Anchor design and misnomers

[LouVul]

LouVul = DinghyDog on Trawlerforum. As a transitioning sailor, I recently purchased a 66# Sarca Excel for my (new to me) Pacific Trawler 37 and will be testing soon. Photos of the Excel are posted on that forum for reference.

Notable previous anchoring experience below:

Boat = 34ft heavy displacement sailboat
Location = Chesapeake Bay (mud with varying top layers depending on locale):

- CQR 35# held a raft of four mid-30 ft sailboats during a 15 minute max 40 kt
squall. Anchor well set prior with no veering.
- Anchored alone, CQR 35# dragged during a squall, but the bottom as fouled
with oyster shells from a nearby processing plant. Anchor well set prior and
never reset during the squall which veered us 90+ degrees.
- Rocna 35# sets like glue and held in max straight line winds up to 45kts, but had trouble resetting when another lesser squall veered us 180 degrees.
- Fortress FX-23 set in a leaf covered bottom when Rocna would not.

My conclusion is that an anchor's ability to set and, more importantly, reset is a very important design consideration for me. The above Rocna experience made me rethink the hoop concept because of substrate impaction. I have no doubt that the Excel will bury and hold in straight line winds. My hope is that, if required, it will be able to quickly reset given the self cleaning (yes convex) non-hoop design.

Mike

[downunder]

LouVal,

I guess eighteen months ago I would have purchased a roll bar anchor a Manson Supreme but seeing some of the issues with roll bars and the reports on the SARCA Excel and awaiting reports on the Manson Boss there are now options with without going the roll bar route.

Will be interesting to see reports on the Mantus with its relatively smaller roll bar effect and its advantages of store ability as an alternative backup.

Looking forward to your test reports. More need for a new SARCA Excel thread.

Cheers

[JonJo]

I find it interesting that some people are happy to say that an Excel is a copy of a Delta but are equally unhappy if anyone is to even suggest that a Rocna is a development of a Spade (but with the addition of copying Peter Bruce's roll bar). Or that a Fortress is much better than a Danforth, and though it looks, in an image, identical - it is obviously different because it performs differently. A Guardian looks like a Fortress, in an image - does anyone want to swap their Fortress for a Guardian?

A point of similarity, between Delta and Excel - the shank. Its self righting. I challange anyone, draw a Rocna shank, draw a Mantus shank, draw a Delta shank, draw an Excel shank, now draw a Spade shank - now tell me the differences. Now go away and invent a self righting shank - and the only answer - is one that looks like the Delta. Its not that people copy but Gordon Lyall came up with the only solution (to give credit it should be generically called 'a Lyall shank'). And when you have finished the drawing - sit back and wonder why some have copied the Delta self righting shank, so precisely, when they have a roll bar.

So why if a Fortress, Guardian and Danforth look the same in images (but perform differently) can the same not be said of a Delta and Excel (whose flukes are totally different). Is there some in-bred hostility, an inability to concede that some people who actually use the Excel might be right.

[Cotemar]

Originally Posted by JonJo

A Guardian looks like a Fortress, in an image - does anyone want to swap their Fortress for a Guardian?

A point of similarity, between Delta and Excel - the shank. Its self righting.

I have both Fortress and Guardian anchors. A Guardian anchor only takes minutes to make its geometry identical to a Fortress, and then anodize the Guardian to make it all the same. Most people would not make the modifications, as it involves work, but it is simple enough.

I was hoping you were going to say the excel tip weight is what makes it self righting, because the shank is only part of the equation. The excel tip weight along with the shank work just like the spade design for self righting the anchor

[Andrew Troup]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

...The Spade is tightly patented which makes copies unlikely.

Many of the posters that are "opposed" to roll bar anchors, I suspect, feel this way because they will not fit their existing bow roller. European crusers faced with this delema choose the excellent Spade, but this is an expensive option outside Europe.
.

Mmmm - the Spade patents date from 1996/7ish. Many countries' patents expire in 16 years; 20 in the US (and Europe, I think)

So I imagine the competition are pretty close to tooling up to produce Spade knockoffs

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by JonJo

... Its not that people copy but Gordon Lyall came up with the only solution (to give credit it should be generically called 'a Lyall shank')...

Or perhaps a McCarron-Stewart-Lyall shank

The Delta Anchor was patented (# 5138967*) by Philip F. McCarron, James W. Stewart, and Gordon M. Lyall (of Simpson-Lawrence Ltd) in 1992.

* ➥ Patent US5138967 - Marine anchor - Google Patents

Note the patent citations (prior art) & references (to Delta).

