Mantus Anchor Swivel Break

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by BlackHeron

While one can design around most of the issues around using stainless steel for anchors it doesn't really change the fact that those issues still exist to one extent or another. All that extra design just adds even more cost to an already expensive material that really adds nothing in the end but some cosmetic benefits.

Personally I'd rather buy a series of galvanized anchors at a substantially tiny fraction of the financial outlay over the decades I might be out cruising and not have to lose sleep worrying about a material that is known for failing with very little visual clues on the surface that such failures are immanent.

Our Mantus M1 is now 3 years old and has spent hundreds of nights and days on the bottom as well as being splashed with salt water up in the bow the rest nif the time when it wasn't. The galvanizing shows no sign of failing any time soon. Even if we had to replace or maybe regalvanize it every 8-10 years we would be far ahead after 30 years of cruising. Besides, perhaps in another 5-10 years some brilliant inventor might just come out with yet another leap in anchor design right about the time we were in the market to replace our existing galvanized anchor, or have it regalvanized.

Or we might just lose it and not be able to recover it. I just can't see paying the kind of ka-ching that decent SS ground tackle represents and throwing all that cash into one bucket only to have it sit at the bottom over half of the time the way we cruise. All for it to be bright shiny sitting up there on the roller.

The ULTRA is not only an anchor looking beautiful as noted it is stainless steel by design with the benefits of the hollow shank and lead filled tip in one piece construction which is impossible to achieve by a galvanized anchor design. This is not the place to discuss that further as I already mislead that thread and I apologize for that.
You can check below one for further details.
https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...or-230818.html
On the other hand, it looks like you own a HR and there are some good reasons why they made it their standart choice as many other prestigious boat builders.
Do you think that would have been possible if there would be anything to worry about the stainless steel material with the ULTRA design?
I understand that you don't want to pay for it but that doesn't mean that there is something wrong with it.

https://www.hallberg-rassy.com/yacht...berg-rassy-44/

[BlackHeron]

Actually, we own a 44 year old HR. And every year it gets that much older.

Owners of new HR's pay at a minimum another order of magnitude more for their boats than ours is worth. Money isn't really an object for this rarified level of boat owner.

As Magnus Rassy has been known to say why they no longer have an option for new buyers to delete the teak deck when they order a new HR. "First owners never have issues with their teak deck.". They won't cheapen their high-end image by producing a plain-jane fiberglass-decked yacht today.

Owners of new HR's always trade for a newer boat well before any issues arise. If you have that kind of budget who cares how much more a stainless steel anchor costs? Pretty is MUCH more important for them than lowly budgetary considerations. That said, most of the people reading this forum are not in that position, nor are they typically the types who will be ordering a brand new HR from the Ellös yard with a crisp half-milliion dollar promisary note from their preferred banking institution.

Stainless Steel anchors have a place in the cruising world, most definitely -just not on MY boat unless I happen to find one on the bottom for free when I weigh my $350 M1 some misty morning and hit rhe jackpot. Mire likely I'd sell it for all the market would bear and cash it out into the cruising kitty after polishing it up first so shiny that it hurt the eyes.

[smj]

Originally Posted by malbert73

Just anchored a few days ago at same time as a neighboring boat with a CQR. I did my usual lay out Mantus and chain at 5:1, back down hard, have the boat stop suddenly (like it does 99.9% of time with Mantus). Repeat a hard back down, same thing. Done, engine off, sundowners ready in under 5 min. The other guys stayed on his foredeck for 25-30 min, slowly tugging on his CQR as he let out scope to let it "settle" - the usual old school approach. Good news he stayed set despite a 180 deg windshift overnight. But made me chuckle and remember the "good old days"



Danforth type are notoriously unreliable with large windshifts which require resettting. Ok, enough thread drift.

Wasn’t there a giant recall on the CQR anchors?

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by smj

Wasn’t there a giant recall on the CQR anchors?

Probably, just like the total recall of all 1994 Toyota Corolla's. It's just time....

https://www.theonion.com/toyota-reca...all-1819577805

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by BlackHeron

Actually, we own a 44 year old HR. And every year it gets that much older.

Owners of new HR's pay at a minimum another order of magnitude more for their boats than ours is worth. Money isn't really an object for this rarified level of boat owner.

As Magnus Rassy has been known to say why they no longer have an option for new buyers to delete the teak deck when they order a new HR. "First owners never have issues with their teak deck.". They won't cheapen their high-end image by producing a plain-jane fiberglass-decked yacht today.

Owners of new HR's always trade for a newer boat well before any issues arise. If you have that kind of budget who cares how much more a stainless steel anchor costs? Pretty is MUCH more important for them than lowly budgetary considerations. That said, most of the people reading this forum are not in that position, nor are they typically the types who will be ordering a brand new HR from the Ellös yard with a crisp half-milliion dollar promisary note from their preferred banking institution.

Stainless Steel anchors have a place in the cruising world, most definitely -just not on MY boat unless I happen to find one on the bottom for free when I weigh my $350 M1 some misty morning and hit rhe jackpot. Mire likely I'd sell it for all the market would bear and cash it out into the cruising kitty after polishing it up first so shiny that it hurt the eyes.

Once again, ULTRA is not just a pretty face, we use some design advantages coming with stainless steel design. You should check that other thread for more information. On the other hand, we respect sailors who don't like the shiny appearance, that is why we are selling its stainless steel matt version, as well.

[zboss]

I appreciate that you guys want to discuss anchors but this is a thread about swivels - one particular one.

