Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

I don't remember seeing this link posted: ANCHORWATCH- THE THEORY OF ANCHORING

It's sort of an interesting way to look at things.

Thank You for the link. Interesting reading really, I have to spend some time over this. For the first look it is possible - if one accept Author's view - that my Rocna "failure" was more due to the rode not long enough than to the seabed conditions (the room was very limited, and we both with Amel used not much over half of the length I like to put out in normal conditions.
Still rode was in widely accepted envelope of length/depth...
Anyway - something to think about

[hpeer]

He he!

Rail & axel shafts

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by DoubleWhisky

Please let me to share some of my anchoring and anchor sizing experiences. Sorry if it will be trivial and boring for some of You.

Thanks for the great anchoring tale.
It is these sort of real life experiences that are not covered by the anchor manufacturers charts (such as poor holding ground, or holding more than just your boat) that often convince people to go oversize when choosing an anchor.

The anchor sizing charts are not consistent as you have noted, as a general trend better anchors recomend bigger sizes, which makes no sense. There is a lot of marketing pressure to recomend smaller anchors. I think the "biggest you can comfortably handle" is the best formula.

Would an anchor of +1 on the Rocna sizing chart (55 Kg) or +2 (70 Kg) have held in the circumstances you describe is difficult to know, but the slow drag suggests it is likely. With this sort of Med mooring setting two anchors in V is not possible.

When considering over sizing the main anchor I would suggest that in most circumstances that increasing the chain size is unnecessary.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by DoubleWhisky

Thank You for the link. Interesting reading really, I have to spend some time over this. For the first look it is possible - if one accept Author's view - that my Rocna "failure" was more due to the rode not long enough than to the seabed conditions (the room was very limited, and we both with Amel used not much over half of the length I like to put out in normal conditions.
Still rode was in widely accepted envelope of length/depth...
Anyway - something to think about

Med mooring with any sort of crosswind can put very high forces on the anchor, because the boat cannot swing into the wind. However, there are advantages, the force tends to be much steadier with no sheering, in addition the anchor is often pulling up hill and you can usually lay out a large scope (but not in this case).

Unfortunately even a very small drag can lead to lots of damage and it is not my favourite anchoring style in bad conditions. If the scope is limited you need to be particularly cautious especially with neighbours that will put additional pressure on your anchor.

[sabray]

At the end of the day. I see the same drop and run anchor technique in popular spots . I don't see a lot of massive oversized anchors. My anchor gear has improved and still the few failures were not about gear but where. Knowing that I wasn't set and moving saved the day not having better gear.
I am not sticking an extra. 20 lbs plus
On the bow justt because it makes me sleep well. My gear is good. If it's nasty out I'm checking and not getting a solid 8.
I really doubt you sleep well if your anchored and getting kicked around. If so your more confident then me.
The I sleep well thing baffles me. I sleep well without double sized hooks z I don't when it's nasty the boat starts sailing or a swell is hammering into the bow. Then I rest but don't sleep well.
I think about my options when it's real bad and how to clear out or run the back up hook out . Really don't want the added burden of a hook so heavy I can't manage it. Just because I can sleep well

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by sabray

Really don't want the added burden of a hook so heavy I can't manage it.

So generally You do accept the formula "biggest you can comfortably handle is the best" suggested by Noelex.

So do I. And so I'm thinking about upgrade to 1+ size (in regard to the sizing chart), by the way following the manufacturers advice. Got good windlass, lot of power, good bow arrangements so it will be comfortable.
Anyway, for my boat anchor MUST be operated mechanically

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

The anchor sizing charts are not consistent as you have noted, as a general trend better anchors recomend bigger sizes, which makes no sense.