[Tidahapah]

A couple of years ago I was upgrading my anchoring gear in preparation for a trip round to the Kimberleys.
I had a 75 lb plough and 3/8" chain and was never really confident with it in over 35 knots and so used to tandem anchor for big blows when anchored up in the GBR.
Did a bit of reading and final choice was a Sarca Excel #8, I am not a roll bar fan.

I have now had my Sarca Excel #8 on Tidahapah for some time and even with the limited work I have given it I am very pleased.
One highlight was recently the Boss and I were anchored of Moon Point (Fraser Island) in the afternoon.
Just before dark we got a serious wind shift that I wasn't happy with.
With a little deliberation we decided to move accross the water and anchor of Big Woody Island. We were still to be exposed but I felt not as dangerous.
Anchored up with plenty of chain about 70 mts in 8 mts of water.
Deployed the flopper stoppers and started to sit it out.
Bugger it got pretty dirty and the tide run was completely savage as well.
Managed to bend one flopper arm and pull out a couple of securing pins.
Stayed awake all night on watch but anchor held like sh*t on a blanket.
Next morning at daylight, picked up the pick and headed into the marina at Urangan as it kept blowing for a few more days.
Wind was up to 40 knots and savage short sea. Really happy with the anchor that I had deployed.
Another very happy customer , fantastic insurance.
Cheers
Benn

[Andrew Troup]

Originally Posted by Delfin

..... I spoke with a Coastie who said they had to abandon their Fortress on a 100' cutter after a three day blow because it dug itself so deep they couldn't retrieve it. Perhaps it got stuck on something, but he said it was because it just went so deep their windlass couldn't handle the retrieval load.

I'd have thought that in any bottom soft enough to bury an anchor that deep, they'd be able to excavate it with that simple suction technique, I forget what it's called, the one where you admit air from a spare scuba bottle into a socket welded to the side of a longish pipe near the bottom.

The air travels up the pipe, expanding and accelerating all the way and in the process sucking industrial quantities of water and mud into the bottom end, creating a humongous vacuum cleaner with no moving parts.

It would be easy enough to shackle it to a chain chaser and send it down the rode, I would have thunk....

[estarzinger]

On the shanks, the delta shank is "self launching", which I suspect is why rocna copied it. Self-launching is an important feature in the motor boat segment (which by the way is bigger than sailboat anchors).

----------------------------------

On "Copies" . . . "Improved copies". . . And "developments"

True original creative ideas are very rare. Most anchors are developments of prior designs.

Anyone honest will agree the rocna fits in that development category. They very clearly took ideas from quite a number of prior anchors and combined them. However, it is also clearly not a "copy" of any one as it differs in very significant and easily describable ways from any anchor that came before (the rocna vs supreme "copy" question is more complicated as you well know). The rocna flukes alone are very different from the spade flukes in obvious and explainable ways (no tip weight and much greater surface area). So the rocna is/was a development.

Fortress vs danforth . . . . Fortress's primary unique selling point is it's aluminum. That is a clear and easily explainable physical difference, which provides clearly different pros and cons vs the danforth. The engineering of the fortress needed to be significantly and clearly different than the danforth to adapt to the different material (the shank is way bigger just as one obvious example).

Fortress vs guardian . . . I have never seen or used a guardian but the fortress website provides a very clear and succinct explanation of its differences vs the fortress - basically they took out all the cosmetic costs from the fortress to make a more 'affordable" anchor. So, that's very clearly a "low cost copy". I don't think anyone would have any problem with that description . . . the same manufacturer is making them both.

Re the excel, some of us are just simply trying to understand it. We are curious. And the very most obvious question when you see one is how does it in fact differ from the delta.

So, where does the excel fall on this spectrum of creativity . . . Two differences have now been described vs the delta. (A) One is the change from two angles/bends in the delta rear flukes to one angle/bend in the excel rear flukes. I am honestly surprised that's an improvement, it sounds and looks more like a cost reduction. And (B) that it has an improved cutting edge. As I said above, this is likely a useful improvement in hard sand, but may be a vulnerable/less durable feature. My personal conclusion is that if those are the two significant differences vs the delta then its clearly an "improved delta copy" and I will reserve judgement on how improved (over the wide range of possible bottoms) until I see some more objective and independent data.

I might comment that I once asked a lewmar engineer why they made the delta cad drawings public. He said all the competitors had long ago bought a delta and taken templates off it, so the only ones without the information were the consumers. On the excel website, I can't even find the printable templates that most every other anchor mfg provides to allow consumer to check the bow roller fit. Is that just because they have not gotten around to it yet, or because they don't want consumers to be able to compare drawings to the delta (or are templates there somewhere and I just did not find them?). I would be interested to see and compare such templates.

