General consensus on Ultra Anchor

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Ultra Marine West

. . . We have very popular and busy bays with deep waters in the south part of Turkey, such as Gocek, where we stern tie too, therefore, the scope is a big issue, and ULTRA makes a huge performance difference there. That is how we became that popular in Turkey at the beginning. It wasn't the beauty of the anchor. You don't need to deal with five different pieces to make the shank of the ULTRA to make it beautiful. I am sure as time goes by and the number of ULTRA Anchors in use increases there, you will also realize the performance difference of our concept, as well.

I've done a lot of sailing around the Turkish Aegean coasts, Gökova Körfezi, Güllük Körfezi, Göcek, Fetiya, Bodrum . . . . -- one of my favorite cruising grounds. I don't think I ever saw an Ultra on a sailboat even once. You see a lot of Bruces and fake Bruces, Deltas, Rocnas, and CQR's. You see Ultras sometimes on the more expensive Delaware-registered motor yachts. I don't think many people buy $5000 stainless anchors with holding power first in mind.



The anchoring there is utterly UN-challenging -- clean sand everywhere, plenty of room -- a CQR would work fine. It is the custom in some places to use shore ties -- and I have done it where others were -- but I never really understood why.

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

It's getting the repeatable part that makes anchor testing so hard and so contentious. Minor differences in the substrate, such as can be found in every bottom, can skew the results wildly. Looking at some of the previous tests where each anchor was checked several times, you will see big variances between tests of a given anchor, even when done in limited areas and short time frames.

And then everyone picks the data that best support their thesis or product... what a surprise!

A damn hard job, anchor testing!

Jim

That is so true.

It is really so hard to do a fair test with real size anchors in the real world. Minor differences can be found in every bottom that a each anchor builder can use that difference to his advantage that is why a test sponsored by an anchor manufacturer is not actually an anchor test at all. It is a secret advertisement.

On the other hand, you can mostly only test how quickly anchors set and how much they can hold during an anchor test.

However, there are other characteristics you need to question to find the best possible anchor design.

The ones we could list are as below;

CHARACTERISTICS THAT AN ANCHOR SHOULD HAVE!
1. Does the anchor require experience to use?
2. Does the anchor instantly set on each occasion?
3. Are you required to set the anchor, or does it set independently?
4. Once set, does the anchor instantly generate its maximum holding power without shifting?
5. In a changing wind or tide conditions will the anchor release?
6. Could it be used as a bow anchor? Does it only hold on sand or could it perform enough at every sort of sea beds?
7. Does the anchor penetrate immediately?
8. Does the anchor have a self righting capability without having a roll bar?
9. Will the anchor penetrate weed or grassy bottom conditions?
10. Will the anchor penetrate hard mud or clay bottom conditions?
11. Should it only be pulled slow or could it immediately hold even you pull it fast?
12. Could it penetrate without requiring the chain weight?
13. Does it immediately hold without sliding and not damaging the underwater life?
14. Does the anchor design assist it to set in all bottom conditions?
15. Does it have some details making your anchor hard to be cleaned by keeping mud and weed on?
16. Is the anchor self aligning onto the bow roller?
17. Does the design allow the anchor to suit your bow roller assembly?
18. Does it suitable to most of the bow rollers?
19. Is the anchor’s shank length enough short to keep it away from hitting the other mechanisms when reeling in and out?
20. Is the anchor tip able to be bent under extreme forces?
21. Is the anchor shank able to bend or break under force?
22. Does it have a strong connection between shank and body?
23. Is the shank eye reinforced to avoid failure?
24. Does its shank hole work good without constricting the swivel?
25. Does it make your boat more beautiful?

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I've done a lot of sailing around the Turkish Aegean coasts, Gökova Körfezi, Güllük Körfezi, Göcek, Fetiya, Bodrum . . . . -- one of my favorite cruising grounds. I don't think I ever saw an Ultra on a sailboat even once. You see a lot of Bruces and fake Bruces, Deltas, Rocnas, and CQR's. You see Ultras sometimes on the more expensive Delaware-registered motor yachts. I don't think many people buy $5000 stainless anchors with holding power first in mind.

The anchoring there is utterly UN-challenging -- clean sand everywhere, plenty of room -- a CQR would work fine. It is the custom in some places to use shore ties -- and I have done it where others were -- but I never really understood why.

Hi sir,

When did you do your sailing in Turkey?

Things changed dramatically in Turkey today. Especially after 2012 when our concept totally understood here and we could increase our capacity dramatically.

Please see the below picture. That is a random picture sent to me by a close friend a couple of days ago. There are 10 sailboats side by side and 7 of them has the ULTRA on. He was so happy to see that percentage in that marina and couldn't stop himself taking the picture and send it to me.