It occured to me now, that may be - just may be - makers of better anchors produce the sizing charts with serious anchoring on mind, knowing it will be general use of their product.
On the other hand manufacturers of older, not so effective designs, know the fact, that their products are more and more relegated to the use by weekend boaters, keeping their boats in well protected marinas/harbours/creeks/buoyed anchorages and looking for not expensive, easy to operate lunch hook, so they produce the sizing charts accordingly to such a demands.
It is impossible nowadays for the companies like Lewmar or Manson not to know exactly who their clientele for specific products is.
This way - may be there is some sense in nonconsistence of sizing charts.

[JonJo]

Originally Posted by DoubleWhisky

It occured to me now, that may be - just may be - makers of better anchors produce the sizing charts with serious anchoring on mind, knowing it will be general use of their product.
On the other hand manufacturers of older, not so effective designs, know the fact, that their products are more and more relegated to the use by weekend boaters, keeping their boats in well protected marinas/harbours/creeks/buoyed anchorages and looking for not expensive, easy to operate lunch hook, so they produce the sizing charts accordingly to such a demands.
It is impossible nowadays for the companies like Lewmar or Manson not to know exactly who their clientele for specific products is.
This way - may be there is some sense in nonconsistence of sizing charts.

And might they have already factored into their charts the concept of Bigger is Better?

It goes back to the basis of the discussion:

How can you claim that the anchor (you are trying to market) is twice as good as the traditional anchor, sets quicker, sets deeper, has higher holding etc etc but simultaneously suggest that a potential buyer should buy a model bigger than that recommended for the historic (and by implication - ineffective) anchor design. CQRs have been used (are being used) for decades - getting close to 100 years. They are regularly used, today, by yachts making heroic voyages and cruises (in both high a low latitudes). They are pbviosuly lucky to be alive - as tyey cerainly do not know about BIB.

To reiterate - we moved from a 22kg brand name CQR clone to a new gen 15kg model, have sailed regularly the east coast of Australia (from Barrier Reef to southern Tasmania, including its west coast of Tas) and have never felt the need for a 20kg modell, let alone a 30kg model(of any design). I accept we must be living on borrowed time. Previously we sailed Asian waters and bits of Europe (reliant on a CQR). But, with increased senility, we do now carry more than adequate back-ups - which we deploy as and when necessary (including warp to tie to trees).

Jonathan

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by JonJo

And might they have already factored into their charts the concept of Bigger is Better?

It goes back to the basis of the discussion:

How can you claim that the anchor (you are trying to market) is twice as good as the traditional anchor, sets quicker, sets deeper, has higher holding etc etc but simultaneously suggest that a potential buyer should buy a model bigger than that recommended for the historic (and by implication - ineffective) anchor design.
To reiterate - we moved from a 22kg brand name CQR clone to a new gen 15kg model, have sailed regularly the east coast of Australia (from Barrier Reef to southern Tasmania, including its west coast of Tas) and have never felt the need for a 20kg modell, let alone a 30kg model(of any design). But, with increased senility, we do now carry more than adequate back-ups - which we deploy as and when necessary (including warp to tie to trees).

Jonathan

Your 15 kG anchor sits well in the envelope of sizing charts recommendations for different new generation anchors (may be slightly on the light side for some of them, but I do know not what exactly do You use. May be You specified it somewhere, but I don't remember)

Anyway:

• Your anchor is new generation anchor of the size recommended by sizing charts (just as mine).
• You are satisfied for day to day use in quite long period of time (just as I am).
• You do carry backups for extremalities (just as I do)

So - how You do see any BIB factor included in the sizing charts?????

[DoubleWhisky]

JonJo,

be sure I do not want to fight with You.
I have a lot of reasons to like and to regard You Aussiess to fight with one for no a reason, really
I just try to get and to share as many wievs and informations on topics interesting for me as possible.
All in good faith

[JonJo]

Originally Posted by DoubleWhisky

Your 15 kG anchor sits well in the envelope of sizing charts recommendations for different new generation anchors (may be slightly on the light side for some of them, but I do know not what exactly do You use. May be You specified it somewhere, but I don't remember)

Anyway:

• Your anchor is new generation anchor of the size recommended by sizing charts (just as mine).
• You are satisfied for day to day use in quite long period of time (just as I am).
• You do carry backups for extremalities (just as I do)

So - how You do see any BIB factor included in the sizing charts?????

