooo much easier!
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Mike and Joanne Stimmler on March 26, 2007, 10:49:40 AM
I finally found Bacon's phone number but when I called they couldn't find the used  Bruce 33. Maybe they sold it. I am considering a Danforth type that will fit in the anchor locker so that I have two diferent type anchors available. Does anyone know what size will fit? Later I may consider a CQR or Delta as a third anchor. I know the CQR's are expensive, are they worth it?

Mike
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: ken003 on March 26, 2007, 11:08:11 AM
Ray,
I am thinking of getting one of these Manson Supreme anchors.  What size is that shown in your photo?  I notice you do not use the long slot which doubles for a trip line.  I would worry about using it too.  Do you think there would be a problem drilling a hole in the top, wide part of the shovel for attaching a trip line?

Ken
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Gary on March 26, 2007, 11:15:50 AM
Because the original Bruce anchor is difficult to locate for purchase I have elected to try a North Star Bruce Anchor.  I will report back in May but in the meantime you might check out their web site at <www.northstar-marinesupplies.com>

I purchased the stainless 33 lb model...it looks to be well made and very close to the original Bruce.

The company is located in Vancouver, Canada.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ray & Sandy Erps on March 26, 2007, 11:28:31 AM
Ken,

That long trip line slot looks like trouble waiting to happen to me.  We have occasionally rigged trip lines with previous anchors and I think with this one I'll probably just tie a line to the rollbar.  We bought the 40-sumthin' pounder.  One thing that impressed me with it over some other new anchors is that it's not ballasted with additional weight so that it will set better.  That means all the weight can be used for surface area holding power.  Take a close look at the dimensions of the model your considering to make sure it fits on your anchor roller.  The shank on the one we got has an interference fit with our setup, something we'll put up with. (although no slop in rough conditions)
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: mainesail on March 29, 2007, 12:07:51 PM
Hi All,

Even though I don't own a 34 I do watch your forums because there are a lot of similarities between the C-310 and the 34's. Unfortunately the C-310 assoc is lacking so I frequent the C-36 and 34 sites regularly.

[Added bu Stu Sept.1, 2014:  the C310 skippers can be found here:  http://forums.catalina.sailboatowners.com/forumdisplay.php?f=111 (http://forums.catalina.sailboatowners.com/forumdisplay.php?f=111)]

I would recommend seriously looking at a Manson Supreme, Rocna or a Steel Spade (not the aluminum version I have one and it stinks compared to the steel version I also have). I've owned just about every anchor made and still own them. My CQR never even gets dusted off any more and my Bruce is on loan to a buddy who never anchors. The Delta is not a bad anchor but also nowhere as good as either a Rocna, Spade or Manson Supreme. I anchor out a lot and my Manson Supreme is now my primary anchor. I actually physically test my anchors and put them through the paces and compare them to each other. I also keep an anchor log book with scope, wind, depth, bottom type and anchor used for each anchoring. The Bruce and CQR were good anchors a long time ago, and still are, but when compared to some of the newer designs they just don't compete in the same arena.

Below is a video of my Manson Supreme in a very hard, intertidal zone showing off how well it penetrates hard bottom types. I drive my truck on this intertidal zone to launch my brothers Boston Whaler! When I tested My CQR here it wouldn't even bite even after four tries. I have no affiliation to Manson or any other manufacturer & these tests were done for my own piece of mind and to get a better understanding of how an anchor works on the bottom.. In the picture below you can see why the Manson sets and holds so well. The cross section of this anchor is sharpened like an arrow head. In my 37 years of boating I've NEVER had an anchor set so definitively and abruptly as the Manson Supreme or hold as well! I can literally drag my CQR 25 around a cove with upwards of a 10:1 scope, and my boat in reverse, at 80% throttle. My 33# Bruce is similar but does finally set and hold.

