Rocna Mk II

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by MicHughV

Well, I am admittedly old school, to be sure...I typically have 4 anchors on board, two on the bow, one at the stern, and Hercules, my Northill storm Aanchor below

Hahaha, Hercules

I have Atlas in the bilge, which is a Fortress FX-125. Assembled, as tall as a man

[Panope]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

I know. But let’s say 20% of boats have a CQR, 15% of boats a Bruce and 20% a Delta. If you just test those three, you have not just 55% of boats but about 100% of boats who are looking at upgrading their anchor.

It’s much less useful to test say a Vulcan vs a Mantus because owners are not looking at upgrading so much.

I have Patrons (people that send money to me every month) that think I should discontinue ALL testing of the older anchors in order to have more time/resources for the 'modern anchor' testing.

Clearly, I am in the impossible position of trying please everyone.

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

This is the more modern (and I think superior) solution. Cruising boats carrying multiple anchors on the bow are not common and becoming rarer each year.

That might apply to cruising sailboats, but not so much to cruising "trawlers."

Latter (as sizes increase) seem to still commonly carry two on the bow, often some combination of Bruce/CQR/Delta -- or a newer Rocna/Mantus/Vulcan/Manson/SARCA (maybe even an Ultra, if really new and it's a more expensive brand of boat) -- paired with a Fortress.

Don't know how often the secondary might be used, on those...

I'd like to carry two, actually, given the differences we see between "normal" substrate along with the occasional Chesapeake slime/ooze. Our "non-trawler" manufacturer probably didn't even expect a boat like ours to ever anchor at all except in case of emergency, though... so our davit real estate is kinda sparse, and original ground tackle was on the minimal side. Addressed all that to the extent possible, but couldn't stretch to a dual-anchor solution.

-Chris

[Kettlewell]

I'm old school, but I only have a single bow roller where my main anchor (currently a Mantus) resides and is used for 90+% of my anchoring. But, I have a huge bow anchor locker where a backup and secondary Fortress resides connected to its own mostly nylon rode stowed in a sailbag. I can pull that thing up on deck and deploy from the bow or stern in a few minutes, or more often it will be taken out in the dinghy for a Bahamian moor or a secondary anchor. When a big blow is expected I will bring it up on deck in the ready-to-go position just in case, though the Mantus has never dragged. Here in New England the most common use for the Fortress is just to keep me away from other boats or some obstruction or shallow spot when there's an expected wind shift. Popular anchorages tend to be crowded and even though the holding is good a wind shift might put me close to another boat on a fixed mooring or something else. But, I find the Mantus bites in quickly and holds well in every bottom type I routinely encounter. It is pretty good at penetrating weed. I have not given it a test in the deep gelatinous goo found in Chesapeake anchorages and parts of the ICW where it is hard to get anything to hold well. Bottom line is that your main anchor should be a versatile one that can hold in a wide variety of bottom types which is one reason Panope's anchor tests are so useful. He tests them in a variety of bottoms.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by Panope

I have Patrons (people that send money to me every month) that think I should discontinue ALL testing of the older anchors in order to have more time/resources for the 'modern anchor' testing.

Clearly, I am in the impossible position of trying please everyone.

It’s a sure thing that you should do what your patrons want you to do. I am not asking you to do anything for me (I’m good with my Bruce haha), I was just suggesting a different testing approach that would be helpful for those who consider upgrading their anchors.

My only benefit would be less boats dragging into me, I don’t need any pleasing

[MicHughV]

Something else I want to throw out. I've looked at a lot of newer boats, especially the bow area, and the anchor roller seems to be an afterthought on many a boat, as they seem to be too small, too narrow, no long enough, don't reach out far enough from the bow, and so on.

Invariable those fitted with dual anchor rollers have them side by side with a forestay turnbuckle or roller furling fitting between them, etc, completely inhibiting the use of two anchors there.

This often does not encourage the use of fitting even a single anchor there, as the fluke of the anchor, more often than not, will bang against the hull or the shank does not lie properly, meaning the anchor sometimes gets stowed at an awkward angle.

On many a boat the windlass, if so equipped, is also in an awkward spot, as is the anchor chain/rode locker location, often with the windlass inside and once opened, the lid of the locker is another impediment.

Other anchors with the curved shank also don't fit well on these rollers.

And the list goes on.

Anchor manufacturers should take a closer look at this situation. It's all good and well to focus on an anchor's holding capacity, but stowing the anchor in a suitable manner for easy deployment and retrieval should be equally addressed.

Let's face it, the pointy end of a bow of a sailboat is a difficult area to locate much of anything, as there is little room there for much of anything.

In rough seas, the pointy end of the boat will see a lot of motion, waves, etc, and keeping the anchor secure is a priority, a big priority in my book, as the last thing one wants, is an anchor getting knocked loose in bad weather and up banging against the hull.

Finally, it's not unusual to anchor in a spot with contrary wind/tide situations, strong tides, lack of swinging room and so on, where the use of two anchors is needed to settle the boat down.

I simply don't see the sense in designing a boat for only a single anchor use, especially those boats that may see far off places.

[Kettlewell]

I simply don't see the sense in designing a boat for only a single anchor use, especially those boats that may see far off places.