We use the 15kg steel Excel, its on the bow roller.

We use it for day to day. But we have also used the 15kg Spade (and its alloy equivalant), the Fortress, same weight as the alloy Spade (slightly more combersome for us as it and the rode (at least initially) needs manhandled) and an alloy Excel same weight as the alloy Spade. They are all reliable, we have used them all extensively on long cruises. The alloys are very convenient, at 8-9kg, as you can carry them on the deck safely and carry and deploy in a dinghy. The early alloy Excel was a not man enough, it bent, but the new model seems stronger than the Bis 80 steel model.

If we lost the Excel we would have no issues with continuing a cruise reliant on a combination of the balance of our armoury.

And we use 8mm G3 chain, no swivel + 14m x 11mm climbing rope snubbers with Dyneema anti chafe hollow tape and a chain hook - on the to do list, replace with 6mm or 1/4 inch G7 chain. We have a Simrad NSS and use the anchor alarm (if twitchyness is an issue).


Edit: Double Whisky, your post, above, came in as I was crafting this reply. If I have made any suggestion that I thought you were picking a fight with me - please accept my humble apology. it never crossed my mind, anyone called double whisky (preferably a single malt) gets my vote!

[congo]

BoubleWhisky.

There have been many posts through various threads on various forums on the performance of the Excel, one to mention is the locked Excel thread, yes we have been questioned, almost condemned because of some of our claims, from anchor testing to concave verses convex, S/H/H/ Power certification validity, the method used for testing, right through to public scrutiny of our patent, I don’t think any anchor manufacturer has seen such a thorough scrutiny program before.

I’m not complaining, why should I, nothing has turned up any significant bad reports on the Excel, yes we do sell all over the world buy selling at a wholesaler’s price, there are many excels and Super Sarca anchors scattered throughout your area, one gentleman just finished a season in the US has sent me a great email on the performance of his 30 K.G. Excel, he also said that in some places they were dropping their Rocnas to and three times before successful hook up , where as he only had to drop once, although he said he would post, I don’t believe he will on the cruisers forum as his letter was three weeks ago? Just maybe he might think he will be accused as many customers have, as being a part of some invented Anchor Right Gang by Cotemar.

I have not seen a single entry posted from any one of the many customers’ reports from the Excel thread after it was locked?

From our customers we have reports of the Excel working across most all of the types of sea bed you have mentioned, this is from small boats through to large commercial vessels, based in Australia we are no threat to those that think we are, we are just soooo busy I could not really care if we do not get a suitable distributor in your part of the world, yes many have put their hand up but when challenged I do not believe they would have been satisfactory , I’m sure it will happen one day but I am not in any hurry.

The only way you will know how good the Excel is or isn’t, is to purchase one, if it is not what we say it is , or not to your speciation’s a full refund would come your way, just show me the Excel in three our four chopped up pieces and then you can even keep the anchor.

Regards Rex.

[congo]

Any way it is that time of the year, should be making pleasentris insted of negatives, I have more important things to do and am of on the water for three weeks, to all I have upset , missread your meaning , including being the naughty boy for the moderators who have me on two strikes, do sincerly oppolgize.

All the best for Christmas to you all and the new year.

Keep safe.

Regards Rex.

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by JonJo

It goes back to the basis of the discussion:

How can you claim that the anchor (you are trying to market) is twice as good as the traditional anchor, sets quicker, sets deeper, has higher holding etc etc but simultaneously suggest that a potential buyer should buy a model bigger than that recommended for the historic (and by implication - ineffective) anchor design. CQRs have been used (are being used) for decades - getting close to 100 years. They are regularly used, today, by yachts making heroic voyages and cruises (in both high a low latitudes).