Shortly, I assure you that you understanding about the ULTRA will totally change at your next trip to Turkey.

On the other hand, we are at the CNR Eurasia Istanbul Boat Show right now and nearly half of boats at that show has the ULTRA on. If you know someone in Turkey that you can send to that show to check it, the show is open for two more days.

I must confess that the overall ULTRA anchor percentage we got in Turkey is even frightening for us. There is no way we can supply that many ULTRA Anchors to the boats in Turkey without other major capacity increases which is not easy.

[Ultra Marine West]

I guess that the information I give below also matches with anchor test.

ABS (American Bureau of Shipping) tested ULTRA and gave it the highest degree ABS Type Approval certificate. We ideally took it for selling ULTRA to Mega Yachts. As we took that certification, Mega Yacht Builders can save 50% anchor weight from each anchor, which means they can put a 550lbs ULTRA instead of a 1.100lbs stockless anchor.

The opening of that certification is totally about the holding power capacity of the ULTRA Anchor. This also explains why big ship captains think that it is the chain holding the boat, not the anchor. It is because their anchors don’t hold much. As per that certification, ABS tells that the ULTRA holds minimum 4 times more than the same weight stockless anchor. That also explains why Mega Yachts with ship anchors suffer too much on anchoring.

1.3.3 SHP Anchors for Restricted Service and to a Maximum Weight of 1500 kg (3306 lbs)
Special approval can be given to superior holding power anchors with holding powers of at
least 4 times the holding power of ordinary anchors. The mass of each bower anchor can be
reduced by up to 50% of the mass specified in 2-2-1/Table 6.

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by David B

It is very unfair to compare the price of two brands of anchor when one is manufactured from stainless steel and the other from galvanised steel. Comparing other brands of stainless steel anchor, the prices are similar.

Yet that is exactly what sailors will do when they are walking around the chandlers shopping for a new anchor. Quick giggle at the genuine CQR and its price, because they have been reading CF. Dismiss the Delta copy as cheap and they can do better. Give the galv Spade a close inspection and approving nod as a good option. Notice the cheaper price of the similar sized Rocna and Mantus. Drool at the Ultra on the top shelf kept away from sticky finger prints, then chose the sensible option that meets the requirements and is within budget.

Curious to know what words are spoken the first time a $5200 anchor is snagged on the bottom I used to grimace cutting the line to a snagged grapple anchor.

Now the real question, what is Steve going to do with that manky old spade anchor after he has tested it. He probably won't want that on his rather nice vessel. Shame he is half way around the world and the cost of shipping probably more than buying a new Spade locally.

Pete

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Ultra Marine West

As per that certification, ABS tells that the ULTRA holds minimum 4 times more than the same weight stockless anchor.

Personally I am not a great fan of the current certifications. It is very expensive for anchor manufacturers to obtain and so significantly pushes up anchor prices, and the standard seems to have little practical value.

The holding requirement is only for four times the measurement reached by the same weight, very old fashioned, ordinary stockless anchor. This style of anchor is shown in the photo below and is a very inefficient design that has to be heavy for even modest holding power. Four time the holding power of the same weight anchor in this style is a very low standard. So the standard sets a low bar in my view, but allows the manufacturers to attach a very impressive label that proclaims the anchor is certified as having “Super High Holding Power”. I think this is somewhat misleading for the anchor buying public.

There is also a strength requirement. Unfortunately, this only considers the vertical strength of the anchor shank. Our anchor’s shanks almost invariably bend from a side force. However, to meet the requirement the anchor manufacturers need to make shanks that are strong when subject to a vertical load. Unfortunately, this makes the shank heavier than it should be. This detracts from the performance, while doing little to boost strength where it is needed.

The first SHHP anchor, the Manson Supreme, in my view particularly suffered from this problem (although it still a very good anchor). Some people have modified the Manson Supreme by removing part of the top of the shank. This reduces the shank weight and significantly improves the performance (as you would expect). It has little impact on the strength of the shank when subject to side loads (where strength is needed) but reduces the strength of the shank when subject to vertical loads. The modified anchor would be unlikely to pass the SHHP test, but I would argue the modified anchor is superior.

I would not recommend modifying an anchor in this way, but it is an indication that the standard is not helping improve anchor performance.

I am not against standards, but we desperately need a new and updated standard that has some relevance to our anchors.

[malbert73]

I’m glad the Ultra is very effective bling. I hope more buy it.
I cringe every time I walk down the docks and see a mini sized shiny stainless CQR copy on the bow of a huge motor yacht.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

If I had to guess, it would hold fine if you could get it set. But setting would likely be a problem, as I can picture it trying to dig in laying on its side and not tipping upright.