Home Made Mason Supreme Video
http://www.dropshots.com/day.php?userid=86200&cdate=20060313&ctime=160000 (http://www.dropshots.com/day.php?userid=86200&cdate=20060313&ctime=160000)
(http://www.pbase.com/mainecruising/image/64147772/medium.jpg)

I'm not trying to slam the CQR, Delta or Bruce as they are all ok anchors. It's just that the Spade's, Manson Supreme's and Rocna's are excellent anchors and after driving a BMW I could never see going back to a Pontiac if you know what I mean.. I can't tell you how many CQR's I dove on, over the years, that were basically being used as a rock connected to chain. Probably 60% of the CQR & Bruce anchors I have witnessed on the bottom, in coves or anchorages, have been sitting on their side with about three inches of the tip barely caught in the bottom. I'm not saying CQR's  can't be set, they can & I used one for 6 years, they just require more skill and patience to set, & set properly, than the newer designs. From my musings over the years I would have to say that close to 50% of boaters, both power and sail, but mostly power don't even know how to set an anchor or attempt to! I've witnessed lots of catastrophic, vacation ending, dragings leading to serious hull damage over the years and every one still haunts me. Perhaps I take anchoring a little to seriously but the cost of an anchor is small compared to a six figure boat. This picture http://www.rocna.com/press/press_0612_wm_ym_testing.pdf (http://www.rocna.com/press/press_0612_wm_ym_testing.pdf) is exactly why NOT to use a CQR. When diving on mine this was the set more often than not even after multiple attempts at getting it to set. Click on the link and look at the picture of the CQR. It's laying on it's side and is NOT set. For a CQR to be properly set it must be vertical like a plow!!!!!! This picture typifies the "rock on a rope" most sailors experience, but never realize, due to the relatively benign summer conditions we mostly encounter. The funny thing is this was a picture that was displayed in Sail Magazine representing anchor tests! Usually the rock on the rope holds till morning giving a false sense of security until a breeze pops up.

I use my Fortress as a dedicated stern anchor a job for which this anchor is perfect. It's very light, to set out in the dinghy with, and holds like pit bull in one direction. It can be tough to set on a hard bottom due mostly to its weight but I have never not been able to not get it to set after a few tries. The anchors on my boat are a Fortress (stern), Manson Supreme (primary) and Spade S-80 (backup). The CQR collects dust in my shed, the Bruce is on loan to a friend with a power boat and the Delta I let go with one of my boats I sold.

Both the Manson and the Spade cost less than the CQR but the Manson has much more surface are per pound than the Delta, CQR, Bruce or Spade because it does not need added lead "tip weight" like the Delta, Spade or CQR.

The anchors pictured below are my CQR 25 lb, Manson Supreme 24 lb & a Spade 35 lb. Look at the surface area of these anchors and you'll see that a Manson has as much surface area as most 35lb anchors yet it only weighs 24 pounds! The sharpened tip also penetrates eel grass and weeds far better than any anchor I have ever used.

Picking the right ground tackle is only half the battle. You also need good technique, proper scope and you MUST set your anchor by either back winding the sails or using the full reverse power of your motor other wise you have a rock on a rope and might as well be using a cinder block.

(http://www.pbase.com/mainecruising/image/74863640.jpg)

-Maine Sail
http://www.pbase.com/mainecruising (http://www.pbase.com/mainecruising)



Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Joe Kern on March 29, 2007, 02:16:56 PM
Thanks for the great info.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: canuck on March 29, 2007, 07:09:56 PM
I upgraded to a Maxwell 800 installed from the factory on our 2004 and also added a down switch during commissioning. We have 300' of 5/16 BBB chain and a 33 lb Bruce (the real thing). We do not move. The planet revolves around us! The three blade prop and M35 really set us. Here in the Pacific Northwest "Brucey" is right at home. We use lots of rode.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: captran on April 05, 2007, 09:35:50 PM
we use 3/8 HT chain, about 35 feet, with half inch line.  I'm tempted to get a swivel, as the shackle catches on the roller.  But I liked the higher breaking strength of the shackle.  The system held on with the 33 bruce for 12 hours of 50 plus knots in the soft sand of Great Sale Cay, with about a 3 to 4 foot chop, coming from the south.  Also held well on the Bahama Bank several miles from West End.  The sand is harder there.    Have a FX 27 also, with equal chain and rode, as a "storm anchor".  Now that we're in the NW cruising summers, the conditions seem easier to deal with.  It may be overkill, but I like waking up where I went to sleep!
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Chris Martinson on April 06, 2007, 05:37:06 PM
Regarding the rode - instead on using a sental....I have about 30 feet of chain then about 20 of line and then another 10 feet of chain and then line (swivels at the connections)....this has worked well for me both in sand in NJ and in Long Island Sound...for what its worth.

