Manson Supreme Rock slot

[mrohr]

Roverhi has posted in the past that he likes and uses the slot; so after a number of years with no problem with my manson in conventional shackle hole I have tried the slot for a few nights in the strongly reversing currents of NYC. No problem, but I have always been wary of the foul bottoms in old industrial areas and hope the slot will function as advertised when necessary. I did have a bit of a start however,when one night the chain slid down the slot with a crash when the shackle slid down the slot and the impact was transmitted back up the chain. This was in Mt Sinai Hbr where there is little current and conditions were calm. So far no problem with the slot.

..............................love you all .......mike........................... mike.............................................. ..............

[congo]

11-10-2013, 07:18

#14

skipmac
Warped sense of humor

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: 29° 49.16’ N 82° 25.82’ W
Boat: Pearson 422
Posts: 6,070
Re: Manson Supreme Rock slot

Quote:
Originally Posted by ontherocks83
Understood and very good point!

Not to open a can of worms because I am sure that with out video of an anchor doing this it is ALL speculation but "theoretically" if the anchor pulled out wouldn't the roll bar side or "non pointy side" catch something (i.e a rock or even just the bottom), flip over, the shackle would slide back and then reset. Or am I being way to optimistic?

Skipmac Wrote:
Well by now you've seen several other replies but just to address this specific question. Manson designed the rock slot exactly for the shackle to slide down the shank to pull the anchor out if it jams in a rock. So if it is designed to do that then why wouldn't it do it whether you reversed pull on the anchor on purpose to pull it out or the pull reversed without your help when the wind changed direction.

Rex wrote;

Well yes and no, yes it can pull out in a 180 degree wind shift but there is less leverage at the rear as now the shackle has traveled back.in this possition it will take more of a considerable force to break it out. (if it does do a back flip it Will not rag rearward) the chain will pull up over the roll bar adding downward force to the rear of the fluke, if the anchor breaks out it has to back flip, the D shackle then slams back to the front of the anchors shank to its original position, it will then l roll over and reset.

To actually trip the anchor out of a rock situation then you have to go direct ally over the anchor, take up all of the slack and motor slowly over it, once the anchor is released the shackle then slides back home, when you are anchored on around three or four to one this upward pressure to trip from rocks is not applied, this is why the ones that have shackled to the slot have not experienced any problem.

How do I know this, well the Sarca anchor was a world first with this mechanism, patented design, so you may wonder if it is patented how come Manson use it, well most of you do not anchor on the slide rail with the manson where as Sarca has no second D shackle attachment,? That’s how to get around a block in the door so to speak.

Yes it is true, slide rails have been around four years, difference being they mostly travel all the way to the rear of the anchor, but try finding one that automatically resets. Try and find anything similar, you won’t, Sarcas design stops approx two thirds rearward from the front of the shank.

You would all remember the then Rocna camp bagging the Sarca, stating the shank was weak because of the slide rail,dragging rearward, then they bagged Manson after adapting our design for the same thing, yes and then went on and did the same thing themselves as well, yes a second D shackle hole too, neither of them could patent it as we have it, Fact.

Yes you will have a ball with this one but what I have said is true.

Why hasn’t either of the two companies mentioned given instructions in the way I have, simply because we also have copy right with the instructions.

Try explaining this every time with ongoing bashing by competition, far easier to say well if you are not convinced stick a bolt in it and lock it of when anchored over night, but I assure you the bolt is not needed,

Skipmac wrote:

Doesn't matter why the pull reverses, if it does then the risk is there and even if the risk is very, very small the results if it happens could be very, very bad.

Rex wrote;
Skipmac thanks for acknowledging the later ( even if the risk is very, very small the results if it happens could be very, very bad.)

Yes well with your acknowledgment of back flip, imagine the huge risk of stable dragging should the roll bar mysteriously drop of,

Skipmac wrote:

No I have not heard of anyone who has had that happen, maybe because no one uses the stupid slot.
__________________
The water is always bluer on the other side of the ocean.

Regards Rex

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by congo

Well yes and no, yes it can pull out in a 180 degree wind shift but there is less leverage at the rear as now the shackle has traveled back.in this possition it will take more of a considerable force to break it out. (if it does do a back flip it Will not rag rearward) the chain will pull up over the roll bar adding downward force to the rear of the fluke, if the anchor breaks out it has to back flip, the D shackle then slams back to the front of the anchors shank to its original position, it will then l roll over and reset.