As I said above, I at least, am just trying to learn about the anchor, and asking the most obvious questions that anyone would ask. I am not hostile toward it or toward excel users. I honestly don't understand the defensiveness and hostility that is coming back. You can ask any question you want about the anchors I use and I will try to answer them in as helpful a way as i can and not become defensive or hostile. My ego is not invested in my anchor choice.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Or perhaps a McCarron-Stewart-Lyall shank

The Delta Anchor was patented (# 5138967*) by Philip F. McCarron, James W. Stewart, and Gordon M. Lyall (of Simpson-Lawrence Ltd) in 1992.

* ➥ Patent US5138967 - Marine anchor - Google Patents

Note the patent citations (prior art) & references (to Delta).

Hey Gord, you are excellent at this google search stuff and I have a little challenge or you that would help the thread. I got a pm from Rex Francis (owner/designer at anchor right of the Excel). Basically he said that all I had to do was an easy google patent search and all our questions about the distinctive features of the Excel (vs the delta) would be answered. I did that, and did find some patents under his name, but none appeared relevant to the Excel. He unfortunately does not list any patents numbers on his website, nor included any in his pm to me. Can you find any patents that list the specific unique patented features of the Excel?

[Cotemar]

Here are the Lewmar Delta CAD Drawings & 3D models from there web site.
They are in PDF, DXF, DWG or STP files. The STP files will bring a 3D model into your CAD (Computer Aided Design) software.

Anchors products

[nimblemotors]

Originally Posted by Panope

I find it fascinating that the large efforts (that we are witnessing now) to improve anchors did not occur long ago. The world was making huge strides in maritime technology while the fisherman type of anchor stayed basically the same for hundreds of years. The CQR was an advancement but it took 50 or so years for the next round of improvements to come along. Certainly many lives and vessels were lost due to dragging anchors. Why is it only recently that we are seeing widespread competition in the marketplace and the resulting "raising of the bar" of anchor design? Is it because nobody lost a war due to a dragging anchor?

Steve

I think this is an excellent point. Me thinks it is the more recent boom in Australian boating that has created a super profitable market in "high end" anchors. An anchor probably cost $30 in materials to make.
Awesome business if you can get it, worth fighting for 1000% profits.

JackB

[Kettlewell]

One thing I have wondered with a lot of these newer anchors is what happens in very soft mud. There is a lot of it in the Chesapeake, for example. In a few places it is a weird consistency that floats a Fortress anchor on the surface--it takes some finagling to get one to dive, but once they do they provide the best holding, or a big Danforth. I wonder what happens with the roll bar anchors, the Delta types, and the Bruce's if they land upside down in the soup--do they ever right themselves? I have observed people backing down merrily all over the anchorage, with not much resistance. It has happened to me with a CQR. The only way to get a hold with one of these relatively dense and heavy anchors is to let it settle, preferably overnight if you can, before backing down slowly. Even then I just give it a little reverse, let it settle, then a little more, let it settle, etc. However, in general you are better off using a Fortress or Danforth in these places, which will dive down 10 or 20 feet into the muck and find some holding ground.

[Cotemar]

Originally Posted by nimblemotors

I think this is an excellent point. Me thinks it is the more recent boom in Australian boating that has created a super profitable market in "high end" anchors. An anchor probably cost $30 in materials to make.
Awesome business if you can get it, worth fighting for 1000% profits.

JackB

You would think that and anchor would be cheap to make, but in reality, anchors take a bit of work and fabrication, which is expensive.

1) Design, analysis and field test the anchors
2) Buy material.
3) Water jet, laser cut or flame cut the flat patterns
4) Fabricate and bend external components
5) Fabricate welding jigs to hold all the components together
6) Weld all the components
7) Send out to galvanizing vendor
8) Advertize
9) Package
10) Store products
11 Ship products

And so many more details to this business.

It’s so much cheaper today just to find and anchor you like an buy it off the shelf

[Astrid]

1) Design, analysis and field test the anchors
2) Buy material.
3) Water jet, laser cut or flame cut the flat patterns
4) Fabricate and bend external components
5) Fabricate welding jigs to hold all the components together
6) Weld all the components
7) Send out to galvanizing vendor
8) Advertize
9) Package
10) Store products
11 Ship products

And let's not forget the important patent infringement search to make sure your design or elements thereof do not infringe on someone elses patents.