Chris
More Therapy
Hull 945
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ron Hill on April 07, 2007, 03:02:59 PM
Chris : What you're using is the same principle as a sentinel. Glad that you mentioned it so other readers know there's another option. 
You also mentioned the swivel/s which is VERY important - especially when you're using more than about 15 ft of chain.  Line will twist, chain will NOT!   :wink:
Title: Re: Anchors. relative merits of Delta, CQR and Bruce.
Post by: Alain P. on April 07, 2007, 06:01:57 PM
I didn’t came to this forum for a long time, as I was traveling and it is not always easy to find cyber-cafés in South America..

I fully agree with reedbr when  he says: Sometimes anchors are like religion.  Everybody has their own beliefs.

Reading the whole thread, I’ve seen two different opinions.. the conservative one.. and the evolutive one.. Please allow me to give here my own opinion, and I apologize if this will be often opposed to the one of many participants:

If I first fully agree with you,reedbr, I don’t agree anymore when you say :  “Danforth It is my primary and I sleep well at anchor” – NEVER use a Danforth as a main anchor.. and don’t sleep if you are using one.. As Stu Jackson righly says :
 Danforths usually can't reset after a current shift.  .Danforth can make a good secondary anchor, but not a main one..

I also disagree with gtrbone  “Bruce/Bruce-Type anchors did the best for the money” are you selecting your anchors only on the “money” criteria?? Or do you want the BEST anchor to equip your boat??.

I also disagree (quite often) with Ron Hill  – “Make sure that you use a swivel between the anchor and the chain so the anchor can do it's OWN thing!! You also mentioned the swivel/s which is VERY important” Beware that most swivels doesn’t have at all the same breaking strength that the one of your chain.. They often will be the “weak” link.. and, with the exception of bearing swivels, they will NEVER turn under load..

Ted Pounds Many serious cruisers use all chain. - No Ted.. If they are really serious,  they should always insert any “elastic” line,, either by using a mixed line (Chain & rope) or by using an efficient  snubber..

Ron Hill I also send down a 15 lb. sentinel – Most of you will learn a lot about your anchoring rode on: http://alain.fraysse.free.fr/sail/rode/rode_b.htm (http://alain.fraysse.free.fr/sail/rode/rode_b.htm) and it is said that a sentinel has only a marginal effect.. Then I fully agree with Chris Martinson instead on using a sentinel,....use about 30 feet of chain, much easier to handle and better to avoid chafing the rope on the seabed..

Again Ron I disagree with you when you say..  I like the Bruce not only for it's holding..  as the Bruce is one of the anchors with the lowest holding..

Mike and Joanne Stimmler If anyone knows of a source for Bruce anchors please post it.  Hi Mike and Joanne.. There is no more source for the genuine Bruce.. as Bruce did stop the manufacturing.. and they didn’t stop because of the availability of cheaper clones, but because they know that this type of anchor is now obsolete..

John Langford What about the Lewmar Claw which is the same as a Bruce but very reasonably priced.  
Gary I purchased the stainless 33 lb model...it looks to be well made and very close to the original Bruce.

No clones are exactly similar to the genuine Bruce, and a minor change can completely change the overall behavior of one anchor.. and if the clones are cheaper.. this is because they are manufactured in China.. and the quality of the steel used can be questionable??

Then I can’t more agree with Ray & Sandy Erps “I was leaning towards one of the new generation anchors,.. I used to worry whether our anchor would set on the first try or not.  Now I worry whether we'll be able to get the anchor back up after setting because it sets so firmly. “[


And with mainesail "The Delta is not a bad anchor but also nowhere as good as either a Rocna, Spade or Manson Supreme. It's just that the Spade's, Manson Supreme's and Rocna's are excellent anchors and after driving a BMW I could never see going back to a Pontiac if you know what I mean.."

And I would never exchange my BMW back for a Pontiac (Although some years ago, the Pontiac was one of the best car available..)
 :D
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: catalover on April 12, 2007, 10:12:12 AM
I spent 2 years cruising with a cqr as my primary anchor and 120' of 5/16 high test chain 200' of 5/8 rode.  I always set my anchor proper, used a rope snubber and never had a problem.  The only time I switched anchors was to a danforth in Suva because the bottom was soft mud.   I would recommend only using top name anchors and plenty of chain and never let your rope touch the bottom. Make sure that you learn how to use your anchors and what conditions they work best in.  There is no substitute for plenty of chain on a well set anchor.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Mike and Joanne Stimmler on April 12, 2007, 04:00:26 PM
I finally gave up on getting a Bruce anchor and have ordered and just received a Rocna 20 (44lb) anchor from Anchorsource in Florida. I was looking for something I could use as a storm anchor and also as my primary anchor so now I'm thinking about which combo of chain and rode to use and am considering about 40 ft of chain with either 200 or 300 ft of rope. I'm not decided on the size and type of chain or rope as I'm not familiar with the diferences of the HT and BBB. Is anyone using a rope to chain splice or is this only needed if you have a winch? (I don't)
I was surprised on how the anchor was shipped. I got home from work tuesday and here's this anchor sitting by the front door. No box, just a big old honkin' anchor with the shipping label stuck on the flukes and some bubble wrap on the tip. Anyone else had this experience? Maybe this is the norm.
I may have over done it with the size on this but I feel that having a DEPENDABLE anchor is a primary safety issue.