Rex perhaps we better agree to disagree on this one.

When anchored overnight with the possibility of a significant change in the direction of pull I don't want an anchor that will break out, back flip etc.
I want an anchor that will stay set and reorient to the new direction. The good anchors do this very well.

Once an anchor breaks out most of the time it resets, but to set ideally an anchor needs a slow steady pull and a strong wind change does not provide these conditions.

The slot is ideal when dropping an anchor in rocky ground to fish. If you want to promote the anchor as a good design for anchoring yachts overnight you should take the opportunity, with the change in shank materials, to make some design changes. The dual options like the Manson Supreme would be ideal, but at least a more secure means of locking off the slot like the Manson Boss.

[sailorboy1]

I have never tried my Manson rock slot. But if I were to ready have a sudden 180 degree shift I don't really see a difference on whether the anchor flips regards of which attachment point I used, the fixed hole of the slot. I don't think my shackle is going to slide down the slot if I used it in anything other than a straight 180 degree direction change, any other time if is just going to try to twist the shank.

But I think the whole thing is much to do about nothing really.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

But if I were to ready have a sudden 180 degree shift I don't really see a difference on whether the anchor flips regards of which attachment point I used, the fixed hole of the slot.

If you use the fixed hole and set the anchor it will not flip. It will remain set (buried) and rotate around. It will develop some list and the holding will reduce slightly as it rotates, but nothing like to same degree if it "flips" and pulls out completely. The later will happen when you use a a "rock slot".
Reliability in remaining set is an important property of a good anchor. The Manson Supreme is very good in this regard. Use the "rock slot" rather than the fixed attachment point and you ruin this attribute.

This might be a worthwhile trade off if anchoring for a short stop in rocky conditions, with constant monitoring, but my advice would be to not use it for overnight anchoring. The Manson Supreme has an option the Super Sarca does not (the slot can potentially be blocked off in the Super Sarca with a bolt, but I have some doubts if this friction fit is adequate.)

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

If you use the fixed hole and set the anchor it will not flip. It will remain set (buried) and rotate around. It will develop some list and the holding will reduce slightly as it rotates, but nothing like to same degree if it "flips" and pulls out completely. The later will happen when you use a a "rock slot".

Maybe. But I feel it is more likely that the anchor with be loaded at small angle changes and more likely to just turn even if using the rock slot. The only time I can ever see the anchor "flipping" in the rock slot is if the anchor could complete a 180 shift with no load on it till the shift is over.

But as I said I've never used the slot, but am starting to wonder if I'm not making use of a feature that may have more chance of being useful than the chance of it being a negative.

[noelex 77]

Yes that is a valid point if the change occurs slowly and the anchor has a chance to rotate around the rock slot will still work fine. It is only when the change of direction is more rapid than the anchors ability to rotate that a problem occurs.

[colemj]

This is all hypothetical brain droppings, and I usually rail against this type of thinking, but what bothers me about "rock slots" is pulling the shank up partway and then wrapping the chain under the shank - at which point you have lost the farm.

Anchored on a LAR-keeled catamaran, we have experienced situations that monos and daggerboard cats do not. Namely, strong opposing wind and currents.

In these situations, monos stay steady in the direction of the current while daggerboard cats stay steady in the direction of the wind (assuming their daggers are up).

Us LAR keel cats, however, are on a Tilt-A-Whirl carnival ride swinging wildly back and forth and around in circles. You have to see it to believe it. This is by far our worst anchoring nightmare. We will gladly take hurricane winds and death-roll anchorages over these conditions. It is the closest we have ever come to sea-sickness.

In one particularly bad episode, when we pulled up the anchor there was a over-hand knot in the chain! Somehow, the chain had snuck completely under the anchor and then tripped OVER the anchor and tied a knot so that the anchor could not be raised higher than just sitting on the bottom before the knot was at the windlass. Let me tell you - that is one unholy mess to correct in a crowded anchorage.

So now I have this deep fear that using a "rock slot" would only make this type of situation worse.

But it is all hypothetical and I have no facts, data, or empirical evidence.

Mark

[Cotemar]

I think it should be called a fisherman’s slot, as it is really good for when you anchor in rocks when fishing and you remain on your boat. No harm No foul.

No cruisers that I ask about using that slot ever use it. Either they never tried it or never wanted to.

