Do I need a new gen anchor?

[eyschulman]

I like to look at complex things with a simple view. If an anchor is heavy enough even a shapeless cement blob with little or no scope and no need to set will hold a boat. Heavy ground tackle also calls for heavy more stressed gear to retrieve. If you don't want to carry a lot of weight on your bow( not great for sea keeping) it would be a good idea to seek a system that will hold the boat(no dragging) with as little weight as practical -that would set fast-reset, and use moderate scope. The modern digging may I repeat digging anchor seems to come closest to ideal. Its not that a heavy CQR or Bruce properly deployed won't do the job Its that a lighter digging anchor will also do the job. If one is into overkill then a bigger heavier digging anchor is the better answer. Just a simpletons way of looking at a complex problem.

[sabray]

The biggest improvement is the new gen hold better in more bottoms. My old Danforth held where the cqr failed. So I had to test the hold and then switch up if I chose wrong. The Bruce did well in most bottoms. My Manson does better. I think the spade will do well also. I keep the Bruce and some Danforth/ fortress where and if I need that extra abilty. It is not a one anchor fits all. I have a Luke for that year when I go to Maine. But for now its a lawn ornament. Rocky anchorage I'm bringing the Luke.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blue Crab]

Originally Posted by eyschulman

I like to look at complex things with a simple view. If an anchor is heavy enough even a shapeless cement blob with little or no scope and no need to set will hold a boat. ... Just a simpletons way of looking at a complex problem.

[QUOTE=sabray;1480879]The biggest improvement is the new gen hold better in more bottoms. My old Danforth held where the cqr failed. So I had to test the hold and then switch up if I chose wrong. The Bruce did well in most bottoms. My Manson does better. I think the spade will do well also. I keep the Bruce and some Danforth/ fortress where and if I need that extra abilty. It is not a one anchor fits all. I have a Luke for that year when I go to Maine. But for now its a lawn ornament. Rocky anchorage I'm bringing the Luke. /QUOTE]

When it comes to a simpleton's view, I have few peers.

As a geezer, I have read all the great sailing books by all the great adventurers. They all pretty much used CQRs along their ways. There certainly may be better, faster setting NewGen anchors now but to roundly toss the CQR in a proverbial dumpster seems somewhat short sighted.

This very morning I swapped a nice little wooden dink for a genuine 35# CQR. No one wanted the hard dink except for a kid's sandbox, i.e. they didn't want to pay much for it. The CQR is oversized for my 8500# vessel. I will figure a place to stow it low and midships along with my bigass Luke/fisherman rocky roadstead anchor, extra chain, dive weights and associated gear.

I also have an assortment of real Danforths and Fortresses. I'm not racing and don't mind carrying a little extra weight to hedge against the almost certain event I will have to weather a hurricane. I dive on my anchor set 90% of the time. If/when I need to deploy the CQR, the S will be HTF, and I'll see to it that it is truly set.

My brand new, never-been-wet-yet, everyday Rocna 10 will soon be riding proudly on my bow roller. I'm thinking I have this area covered.

[sabray]

Yeah okay. I wouldn't want shapeless blob. I want the most universal shape at the outer suggestion for my cruising area and boat design.
New gen anchors offer this diverse holding. Where my cqr would not hold the new gen does. Where a Danforth holds really well the new gen still holds. Where the cqr dragged and would nt set I would try a Danforth and that usually would set hard. Now the Manson sets and I don't have to fuss with changing up. Might not always be the best anchor of choice so I carry a Bruce and fortress and if heading tword Rocky places a Luke.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[poiu]

Well, it's been a year since I got my 70kg Rocna.

I just re-read the thread and there is a lot of good advice here and I can add my experience.

I ended up with the Rocna as I made a model of the Spade and found it wouldn't fit my stem very well. Likewise the Mantus from its drawings looked far too close to the boat. A pity as I think it is a better choice.

The Rocna doesn't fit perfectly, but it is OK. I really need some way of holding it in position. Currently I am relying on the windlass. It is not an adequate solution.

Anyway, to cut to the chase - yes it works better than the CQR as most people would have expected and as I expected from reading similar threads. It does drag though. If the ground is really soft then it will drag, and I have dragged on a few occassions, but it is the percentage of failures which is relevant and I reckon my re-set rate is down from 20% to 5% or less. So a 4 times improvement. Pretty good. In fact it is better. If I can see the bottom and it is sand and there are no rocks, then I know I will hold. I wasn't that sure with the CQR. It managed to drag sometimes in what should have been good conditions.

So, to answer my own question. I don't need a new gen anchor, but I'm glad to have one.