Any comments welcome
Mike
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ray & Sandy Erps on April 12, 2007, 07:39:17 PM
Our Mansion Supreme (Rocna knockoff) came in a box.  We have it on the end of 300 feet of 5/16 chain.  On our previous boat (C-34) we had a Bruce on 50 feet of chain spliced to 200 feet of nylon rode with electrical tape wrapped around the eye splice to take the brunt of the chafe.  This did make it go over the windlass easier which we really only needed occasionally when anchoring in deep water.  I think it's more typical to have a thimble in the eye splice and then use a shackle to attach it to the chain but that does make a bulky transition when using a windlass and also puts another fitting into the mix for another possible failure point.

I think the first time you anchor with your Rocna you'll be pleasantly surprised by its setting characteristics.  It's night and day difference in our experience.  I hear the same kind enthusiasm about the Spade.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Alain P. on April 22, 2007, 03:17:54 PM
I think the first time you anchor with your Rocna you'll be  surprised by its setting characteristics. 

http://www.svintothelight.com/Feb0706.html


The new Rocna was covered with a huge clump of mud/sand/grass

The other thing of note that happened during this time period was that we experienced our first "anchor dragging" incident.  On Saturday (Feb 4) we had a strong frontal passage with winds 25 knots, gusting to 35 knots.  That combined with pretty rough water conditions in the bay made things 'a bit dodgy', as our British/South African friends would say.  We were out in the cockpit as the storm really got going and noticed a neighboring boat moving at a rapid pace to the rear toward another boat. 

The owners of the boat that was dragging anchor had gone ashore earlier in the day, and the boat that was getting ready to get hit only had the teenage son of the family that cruises on the boat aboard.  I was getting ready to go help the boy 'defend' his boat and try to stop the other boat from dragging when I noticed that we were closer to our neighbor to the stern than we had been earlier......

we had dragged and were dragging.  

We were dragging slowly vs. the other boat, which looked like someone was driving the boat swiftly in reverse.  Dahleen and I started our motor and motored into the wind of the storm for about an hour and a half, until is subsided a little and we could re-anchor. 

AS I PULLED THE ROCNA UP TO RE-ANCHOR, IT WAS COVERED WITH A HUGE CLUMP OF MUD/SAND/GRASS, SO RATHER THAN DIGGING IN, IT WAS PLOWING ALONG THE GRASSY BOTTOM.   A grassy bottom is not the ideal holding ground to anchor in, but you play the cards you are dealt. 

During the course of the storm, 5 boats around us all dragged and had to either put out a second anchor or redeploy their primary anchor.  We found a patch of sand to drop the primary anchor in and also put out our secondary, a 33 lb. Bruce.  I also increased our scope to 9 to 1.  I think this will work for all but the worst of storms. 
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Ted Pounds on April 22, 2007, 06:55:15 PM
Anecdotes do not make good science.  For good, unbiased info on the many anchors on the market I suggest reading Practical Sailor.  They have run a bunch of controlled anchor comparisons.  They are the "Consumer Reports" of sailing as they accept no advertising.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Stephen Butler on April 23, 2007, 05:53:54 AM
Not the correct venue for this comment, but I cannot resist.  Based on my personal experience with Practical Sailor, i.e., subsscribing twice and neither receiving a single issue, nor a password for site access, I would take anything from the publication with a grain of salt.  If a business cannot conduct itself correctly, one has to wonder about its analysis.  Just one individual's experience and view.
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: mainesail on April 23, 2007, 07:24:58 AM
Quote:
"Anecdotes do not make good science.  For good, unbiased info on the many anchors on the market I suggest reading Practical Sailor.  They have run a bunch of controlled anchor comparisons.  They are the "Consumer Reports" of sailing as they accept no advertising."