What is interesting is that Rocna only puts this slot on a 9 and 13 lbs anchors and calls them fisherman’s anchors

Manson Supreme puts this slot on all its anchors

[cheoah]

[QUOTE=congo;1378939]

11-10-2013, 07:18

I'm sure there is something worth reading here, but the formatting is so unique on Rex's post that it's not worth it. Try some bolds, some colors, or even some lines, but what;s up with the signature line header thing? Just scratching my head here, thought the forum was corrupt or something.

Carry on.

[JonJo]

An application for a rock slot, maybe Noelex will relate to this, is in locations where you moor bow or stern to a pier, pontoon but drop your anchor as you go into your chosen position so as to keep the non-shore end of the yacht out. Often these locations, in the Med, have lots of old ground chains and there is a chance of having your anchor foul one (a ground chain), or even the chain of the yacht next door. Having a rock slot (and using it) allows the fouled chain to be dropped easily.

Tide and wind shifts are obviously not an issue.

In fact if I were spending much time in the Med - I would specifically have an anchor with a rock slot - for such an eventuality. I would also have it 'full size' as I can then use it as a primary if necessary - so it would need be a SARCA or Supreme, as they are the only ones with the slot?

I know Noelex abhors marinas, a man with some similar ideas to ours - but sometimes marinas are a necessary evil and mooring bow or stern in seems to be the norm.

But having said all that one might think if it were an issue (fouled anchors) then all the charter yachts would be fitted with anchors with rock slots - not a bit of it, they all have anchors most of us would not even keep in a shed. Equally if it were an issue one might think the anchor makers would feature it as an asset - not a bit of it.

Noelex, set me straight

Jonathan

[Caribsailors]

Originally Posted by Cotemar

I think it should be called a fisherman’s slot, as it is really good for when you anchor in rocks when fishing and you remain on your boat. No harm No foul.

No cruisers that I ask about using that slot ever use it. Either they never tried it or never wanted to.

What is interesting is that Rocna only puts this slot on a 9 and 13 lbs anchors and calls them fisherman’s anchors

Manson Supreme puts this slot on all its anchors

Ditto !!! Tried it and changed it to the fixed position after slipping anchor on two wind shifts.....great anchor!.....forget the rock slot.

[noelex 77]

Yes I agree I have no objection to using the rock slot if there is a guaranteed similar direction of pull. When Med moored (this is where you anchor, then reverse and tie your stern to pier, or rocks), or even in some of the trade wind areas in certain times of the year where the wind direction is very constant. For most overnight anchoring there is too much risk of direction of pull changing. Even when Med moored in an anchorage its nice to retain the ability, if a strong cross wind springs up, to release the stern lines and go back to swinging on the anchor.

It is important an anchor has a secure conventional attachment point as this will be used most (or all) of the time. The Manson Supreme does, the Manson Boss is probably acceptable (although they seem to changed the design from the original concept, suggesting there were some problems). The Sarca relies only on the friction fit of a bolt, or if you follow the designers recommendation nothing at all. I don't feel this is satisfactory. All other anchors use a simple conventional attachment point.

[JonJo]

Noelex,

I think a very well tightened bolt with nylox nut is pretty secure, there will be no friction if it is well tightened.

But less specifically,

Most anchors have a fixed shackle point, the option of the slot and shackle point on both the Boass and Supreme suggest one of them results in better balance (or neither is optimal). The SARCA has one shackle point, when used correctly.

Anchors are all about compromise, we all make our choices and decide our priorities. I think the SARCA, Supreme (I forgot the Boss in my previous post) offer an option not available on other anchors which might suit some yachtsmen and cannot be simply discounted.

Alternatively - find me the perfect anchor

Jonathan

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by JonJo

Most anchors have a fixed shackle point, the option of the slot and shackle point on both the Boass and Supreme suggest one of them results in better balance (or neither is optimal).

The Boss only has a slot. They supply a special bolt to block it off, but they shape the end of the shank so the bolt is not just relying on friction to prevent it sliding forward.(it still does not look wonderfully secure to me) The Sarca just has a simple uniform thickness slot. I cannot imagine you could get it tight enough to stop the bolt sliding when subject to some force and even with a nyloc nut the galvanising will thin around the SS bolt (reacting to the SS) and tend to loosen it

I agree about the Supreme. Hopefully they optimised the balance for the fixed hole.