New to anchoring - appreciate advice/opinions

[groundtackle]

Delancey: my apologies my last post should have bee addressed to you rather than ND. Thanks again to both of you for your questions and input
Nick

[Sandero]

People will debate which anchor is superior...for different bottoms... and this debate will go on and on and on.

Shiva was delivered to me new in 1985 with a 35# CQR abd nylon rode. I upgraded to a Maxwell Nilson VWC windlass and all chain.

I have anchored hundreds or probably well over 1,000 times from Maine to LIS... and in the Caribbean (4 years) an have only dragged a handful of time... on eel grass in Cuttyhunk.

More important than the anchor.... is the chain rode and the sailor's technique... and knowing how to determine when your hook is set.

1. When we cruise we tow our dink and figured out that in light winds our dink will tell us when the anchor has set... When the dink is astern of the boat when anchoring... the anchor is set. Before the hood sets the stern of Shiva pulls the dinghy and the dink is along side the quarter of the boat.... because the stern is moving aft as the chain is going down... and stops when it sets (and is not dragging) and then the dink lays to wind. This technique does not apply to situations with strong currents.

2. Our anchoring with chain includes a snubber with a hard rubber mooring compensator with 3 wraps. When there is force on the boat... the catenary lifts... the compensator stretches and the line untwists a bit. You can't see dragging without the compensator because the snubber will not show the excess tension and the catenary is lifted as the boat drags astern.


in light winds back down making sure the mooring compensator stretches... Your anchor is set. It will wind back when the catenary returns.

[conachair]

Originally Posted by groundtackle

So I read a lot and talked to people about their anchors. The only product I could find that consistently met all my requirements was the Excel.

Have you spent a load of time living on the hook with different models? I have 2 to choose from onboard and really don't think anyone blindfolded could tell the difference - so many variables involved. move to the other side of a bay and things can feel completely different. IMHO no way can you describe how an anchor behaves in any precise way - as far as "pretty good nearly all the time" maybe, but most new gens can do that

[groundtackle]

Originally Posted by conachair

Have you spent a load of time living on the hook with different models? I have 2 to choose from onboard and really don't think anyone blindfolded could tell the difference - so many variables involved. move to the other side of a bay and things can feel completely different. IMHO no way can you describe how an anchor behaves in any precise way - as far as "pretty good nearly all the time" maybe, but most new gens can do that

Perhaps Nick hasn't had the time on the hook like yourself but I certainly have. Nick lied a little about me, it's 40 not 30 yrs in the marine industry. 30k offshore miles.
With some accuracy I can tell the flavor of anchor and bottom its attempting to hold. Have lots of fails and memories that won't be forgotten.
My stress level on the water has dropped dramatically after using the Excel, we get that same fondness from owners as well.
ce

[conachair]

Originally Posted by groundtackle

Perhaps Nick hasn't had the time on the hook like yourself but I certainly have. Nick lied a little about me, it's 40 not 30 yrs in the marine industry. 30k offshore miles.
With some accuracy I can tell the flavor of anchor and bottom its attempting to hold. Have lots of fails and memories that won't be forgotten.
My stress level on the water has dropped dramatically after using the Excel, we get that same fondness from owners as well.
ce

You can certainly get a feel for the bottom after load of miles, I still wouldn't be so bold as to say I could tell the difference between a couple of new gen anchors blindfolded, too many factors going on for me anyway. Though it's not something I've really tried as a test - anyone tried different models "side by side" care to comment? Could you put the blindfold on and say "Oh yes, that's a spade" - or "Must be an excel" ?

[groundtackle]

Originally Posted by conachair

You can certainly get a feel for the bottom after load of miles, I still wouldn't be so bold as to say I could tell the difference between a couple of new gen anchors blindfolded, too many factors going on for me anyway. Though it's not something I've really tried as a test - anyone tried different models "side by side" care to comment? Could you put the blindfold on and say "Oh yes, that's a spade" - or "Must be an excel" ?

Had to watch Americas cup, wow..? nothing else to say.
I wouldn't be so bold to put those two against each other blindfolded, Spade is a good anchor and we feel our closest competition. I'm not going to speak negatively about other manufactures, in fact we made a vow.
I can however tell the diff between roll bar concave non tip weighted against an Excel going thru weed or on a reset in mud. I can tell how much drag before they set hard or pick at boulders. I can tell you how they release on retrieval, if full of mud, how they handle the launch or upside down when nesting on board. All those things.
Before we went down this venture I needed to prove it to myself. My backyard is full of test anchors. I would take them out like Steve "SV Panope"was doing, no camera but even more aggressive. Had a strong bow roller and related installation. I'd drag em around and do 5 kt sets and reversals and other exams. Ended up shearing the windlass keyway one day. My wife was extremely irritated and the dog was throwing up.
Now that I tested them against each other on the same days in the same bottoms you get a feel for each model while looking for any weakness in performance or construction. Confidently chose the Excel because it hits all the points.
I need to watch the press conferences...
ce

[conachair]

Originally Posted by groundtackle

I can however tell the diff between roll bar concave non tip weighted against an Excel going thru weed or on a reset in mud. I can tell how much drag before they set hard or pick at boulders. I can tell you how they release on retrieval, if full of mud, how they handle the launch or upside down when nesting on board. All those things.