The Sail magazine test results were about as unbiased as you can get unless you consider that they actually gave preferential treatment to the Claw and the CQR! The Practical Sailor tests compared 33# anchors to 25# anchors?? How is that a fair comparison..

The Sail Magazine article had more than one test per anchor. They tested all the anchors at three different locations with multiple sets, pulls and scopes and they then reported exactly what the results were.

People on other forums have made ridiculous claims that Sail gave preference and may have "fixed" the results to satisfy advertisers. Using this logic Sail magazine really cut off their supply of ad money. It seems three of the anchors that got beat up the worst were the Lewmar Claw , the CQR (also Lewmar) and the West Marine Performance 20. Lewmar is one of Sails larger advertisers! In this months issue they have one full pager and one quarter page ad alone. West Marine's VP of product development Chuck Hawley was actually involved in the testing and WM also spends huge ad money with Sail. Three of the best performers the Manson, Hydrobubble & Rocna have no advertising in Sail Magazine at all and West Marine does not sell any of those anchors! Biased based on ad money I think so! With the preferential treatment of the Claw & CQR this bias is clear but it still did not help either of those anchors perform better! The top performing anchors data speaks for its self..

This test however was a very "biased" test when it came to the CQR & Claw but not their competitors. They went so far as to have in-depth discussions to figure out a way to get the Bruce and CQR to set better so they could at least get load test results. Now this test was only a hard sand test so you can't translate these results to a soft mud bottom but the authors made it quite clear that these were hard sand tests...

Here's a direct quote: "The CQR is another tried-and-true anchor that yielded surprising results. The maximum load we recorded during our first three pulls on 5:1 scope was a very short spike up to 350 pounds, but most of the time we never felt the anchor set. No matter how slowly we went or how we tried to manually coax the anchor to set, it seemed to just skip along the surface of the bottom."

This to me sounds like they perhaps had to give the CQR (ie: Lewmar ad money) a little "extra" by going slower than with other anchors and trying to manually coax it to set. How can anyone claim bias against the CQR when they potentially gave it preferential treatment? This seems a little unfair if you are replicating test results using the SAME technique with all anchors to make it as fair as possible. The results don't surprise me as I own a Bruce and a CQR and though they perform ok they are not always quick setters (CQR) or high holding (Bruce). My assertion that 80% of boaters never actually set an anchor and get very lucky using basically a "rope on a rock" seems more true than ever.

Last summer on a friends boat he left me at the helm while he went to drop his CQR. I backed down, like I always do, gradually increasing to 80% throttle and the anchor dragged!

Here's how the conversation went "Geez that's never happened before","Really? Lets try it again",.

On the second attempt it had an initial bite (starting to burry) but when I applied power it broke free. "Your giving it to much throttle and ripping it out of the bottom", "it's an anchor!", "let me try", "ok".

So I now go up to let the anchor down & he puts the boat in reverse gets it moving and then puts it in neutral and we get an initial bite. "There see it's set", "No it's just starting to dig in it now needs to be set", "It's always held me before", "Have you ever experienced a 30 knot blow on the hook?", "No" "Well a 30 knot blow on your boat is the equivalent of roughly 900 pounds of pull on the anchor did you know that?", "No", "Did you know that the motor on this boat can barely re-produce 350 pounds of pull wide open?" "No", "Well let's let it set your way and in a couple of hours we'll simulate 20 knots of wind with the motor and see and happens", "You're on". You can probably guess what happened. Because we never properly set the anchor it dragged! We did get it to set that day using a 10:1 scope then shortening to 5:1. My friend could not beleive that the CQR could hold his boat using 80% throttle and was totally surprised by it! Scary I know.... From my experience I find a CQR likes a minimum of a 7:1 to set but it sometimes prefers more..

He now understands that an anchor should hold your boat at wide open in reverse without moving. This is a guy who has been sailing for 25 years and admittedly dragged "perhaps 20 times but never with my CQR"! Once is to much! It's imperative the anchor gets "set" properly. Yes the CQR sets better in soft bottoms than in sand but not all boaters are lucky enough to always drop the hook in a soft bottom. So if you're in a hard bottom make sure to get it set. The CQR will set well but it may take more than one attempt. Don't ever be fooled by the "initial bite". With a CQR this is a situation where the anchor is laying on it's side with the tip just starting to dig in. Like the picture at the beginning of Sail Magazines article. If you stop there on any sort of wind or current shift the anchor will twist out. A CQR needs to be vertical and buried to the shank or it's not properly set. If it's properly buried it can sometimes survive a 180 shift without "breaking free". I suggest some of you begin diving on your anchors in a shallow spot to see what's going on down there I think you'd be surprised...
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: reedbr on April 27, 2007, 02:02:00 PM
14 months, that's a lot of hang time on this thread.  I wasn't aware of the additional tests in the magazines.  Some were very interesting. 

