Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

[congo]

Noelex Wrote:

A lot of the seabed "damage" is caused by the chain but it we focus on the anchor itself the biggest factor is speed in setting and the ability not to drag.

If you dive and look at distance to set, there is a remarkable difference between the better anchors like the MS, Rocna, Spade (concave) and the poor performers like CQR (convex)
A CQR,even with the right technique will typically drag and can leave a furrow for 10m, or so, before it sets.
The better anchors will set in less than a metre.

The Delta and Kobra designs (convex) will set quickly, but sometimes slowly drag under the surface in stronger wind.

By far the biggest damage is caused by a fully dragging anchor. The higher holding power of the concave designs is big help in reducing the chance of this widespread damage.

If Australia was considering banning concave anchors, that is shameful. It is exactly the wrong thing to do.

I wonder where they got the idea to do that?


Well Noelex it is a pity that you have not experieced the Sauper Sarca or Excel as niether plough, set extremely fast and continue to bury, and yes in many types of weed beds, our designs further are multi purpose covering a wide variety of ocean type sea floors, less dragging less disturbance.

What many of you have experienced is the wow factor in how fast your concave anchors set, its a shame it is all over and the bitter end procducess recommending two sizes up and then still having them drag. Then in some cases resorting back to a Bruce.

Go purchase a brand new origional CQR, not a copy , not a second hand one, have them sharpen the toe, you will be amzed as you said you will feel you have hit the back wall in your garage and anchor in more places than your beloverd concave, I kid you not , try it.

If you look at the needle toe on the Mantus, it has no choice but to dig in instantly as it is as sharp as a razor. if you want the best concave design then you cannot go past the spade.

The last part of your question really doesn't deserve a comment, but at the moment we have a flow of our product entering your country, sooner or later, mark my words you will have your own countrymen to argue with.


Regards Rex.


__________________

[JonJo]

A quick comment on environmentalists and anchoring.

I'm a sceptic, I have no evidence that anchoring damages seabeds in the long term. I disagree with the concept and have publication (in Oz) on paper, not ephemeral electronic media, saying the same. It is possible anchoring damages seabeds (I have an open mind). I have seen no scientific basis for closing of anchorages based on damage by anchors of any description.

Anchorages used over decades have commonly be chosen to provide sanctuary for mariners in times of weather that might endanger life and to close those anchorages without real and in depth analysis looks short sighted.

OK, I'm a Luddite.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by congo

Go purchase a brand new origional CQR, not a copy , not a second hand one, have them sharpen the toe, you will be amzed as you said you will feel you have hit the back wall in your garage and anchor in more places than your beloverd concave, I kid you not , try it.
____

I have crused with a CQR for more years than I care to remember and yes it was new when I started.
I still have a CQR in one of my outside lockers. It's not been used for at least the last 5 years so it still should be in good shape.

Anchors like the MS, Rocna and spade set nothing like a CQR. They set with a bang rather than the long slow gradual set of a CQR.

Yes sharpening the toe of a CQR does help and I would recommend this prior to re-galvanising (although the galvananising does not last long on a sharp point), but you cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, as my dad used to say.

I would expect any modern anchor manufacturer to distance themselves from the CQR rather than compare there anchors performance to this elderly design. They should be chalk and cheese.

[JonJo]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

If Australia was considering banning concave anchors, that is shameful. It is exactly the wrong thing to do.

I wonder where they got the idea to do that?

Noelex, please do not tell Australian's how they should run their country - it might be shameful but it has nothing, whatsoever to do with you. If you pay Australian tax you are fully entitled to express your views at the next ballot, September 2013 and on this forum, but prior to making accusations of shame, possibly declare your nationality.



I wrote a piece some months ago about anchors in which I said I tested some small anchors and that the concave roll bars anchors carried mud.

BUT

I also said this might be a scale effect and that this carrying of mud might not occur in larger anchors - because I had no evidence (that it occurred in larger anchors).

That is roughly what I said, I only put the bit in brackets to make it perfectly clear here.

Since I wrote that we have had a suddenly deluge of honesty. We have had the Manson Supreme in weed thread, this, BIB, thread and the admissions might also have appeared on the Super SARCA and SARCA Excel threads. Numbers of people with pretty substantial anchors have admitted, and proudly stated, that their concave, roll bar anchors carry mud. These comments came voluntarily, they came thick and fast. Suddenly we have a new level of integrity. Apparently nearby yachts would say 'are you dredging the anchorage' or whatever. Strangly since the roll barred convex anchors were introduced this carrying of seabed was simply not talked about - go back and have a look. There was the odd mention but not the plethora of independent posts from all over the world that has appeared in the last 2 months.