Well if you can do that then hats off to you

[NevisDog]

Originally Posted by groundtackle

... I'm not going to speak negatively about other manufactures, in fact we made a vow...

Wow! Thanks for that - this topic seems to engender near all-out war at times.

[NevisDog]

Has anyone else noticed how every thread on anchoring seems to end up with someone claiming their CQR (Bruce, Danforth...) is as good as any 'modern' anchor, it's all about technique, etc? Do they do it so as to light the fuse and watch the fun, or can they be serious?

A good anchor will likely save your bacon some day, whereas a shitty anchor, one day, will cause you so much grief if you dare to leave your boat for a trip ashore and the wind changes.

We think nothing of spending a few grand on some electronic gizmo that can lead to a false sense of security, but shy away from investing in real security, the security of double the holding power when the wind starts to whistle in the rigging, and knowing it won't flip out at the first wind change and fail to reset.

I still recall those days when a CQR was the best there was, but everything else has moved on. No one still uses those spinning depth sounders (remember the ones with the flickering red beam spinning around the dial - near impossible to read in a lumpy seaway); no one tosses out a Walker log any more to measure speed and distance; so why use a totally outdated anchor? Not only your boat is at risk - you are risking mine too when you drag towards me on a dark and stormy night because of totally outdated, inferior equipment that lives depend on.

A good anchor is the number one priority piece of safety gear on any vessel; why compromise? And please, never tell anyone new to anchoring that the type of anchor doesn't matter - when the chips are down, it surely does. Point them to a reliable source of comparative data, instead of spinning old wive's tales about technique trumping everything.

[Don C L]

This goes on and on I guess, but I would not be so quick to discredit all the old anchors so brazenly. In the kind of anchoring I am doing, bow and stern, in this somewhat unusual neighborhood, i can't see switching from my danforths, ever. I'd put good money that if three or four other boats drag and snag my 20H, we'll all still be good for the night.

[NevisDog]

Originally Posted by Don C L

... In the kind of anchoring I am doing, bow and stern, in this somewhat unusual neighborhood, i can't see switching from my danforths, ever. ..

I'm intrigued, Don: (a) what's so unusual about your neck-of-the-woods, and (b) why bother anchoring bow & stern??? We all know how modern anchors cope very well with 180 degree shifts, without mooring fore and aft, while a Danforth never will, so... why?

[Blue Crab]

Originally Posted by NevisDog

Has anyone else noticed how every thread on anchoring seems to end up with someone claiming their CQR (Bruce, Danforth...) is as good as any 'modern' anchor, it's all about technique, etc? Do they do it so as to light the fuse and watch the fun, or can they be serious? ...

There are just a few of those left, and only one poster who is adamant about the CQR, offering up one cockamamie reason after another. My fav is that he has been anchoring all his life.

Like we haven't. ... wait for it

[Fortress]

Originally Posted by NevisDog

I'm intrigued, Don: (a) what's so unusual about your neck-of-the-woods, and (b) why bother anchoring bow & stern??? We all know how modern anchors cope very well with 180 degree shifts, without mooring fore and aft, while a Danforth never will, so... why?

Never is a bit of a stretch. If you bury a more massive Danforth or similar type deep into a sea bottom, such as in soft mud, then the boat could be spinning around like a top and the anchor will not break free.

During the Chesapeake Bay soft mud testing, and with the boating media present, we buried the 21 lb (10 kg) Fortress FX-37 into the mud 13 feet (4 meters), as per the winch operator's calculations.

We were directly above the FX-37 at a 1:1 scope and were trying to break it free aboard the 81 foot research vessel, but we ended up snapping the wire rope at 3,500 lbs (1,600 kg) of load and we lost the anchor.

The thought that this anchor would have broken free had we only pulled from a 180° direction is a bit comical.


Another point is that much is being made about an anchor's performance during wind shifts, which certainly is important.

However, if the anchor cannot handle much of a straight or off-center pull, then you might not find out how well it performs during a wind shift....the boat will already be set adrift.


Here's a side-by-side comparison by anchor weight that you might find to be of interest:

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by NevisDog

I'm intrigued, Don: (a) what's so unusual about your neck-of-the-woods, and (b) why bother anchoring bow & stern??? We all know how modern anchors cope very well with 180 degree shifts, without mooring fore and aft, while a Danforth never will, so... why?

Look.

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

There are just a few of those left, and only one poster who is adamant about the CQR, offering up one cockamamie reason after another. My fav is that he has been anchoring all his life.

Like we haven't. ... wait for it

Ok, I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, can someone explain to me why these anchoring threads end up heading this way?