I wanted to update that my 33# Bruce (kind of) failed me once last season.  The bottom was covered with oyster shells in a shallow cove near an old shucking house.  It didn't drag, but I had a heck of a time getting it to set.  When it finally did, I still wasn't happy about it.  I did not sleep well that night.  Other than that I'll hang onto it as my primary as it seems to be becoming a collector item!  Can anchor's actually appreciate?   
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: mercedesman on May 05, 2007, 06:54:54 PM
I have used CQR and Bruce in mud, rock and sand and Bruce has shown to be most versatile. I would not hesitate to use it again.
I was anchored on short scope with strong currents and a mud bottom in a 45' Ketch on an all chain rode. The scope was barely 2.5:1. I had an injured back and had to stay put, could only crawl around on deck and a deep low was headed my way. The winds made it up to 45kn. The anchor held. The only real assist for the anchor was the nylon snubbers I tied into the chain to help absorb the shock. The system worked well, the boat did not drag though at times it felt as if there were a mad-man at the top of the mast shaking the boat as she heeled up to 20 degrees (cross winds and currents). The Bruce did a great job and I would not hesitate to purchase another. (It was a 66lb Bruce on 3/8ht chain, all chain rode).

On the other hand, I have drug CQR's (on all chain) through rock only to set a smaller Bruce on 50' chain with nylon rode.

Danforth's have a tendency to drag in the places I have tried them, mainly hard sand, never in rock, didn't try it in mud.

Hope this helps,

Mike
Title: Re: Anchors.
Post by: Stu Jackson on October 06, 2009, 03:34:17 PM
Here's an update from Maine Sail:  http://forums.catalina.sailboatowners.com/showthread.php?t=112776 (http://forums.catalina.sailboatowners.com/showthread.php?t=112776)

This has turned out to be a great discussion of BOTH anchors AND an important review of stainless steel in anchor system use:  like, DON'T!!!
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Hawk on February 09, 2010, 05:21:24 PM
Thats it. A picture is worth a thousand words.
I'm trading up from my 22 Delta to the Rocna just like Steve. But 33 or 44?? I know Steve's opinion, but he's dodging potential Mexican hurricanes.

Hawk
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Stu Jackson on February 09, 2010, 11:43:02 PM
OK, let's be clear about weights.  33# is about the size of a Rocna 15, 15 kg.  Our Rocna 10 is 22 lbs.  2.2 lbs per kg.  The Rocna 15 is what Steve has.  a 44 Rocna is way overkill for our boats.  Please read the anchoring sizing table thread, here, and size your anchoring system properly: http://c34.org/bbs/index.php/topic,4990.0.html (http://c34.org/bbs/index.php/topic,4990.0.html)

Steve's Rocna 15 held him through the chubasco event.  100 ft of 5/16 in chain.
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: mainesail on February 10, 2010, 05:47:31 AM
OK, let's be clear about weights.  33# is about the size of a Rocna 15, 15 kg.  Our Rocna 10 is 22 lbs.  2.2 lbs per kg.  The Rocna 15 is what Steve has.  a 44 Rocna is way overkill for our boats.  Please read the anchoring sizing table thread, here, and size your anchoring system properly: http://c34.org/bbs/index.php/topic,4990.0.html (http://c34.org/bbs/index.php/topic,4990.0.html)

Steve's Rocna 15 held him through the chubasco event.  100 ft of 5/16 in chain.

I agree the 15kg or 33# is more than enough. The 44# could qualify as a permanent mooring for a C-34. :D

Our 15kg has survived 55+ now and three to four foot chop on a loaded boat weight of 18,500-19,000 pounds & 36 feet. I only wish the bimini fared as well.. We did not move an inch and we had spun a 360 cookie trail before morning. We get some nasty fall winds in the NE. Prior to this event the most we had seen was 45-50, and again zero issues.
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: waterdog on February 10, 2010, 05:48:22 PM
"Steve's Rocna 15 held him through the chubasco event.  100 ft of 5/16 in chain."