Personally, I think it's the best of the rollbar designs, as the larger rollbar is less susceptible to clogging. And rollbar clogs seem to be the majority of the issues with other rollbar anchors.

I've done this. About 39 times out of 40, the anchor lands right side up and it sets even faster. The roll bar only matters if the anchor is flipped over backwards.


Roll bar clogging is not the problem so much as mud sticking to the concave fluke, normally near where the shank attaches, and upsetting the balance.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Ultra Marine West

However, there are other characteristics you need to question to find the best possible anchor design.

The ones we could list are as below;

CHARACTERISTICS THAT AN ANCHOR SHOULD HAVE!
...
8. Does the anchor have a self righting capability without having a roll bar?
...

That's rather arbitrary. Why shouldn't an anchor have a roll bar?

Ultra isn't the only anchor with SHP or SHHP certification.
This explains certification: https://www.petersmith.net.nz/boat-a...sification.php

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Personally I am not a great fan of the current certifications. It is very expensive for anchor manufacturers to obtain and so significantly pushes up anchor prices, and the standard seems to have little practical value.

The holding requirement is only for four times the measurement reached by the same weight, very old fashioned, ordinary stockless anchor. This style of anchor is shown in the photo below and is a very inefficient design that has to be heavy for even modest holding power. Four time the holding power of the same weight anchor in this style is a very low standard. So the standard sets a low bar in my view, but allows the manufacturers to attach a very impressive label that proclaims the anchor is certified as having “Super High Holding Power”. I think this is somewhat misleading for the anchor buying public.

There is also a strength requirement. Unfortunately, this only considers the vertical strength of the anchor shank. Our anchor’s shanks almost invariably bend from a side force. However, to meet the requirement the anchor manufacturers need to make shanks that are strong when subject to a vertical load. Unfortunately, this makes the shank heavier than it should be. This detracts from the performance, while doing little to boost strength where it is needed.

The first SHHP anchor, the Manson Supreme, in my view particularly suffered from this problem (although it still a very good anchor). Some people have modified the Manson Supreme by removing part of the top of the shank. This reduces the shank weight and significantly improves the performance (as you would expect). It has little impact on the strength of the shank when subject to side loads (where strength is needed) but reduces the strength of the shank when subject to vertical loads. The modified anchor would be unlikely to pass the SHHP test, but I would argue the modified anchor is superior.

I would not recommend modifying an anchor in this way, but it is an indication that the standard is not helping improve anchor performance.

I am not against standards, but we desperately need a new and updated standard that has some relevance to our anchors.

You are right, these indeed are low standards, but we don’t have any control over these standards. Any new generation anchors can easily achieve a minimum of four times more holding power. As I know, the old generation ones could also achieve the minimum two times more holding power. However, it is at least a test by an independent third party.

Under normal use and conditions, the anchors and swivels are not exposed to side loads. When wind direction changes, the direction of the pull also changes by anchor maneuvering under the sea bottom. When an anchor gets stuck under a rock, it is then exposed to excessive side and vertical loads. In that case, we recommend users try an anchor recovery method instead of forcing for recovery, which may end up with a bent shank anchor or broken bow roller, etc. That is why we designed the ULTRA Anchor Ring https://www.ultramarinewest.com/prod...ra-anchor-ring

On the other hand, we started using 318LN Duplex stainless steel as of 2015 at the shank of the ULTRA, which is the strongest stainless steel ever therefore noone could bend its shank for the last five years when it is sized correctly for the boat.

The ULTRA Anchor also comes with a lifetime warranty; instead, someone could still bend the shank, etc.

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

That's rather arbitrary. Why shouldn't an anchor have a roll bar?

Ultra isn't the only anchor with SHP or SHHP certification.
This explains certification: https://www.petersmith.net.nz/boat-a...sification.php

When an anchor has a roll-bar, it doesn't fit boats with bowsprit.

I didn't mean ULTRA has the only one with Lloyd certification; instead, I just noted that these are very low standards as any new generation anchor can achieve certification easily. We were talking about independent anchor test, so that is also an independent test.

[Lost Horizons]

Originally Posted by Ultra Marine West

When an anchor has a roll-bar, it doesn't fit boats with bowsprit.

Really? They fit mine just fine.

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by Lost Horizons

Really? They fit mine just fine.

I guess, I used a wrong word in English.

How do you call boats looking like the one in that picture?

[Lost Horizons]

Poorly designed.

[Lost Horizons]

My take on modern anchors, they are expensive. Even Rockna and Mantus are. I have hard time understanding why an anchor costs more than an outboard motor OF THE SAME WEIGHT. It is a completely different level of complexity. A hunk of metal should not cost this much. Particularly the one that is almost a consumable item. Stainless steel? It probably deserves a 25% premium over carbon alloy, but 300% premium is silly.