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by zboss

I appreciate that you guys want to discuss anchors but this is a thread about swivels - one particular one.

That is so true, and I apologize for that once again. In that subject as a competitor, I must note that I don’t see any design strength weakness on the Mantus Swivel. It looks solid to me. Therefore, it is very unlikely that one can break it.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by smj

Wasn’t there a giant recall on the CQR anchors?

lol I wish. I cringe every time one anchors upwind of me.

Our local used equipment chandler (Bacon in Annapolis) apparently doesn’t accept used CQRs for consignment any more- too many and no one buys them anymore

[bclaude]

This post is to solicit the input from Ultra on the sizing of their Swivel.

I have ordered a 60kg Ultra in replacement to a stainless steel Spade of the same size. Nothing wrong with the Spade, we have used Spade anchors extensively and exclusively over the last 15 years and have nothing but praises for them other than they rust quickly and are a pain the re galvanise. The anchor is to be installed on a 58ft sailing yacht. The dry weight of the yacht is quoted by the yard at 26 metric tons. I suppose that with full tanks of water and fuel and all our live aboard gear the actual weight of the yacht is closer to 30+ tons. The Ultra sizing chart indicates that the Swivel ufs 13–60 is recommended for this anchor. I have checked my bow roller and I could easily upsize to the next size up Swivel, the ufs 16–100. I have a high strength 12mm galvanised chain. My anchor is one size up compare to the Ultra chart and generally I like the "one size up" concept for anything that touches my tackle. We use our anchor extensively in any sort of conditions. I note that Ultra has gone to great length to make the anchor shaft hallow as ensure the anchor will land tip down on the sea bottom for best setting. Could a heavier swivel upset the over all balance of the anchor to a point where it could be counter productive? Many thanks for your feedback!

[Muaddib1116]

It might have been more appropriate to start a new thread for this question, since this thread is specifically about the Mantus swivel. That being said, I think if it fits, bigger is better. I don't think the swivel will prevent the anchor from self-orienting into the "setting position". The only concern with large overbuilt swivels seems to be that they may hinder the anchor's ability to bury into the bottom in certain substrates.

[Ultra Marine West]

Originally Posted by bclaude

This post is to solicit the input from Ultra on the sizing of their Swivel.

I have ordered a 60kg Ultra in replacement to a stainless steel Spade of the same size. Nothing wrong with the Spade, we have used Spade anchors extensively and exclusively over the last 15 years and have nothing but praises for them other than they rust quickly and are a pain the re galvanise. The anchor is to be installed on a 58ft sailing yacht. The dry weight of the yacht is quoted by the yard at 26 metric tons. I suppose that with full tanks of water and fuel and all our live aboard gear the actual weight of the yacht is closer to 30+ tons. The Ultra sizing chart indicates that the Swivel ufs 13–60 is recommended for this anchor. I have checked my bow roller and I could easily upsize to the next size up Swivel, the ufs 16–100. I have a high strength 12mm galvanised chain. My anchor is one size up compare to the Ultra chart and generally I like the "one size up" concept for anything that touches my tackle. We use our anchor extensively in any sort of conditions. I note that Ultra has gone to great length to make the anchor shaft hallow as ensure the anchor will land tip down on the sea bottom for best setting. Could a heavier swivel upset the over all balance of the anchor to a point where it could be counter productive? Many thanks for your feedback!

The UFS13-60 has a breaking strength of 36,200lbf, so if that is higher than the breaking load of your higher grade chain, it is up to you to go one size upper swivel. However, if your chain's breaking strength is higher than 36,200lbf, we recommend using the UFS16-100. Offering a secure solution even for the highest grade chain users was also one of our motivations once we came up with the latest ULTRA Flip Swivel' pin design, letting them fit one size smaller chains.
The heavier swivel wouldn't affect the anchor performance at all.

[motion30]

I am using one, although it is only been about 6 months . I am anchored full-time we had 80 mph winds due to the hurricane, and several evenings of 50 mph winds
Thankfully no problems

[jordanbigel]

So, Matnus is now including a special cotter-pin with the swivel, and the seizing wire, and the instructions say you can use either! If the cotter pin is so much better, why still include the seizing wire?

I'm trying to figure out which way to go. Pros and Cons. Wire vs Cotter pin.

I saw one post above where someone used cotter pin, must have been before Mantus was including them in the kit. Seems to have worked out. The wires can break, have to be inspected, takes more time to seize than inserting a cotter pin and bending it. Which is better?

Any opinions?

THANKS!

[zboss]

Originally Posted by jordanbigel

I'm trying to figure out which way to go. Pros and Cons. Wire vs Cotter pin.

THANKS!

Personally, I always thought a bolt seized with loctite blue (or similar) would be a better option than either a cotter pin or seizing wire.

[motion30]

Originally Posted by jordanbigel

So, Matnus is now including a special cotter-pin with the swivel, and the seizing wire, and the instructions say you can use either! If the cotter pin is so much better, why still include the seizing wire?

I'm trying to figure out which way to go. Pros and Cons. Wire vs Cotter pin.

I saw one post above where someone used cotter pin, must have been before Mantus was including them in the kit. Seems to have worked out. The wires can break, have to be inspected, takes more time to seize than inserting a cotter pin and bending it. Which is better?

Any opinions?

THANKS!

When I first installed my swivel I used monel wire, when I installed new chain I use a cotter pin . Probably does not make much difference as there is little load on that area. But the cotter pin seems a little more substantial and makes me feel safer