Just a small clarification.   I'm sure a 15kg probably would have held just fine.   But my system is engineered so that when it's blowing 50 I just calmly order another marguerita rather than rushing through the rain down to the beach to check. 

My Rocna is 20kg.   I have no regrets.   If I was cruising the Northwest, I'd own a 15kg.


     
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Stu Jackson on February 10, 2010, 10:26:23 PM
I should read Steve's signature more often.  Sorry.
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Hawk on March 19, 2010, 05:49:14 PM
I emailed an inquiry direct to Rocna below and they responded - also set out below:


I have a 1990 Catalina 34 sailboat which the manufacturer states has displacement of 12,500 lbs (5.6 t). However the consensus of owners is that the boat is much heavier with accurate weights in the range of 17,800 lbs (8.09 t) loaded without crew.

Your sizing chart says for a  33’ boat equal to or less than 8 t you recommend the Rocna 15. Then for a 36’ boat the Rocna 15 is only recommended for 7 t or less.

Response from Rocna:
"You are correct, when a boat is close to or on maximum displacement we recommend for peace of mind and safety’s sake you go to the next available size. Of course the final decision will rest with you as there are a number of variables to consider as previously stated.

The additional 5kgs is not really relevant, as the blade area is of more importance for the super high holding power. On checking with our production manager he also recommends a 20kg Rocna but again the final choice is yours."



Just thought the exchange may be of interest...........I'm undecided as not sure the 20 is really necessary, but I do like to sleep when it blows at anchor.

Hawk

Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Ron Hill on March 19, 2010, 06:04:42 PM
Tom : What else did you ever think the anchor maunfacture was going to say. (a deep thought - "The final decision rests with you") ?!?  
Go for the larger!! 
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Rick Johnson on March 20, 2010, 04:37:42 AM
Hawk,

It was interesting to hear what the manufacture had to say!  I'm also trying to decide which size to buy and lean towards the 20 kg.

Thanks for posting,

Rick
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Hawk on March 20, 2010, 09:54:31 AM
Thanks Rick.

Ron,
Well I certainly didn't expect the manufacturer to recomend a 33# Bruce combined with a 15# sentinal which is what you report using, particularly when Peter Smith, the inventor of the Rocna says this:

Don’t bother with kellets (AKA anchor angels sentinals or buddies)
Kellets are supposed to increase the holding capacity of an anchor system by holding the rode low and hence keeping the angle of pull on the anchor closer to the ideal of parallel to the seabed. In practice, their effect even when deployed in an optimal point on rode (close to the anchor) is very minimal and the high loads which must be expected on a tandem rig will straighten the rode very quickly. They have negligible effect on ultimate anchor performance in a regular anchoring set-up, and even less when tandems are deployed. For more on kellets, study the article “Anchor Rode Kellets”.
Figure 7: Simulation of a large kellet added to an all-chain rode. Even at this comparatively low tension, it makes virtually no difference to the angle of pull.
Source: “Mixed Rode Calculations” spreadsheet by Alain FraysseIn the context of overall efficiency, the kellet is a bad investment also. The weight of the kellet used instead in the form of a larger anchor is a far more sensible tactic.  


My inquiry arose from the posts under the Displacement thread from Owners who have seen their boats weighing in at far more than Catalina's stated displacement, ie. more like 17,600+ (8 t) loaded. On Rocna's sizing recomendations they do mention 33' loa and 36' loa, but not 34'.
I was looking for confirmation that, arguably, Steve has it right with his Rocna 20 (44#)for an 8t 34' boat...and not just for Mexico.
I am taking the boat north from Vancouver this year up past Desolation Sound to the Broughtons where it can blow 40 through inlets and narrow anchorages just for fun, and depths for anchoring are much more than you'd like. Oh, and your 20% off coupon for Boat Assist US ain't no good up there, cause there ain't no Boat Assist.....it's not the Chesepeake.
My sentinal will be a 10# sack of Molson Beer hanging from the rode.

Hawk





Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Ron Hill on March 21, 2010, 06:13:21 PM
Tom : I did use a Bruce 33# and a 15# mushroom, but you forgot the 35ft of chain, so the mushroom was 35 ft away from the anchor and acted as the weight of another 15 ft of chain.

However, a few years ago I added a windlass and changed to 50 ft of chain (wrote that up in the Mainsheet).  Can't/won't argue by Email thru a third party with the maker of your anchor.  Go for it!!