I have not said any of this, I might have repeated (ad noseaum )what was posted - but it is not my invention. The manufacturers of roll barred concave anchors might not be happy with me (and the manufacturers of Fortress/Danforth/Anchor Right might be pleased)- but the admissions did not come from me.

I do not care either way (what the anchor makers think) - but I do care that evidence is not suppressed, that evidence is admitted (openly) and any contrary comment is considered not denegrated. I have no interest in the success of Spade, Fortress, Anchor Right, Manson - I have every interest in a healthy, honest and professional marine industry in which customers are given the fullest information.

Fortunately Noelex I will be able to quote you verbatim in the future. Promise I'll not edit for effect


If neighbouring yachts see clods of seabed on anchors - so will any bureaucrat passing nearby. They do not need to have ideas planted in their minds - most are university graduates and most can think for themselves. Get real.

So I take real offence with the suggestion that someone might have planted an idea in a middle management environmental officers mind.

The comment was uncalled for and offensive

Do not worry, I have something of a thick skin

[Snowpetrel]

It would be interesting to look at some of the harder used New gen anchors and see how sharp the tips are, maybe over the years of hard use they are just now starting to dull, hence more reports of failures?

Congo, how do you recommend the tips of the new gen anchors are sharpened?

Cheers

Ben

[Jimbo485]

Originally Posted by JonJo

Noelex, please do not tell Australian's how they should run their country - it might be shameful but it has nothing, whatsoever to do with you. If you pay Australian tax you are fully entitled to express your views at the next ballot, September 2013 and on this forum, but prior to making accusations of shame, possibly declare your nationality.

s:

Relax, JonJo, Noelex is an Aussie. Used to be a boatbuilder IIRC. Probably paid more tax than your average Aussie before escaping!

[Andrew Troup]

To put a sharp point on an anchor prior to regalving, simply grind off all the old galv in the area and take off a few mm of parent metal as well, well back from the point*

Then build the whole point area up above the original profile with a stainless electrode, preferably 309 or one of several other grades specifically designed for welding stainless to mild steel. Grind it back to match the profile and give the desired sharp point, except now the whole point area is stainless: as well as not corroding, it holds a sharp edge longer than mild steel.

When you galv it, the galv will not stick to the stainless, but it will cover the mild steel.

Remember to melt out the lead in the tip, if it's a genuine CQR, prior to galving, then reinstate it after. Check with a magnet for knock-offs; some of the better ones do, some don't.

*The idea of doing this is to enable future rewelding the tip with the same overlay rod, whenever it gets blunt, and resharpening it, without the weld heat buildup travelling back far enough to burn the galv off.

If anchoring in weed, particularly kelp, you could consider welding a serrated stainless cutting bar along the centre seam of a convex anchor. The ideal would be to copy the grind on a genuine Leatherman blade. This will make your anchor very dangerous around humans, though...

[congo]

Nolex,

Yes well the brick wall is a good feeling, it 's after that is what matters, obviously you havent read many of the posts, problem being my suggestion of sharpening the point I dont believe you have tried, yes I agree a sharp point is going to be sharp for how long? agree silk purse out of a sow's ear?

Well both hoop style concave anchors don't actually have blunt points do they, further it is neccessary to go up two sizes as if you dont want to be able to anchor in no more than a CQR will, all be it you will feel like you have hit a brick wall.

Well we have been hitting brick walls and the latter, staying put in many types of sea beds here in Australaia without recommending two anchor sizes bigger, for the last 18 years.

The biggest reward possible ,we have customers coming back when they upgrade to a new vessel and cannot be swayed by the new gen anchors, our products have served them so well through cylones ,Tsunamis real worlds tests over not seven but 18 years.


Nowhere Noelex my friend will you see the results through out your threads on our anchors, evidence, alls not that good with the new gen, I would ask you to revisit your threads.

Our biggest worry now is keeping up with demand as I think all of this controversy, anchor test, bendy shanks, product quality has put a lot of focus on our companay and is now being rewarded.
Regards
Rex.

[DumnMad]

Jonjo; It seems you are misleading and trying to say the success of the most popular anchors are cancelled by a few instances where some have had a little trouble due to who knows what they might have done wrong. Do you have another agenda????

And whats this nonsense about a bit of mud on the anchor?
If the sea bed at anchorage depth is muddy then its placed by rivers and waves and which cause the smothering of plants & animals. Anchors won't be doing significant harm compared to a storm or river in flood.
Don't try to make a mountain out of a molehill. In my experience its very true that non-science or nonsense has greatly influenced the thinking of some environmental officers, particularly in the area of silt and dust "pollution".