Jonathan

Originally Posted by JonJo

We need to introduce the idea of personal experience. We work with 15kg anchors - and plan our anchoring accordingly. If we carried 50kg anchors we might plan differently (we'ed sail a bit bow down to start with, need a bigger windlass (maybe 2 windlass as we could not deploy by hand) and more power availability).

We do have a different boats also.
You do have two bows and probably some centerline post to work with Your anchors.

I have only one bow, double bow roller (lousily designed, I must admit) and very limited space for all anchoring equipement.

My boat is four times heavier than Yours, so I need to have all power driven, especially that we most of the time sail as a couple (our bunch of fourlegged friends is of no help with anchorwork).

On my bow, after slight and easy modifications I can accommodate two CQR style anchors. May be even that modification is not necessary for two CQRs, I'm not sure now. I'm also pretty sure, that with this slight modification I could put to quite convenient use one CQR style anchor and one Bruce style anchor. May be (just may be) WASI Bugel/SARCA Excel combination would be possible, but I doubt it.
But (and this is great BUT) I can have only ONE anchor of Rocna/Mantus/Supreme style on the bow.
I have the gear enabling me to change between anchors of considerable size (let’s say up to 36/40 kG) in quite calm weather, so I thought of adding secondary anchor for floors covered by vegetation, but Your opinion is such a seabed is just unsuitable for anchoring and should be avoided (in emergency it leads to the tactic – throw overboard everything You can and hope something will hold) and it is more than a possibility You are right.

About twenty – thirty years ago, with older generation of anchors – it was widely accepted, that yacht (for serious cruising at least) should carry two main anchors, preferably of different construction, and to ride really bad weather on two anchors. Discussions were rather limited to mode of double anchoring (V, tandem). The bows of monohulls were arranged accordingly. This setup of bow is still widely used, even if not taking to the account the progress in anchor construction. Take a look at Amel – the boat designed with long range cruising on mind – they are specifically arranged to take not heavy WASI Bugel and Delta together on the bow and to work both anchors conveniently. Amel is old school still.

With new generation of anchors, providing much more holding area for the given weight, the things changed. Mostly You can accommodate only one new style anchor on the bow, at least to work it in manageable manner. On the other hand new gen anchors, with they considerably higher holding power offered the possibility of single anchor solution with safety margin not lower, and may be even higher than old double anchor arrangement. So it was a case of one anchor replacing two. Such an anchor probably need to have not only the holding power of two, but also some additional margin, just because the case of dragging single anchor can lead to worse scenarios than dragging one of two anchors but it is of course disputable.
Anyway if we have an alternative: two older generation anchors or one new generation anchor, it may be not strange, that the sizing charts are giving bigger weight for new anchors than for old anchors, as new anchor is expected to replace two old anchors.
Have a look at the charts: One 40 kG Rocna against one 27 kG CQR and one 25 kG Delta. It is still 12 kG less for new configuration over old one (recommended sizes for my boat). So it is no BIB factor, but the two (with higher total weight) versus one (lighter than two together) situation. My view is that sizing charts are reflecting this.
On the other hand there is still massive market for simple, easy to operate and inexpensive anchors used as a lunch hooks by weekend boaters. And weekend boaters own probably 90 – 95 % of pleasure boats around the world. Existing sizing charts for older generation anchors work probably quite well for them, except of the case of Med mooring situations (and MOST of boats in Eastern Med is notorious for dragging the anchor when Med moored – for all years I can not remember a day of night without at least one, normally more situations like this).

So… May it is not so much of mystery in sizing charts, as I thought previously.
Good to discuss it with You, thanks!

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by congo

DoubleWhisky.

The only way you will know how good the Excel is or isn’t, is to purchase one.

Regards Rex.

Anyway it is my intention to contact You in the future and discuss the Excel via e-mail.
For now I do not know how soon it will be possible for me to be back sailing after long illness - hope it will be not to long.

My cruising ground is mainly Eastern Med., but I was missing from there for two seasons. I didn't see the Excel there yet.

Regards

Tomasz