The C34 really weights about 15.5K lbs.  Could never get Catalina to admit it, but they never deny ed it!

Like Stu says, your boat your choice.  A thought


Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: tonywright on March 24, 2010, 09:48:39 AM
Another dimension to double check is LOA. For a Catalina 34 it is actually 35'8": a lot closer to 36' than 34'.  (length of the hull is 34'6", the pulpit accounts for the extra).

Tony
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Bill Asbury on March 25, 2010, 03:34:52 PM
Thinking about getting a 35# Rocna or Manson.  Please pardon by ignorance but I'm wondering if the half circle 'rollbar' is there to help balance the anchor so it lands on the seabed in the upright position.  Thinking it must be functional, because otherwise I'm not impressed with how it looks.
Thanks,
Bill
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Michael Shaner on March 25, 2010, 04:56:52 PM
You're absolutely right Bill. Should the anchor land upside down on the bottom, it rolls right over...

Actually, on the Manson website, they claim this to to be a "green" feature as well. They profess that the reusult is less damage to the sea bed as the anchor is being set...the "green world" has trickled all the way to ground tackle...who would-a-thunk it?
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Bill Asbury on March 25, 2010, 06:59:04 PM
Thanks, Mike, sounds good and in synch with others on this board who swear by these 'new age' hooks.  My wife is the family environmentalist, so she'll be impressed, too...:-)
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: mainesail on March 25, 2010, 07:09:34 PM
Thought you guys might be interested in these videos.. :D

CQR vs. Rocna - Hard Sand Setting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmGAckf69pE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmGAckf69pE)

Rocna - Flip Flop & Dig (short but you get the idea)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsDRQHbpv-M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsDRQHbpv-M)

Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Bill Asbury on March 26, 2010, 10:10:10 AM
Thanks for the videos, Maine.  Good demo of effectiveness of Rocna/Manson hooks.
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Lance Jones on March 26, 2010, 02:29:57 PM
After reading all of this thread, I've come to the conclusion that my 5 lb mushroom anchor is not big enough. :cry4`
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Stu Jackson on December 25, 2013, 11:04:10 AM
Another good read:

http://www.morganscloud.com/2013/12/16/36-tips-to-get-anchored-and-stay-anchored-part-1-gear/?utm_source=feedb (http://www.morganscloud.com/2013/12/16/36-tips-to-get-anchored-and-stay-anchored-part-1-gear/?utm_source=feedb)
Title: Re: Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important
Post by: Kent & Jane Overbeck on December 25, 2013, 02:22:07 PM
Here is a replay of my previous post.  I haven't changed my mind. 

 We have just completed the “Great Loop”.  It took 13 months and covered around 6500 miles.  Before we left on the trip I was going to buy a new anchor.  The problem was just what it was going to be.  I will not rehash all of the anchor discussion on the forum as it is readily available but just report on what we did.  I liked the Rocna but was concerned about quality.  Shortly before our trip Rocna changed their warranty to cover not just breakage but included bending if the anchor was sized to their recommendations.  That swayed me over.  I purchased a Rocna 15 (33#).  My rode is 50 ‘ of 5/16 G-4 chain and 250’ of 5/8" 8 strand plaited nylon.  I got 250’ so I could go back and drop a stern anchor if needed.
 We anchored many times in a great variety of conditions and bottoms.  We had hard sand, soft sand, soft and hard mud, clay, grass and some weeds and at times a gravel mix of the above.  We had 6-8’ tidal ranges along with the current and reverses that come with the tides, and sustained winds of over 60 MPH three times, conditions that can be very challenging when anchoring.  We never used a second anchor, not even when in strong current reverses.  The Rocna set first time, every time, very quickly and we never moved after that.  There was no problem when we had a wind or current shift as it seemed to reset immediately.  The biggest problem was getting all the mud etc. off.  I was evident the entire anchor was buried as the roll bar was covered.  :clap
I guess it’s obvious that I like the anchor.  That being said, I also have a 33# original Bruce that has given good service. I also have a 22# Delta fast set and a Fortress FX 11 that I have used on my Seaward 26 very satisfactorily.  I was in the company of a great variety of boats with various anchors and rarely saw anyone have serious problems they couldn't resolve.
I know there is more than one good new style anchor, but right now, after this trip, I’m a Rocna fan.
I also want to report that the 8 strand plaited rode was awesome.  It fell easily into the locker with no coiling or twisting and was very easy to handle.  Well worth the extra cost.