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by JonJo

Noelex, please do not tell Australian's how they should run their country - it might be shameful but it has nothing, whatsoever to do with you.

JonJo I don't normally respond to personal comments.

My nationality should have nothing to do with my ability to post on anchoring laws in any country, or anything else for that matter, on this international forum.

For what its worth I am Australian.

[Snowpetrel]

Originally Posted by Andrew Troup

When you galv it, the galv will not stick to the stainless, but it will cover the mild steel.
.

A great idea Andrew, maybe one day we could get an anchor with a tip like this already welded in on purchase. It would be great to be able to keep that tip needle sharp, and not have the sharp edge rusting away.

Almost makes you think a replaceable stainless steel bolt on tip could be the go. you could insulate it from the galv so it wouldn't chew away at the nearby zinc.

Maybe add a replaceable zinc to the anchor as well...

[congo]

Snowpetrel

Yes the toe of anchor has to be durable and with stand proof testing, these are extremely excess loads, this then determins our designs toe entry strength, basicaly controls how fine we can go, the finer the toe the quicker it wears, at the same time because it sets faster there is less dragging, so in good anchorages where fast setting is common probably one balances out the other.

If you are anchoring in gravel, hard sand stone, rubbly material where the anchor will take longer to set dont expect your thin sharp toe to stay sharp for long.

This is an issue with the large trawlers of which we have to deal with, so getting it right is very much part of our design, remeber we are certified tested anchor manufacturers, needle like toes would never cut the proof testing.

It is common sense for construction of the toe to be quite broad, not a razer sharp toe, but more something that you would not exactly call blunt.

The marerial one users in an anchors design can also govern how thin or thick the toe can be, with the excel you would not call it a razer sharp toe but they are constructed of bisaloy, this material even when the gal whares of is very wear sustainable, the Super Sarca toe can be a lot blunter because of the anchors design, so it is produced out of very thick flat bar 350 grd mild steel, but because of its bulk will hold the toe profile for many years.

I like Andrew Troups method of building up an anchors toe, that would also work well, I cannot see anything wrong with that, if we get an anchor that needs tip or toe attention it can built it up with weld of basically mild steel or harder grades if required, a method we use to re galv a small area is basically a gavanizing stick of which can be melted into the steel and then linished back that also works well.

Even if we were to get the whole anchor regaled just for a toe touch up it wouldn't be long any way before the Gal is ground of the tip.

Regards Rex.

[JonJo]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

I wonder where they got the idea to do that?

I wonder whom Noelex referred to here

[congo]

Dumnad,

We dont make the environmentle laws here in a Australia ,for the greens, they are chasing votes, take our Port Phillip bay for instance, we have a pest starfish that has lobbed here from the ballast water from big ships, these star fish granted are desecrating our bays, the environmentalists's are trying and believe will succeed, when a tralier boat is retreived you will have to boat wash the whole boat and motor prior to leaving so as if you visit another bay you wont spread these star fish.

Ironicaly you can motor through Port Phillip bay around and into Westerport spreading the star fish spawn, this movement from one bay to another is now being identified as a prime source of spreading this pest.



How do you think this will go , so it is not only anchors destruction it is the abilty for these concave designs to carry lardge clumps of spawn and then deposit in another part of the bay, worse still in another bay all together, yes it is a worry as we are loosing fishing grounds at a greate rate now, I think they will simply ban all anchors, you cannot argue with them with a display like this.

Yes I know all anchor designs can carry some mud but not volumes like this, and the ones that will complain, protest over more non anchoring areas are probably some of the culprites with concave anchors that could have reduced this interest by simply washing them of on retrieval, simply could not be botherd.

Regards Rex.

[Cotemar]

Here is the only problem with Convex plow anchors.

The sharp pointed upward bend is the problem.

Like the bow of a boat it’s made to cut and then it pushes the seabed aside and moves.

If your boat is pumping in the waves then the shank gets tugged upward and the sharp pointed upward bend pushes the seabed aside and the anchor moves.

If there is strong gusting wind and the anchor gets a tug, then the sharp pointed upward bend pushes the seabed aside and the anchor moves.

It breaks out easily and comes up clean, because it has a sharp pointed upward bend that pushes the seabed aside and allows it to move.

At 2am in the morning on a dark, gusting, windy and rainy night I am not thinking about how easily and clean my anchor will break out. I am sleeping