Most boats are not designed or intended to see far off places, but OTOH most of the boats out there doing it are ordinary production sailboats adapted by their owners. It would be impossible for anchor designers to create designs that fit well on all production boats. I suspect it is changing somewhat, but from my casual observations around the harbor many production boats were designed to fit Delta anchors or very similar. I see some very new, large, and expensive boats with Delta anchors or Delta types on the bow. At the Newport boat show recently it seemed like most anchors shown on bow rollers were Delta types.

[CarlF]

If I look at cruising sailboats built in the last 15 years (even semi-custom), I almost never see two anchors on the bow.

Originally Posted by ranger58sb

That might apply to cruising sailboats, but not so much to cruising "trawlers."

Latter (as sizes increase) seem to still commonly carry two on the bow, often some combination of Bruce/CQR/Delta -- or a newer Rocna/Mantus/Vulcan/Manson/SARCA (maybe even an Ultra, if really new and it's a more expensive brand of boat) -- paired with a Fortress.

Don't know how often the secondary might be used, on those...

I'd like to carry two, actually, given the differences we see between "normal" substrate along with the occasional Chesapeake slime/ooze. Our "non-trawler" manufacturer probably didn't even expect a boat like ours to ever anchor at all except in case of emergency, though... so our davit real estate is kinda sparse, and original ground tackle was on the minimal side. Addressed all that to the extent possible, but couldn't stretch to a dual-anchor solution.

-Chris

[rslifkin]

The move from 2 anchors on the bow to 1 as the common setup came from a few things. Modern anchors work in a wider range of conditions, so a second anchor isn't needed as often. And big windlasses have become much more common, so it's easier to carry a really big primary anchor, which means that even if it's not great in something like soft mud, you can make it big enough that the performance will still be adequate most of the time.

I keep a Fortress stowed in the forward bilge with the rode in a milk crate, but I've never needed it due to the generously sized Vulcan on the bow being inadequate. I figure I'd rather have the Fortress set up to be put in the dinghy or carried to wherever on the boat for deployment, as it's more likely I'll be using it for something other than a substitute for my primary and therefore may be deploying it from the stern or the dinghy rather than dropping it off the bow.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Panope

Thinwater found a significant SEASONAL variation in his extensive testing on the East Coast. From (my) memory, he reported about a 20% change in holding power.

This contrasts with my testing (8 years) here in the PNW where I have NOTICED no measurable change in performance over any amount of time.
The exception is the seasonal (summertime only) presence of weed covering the Sandy Mud seabed. The other 6 seabeds do not have this problem. I use the camera images to help confirm weeds are not affecting the tests.

Note that my seasonal water temperature varies (at the seafloor) by at most 5 degrees F.. Whereas Thinwater's temperature varies by perhaps 40 degrees.

Yes, that about summarizes. In the summer the bottom can be in the 80s, even in the sane a ways. In the winter, very near freezing. The sand and mud even change appearance, as the algae etc. die. We also get some weird bottoms in the spring, when heavy layers of leaves from the fall begin to rot as the water warms. Smelly, and the galvanizing turns black overnight.


But the differences in holding are not huge. Just enough that I need to check dates before repeating testing. I noticed this after getting anomalous results on what I though was one of the worlds most uniform sand bottoms, and one I like testing on for that reason. It took several years of testing the same anchor to be certain it was seasonal. But you would really only notice if you were testing anchors in the depth of winter, which you can guess, isn't that appealing.


I'm sure grass is even more variable with the season. But testing in any sort of weed is like herding cats. You can make comments, but anything quantitative is dubious. Often the same anchor is all over the place. The best you can often say is that one anchor is more likely to penetrate than another. Maybe. It could just be luck.


---


Two more unrelated thoughts.
* I have changed bower anchors a number of times, as I come across some great new anchor. Honestly, after the first few day's enthusiasm, I can't really tell the difference. Rocna, Manson, Mantus, and now Excel. Many are very good and I wouldn't pay money to swap out any of the top tier. I would (do) keep a Fortress as a kedge, because it is so easy to take out and because it is powerful in soft mud.

* I was walking the dock the other day and decided that most anchors are bent while docking. I'm pretty sure of that. Also, judging from the fact that these useless, twisted lumps of metal were still on the bows, they don't actually anchor. They probably won't read this thread.

[MicHughV]

Each to his own I guess, as there is no one size fits all.

There is such a wide variety of anchors available, that one can pick and chose to one's hearts content regarding size, weight, model, etc.

Whether you have one, two, three or more anchors aboard is likewise a personal choice.

Same goes for nylon rode/chain options.

I came by my preferred anchor(s)/rode selection by personal trial and error. It has stood the test of time and I'm unlikely to change at this stage of game. Even if a Rocna or other contemporary design were given to me for free, I would not be motivated to change.

I think it's misnomer to state that one anchor is "better" than another, a better adjective would simply be to state it's "different".

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by MicHughV

I think it's misnomer to state that one anchor is "better" than another, a better adjective would simply be to state it's "different".

Again, I can’t agree because it is an established fact that one model anchor is better than another. Panope’s testing is clear down to the different categories used for testing and evaluation.

One can opt to ignore a category or give it more or less weight which changes order but for holding in bottom types it’s results are clear

[sailingharry]

My boat (43', 22klbs, low windage monohull) came with a 55lb Rocna and a 45lb CQR. The CQR was upgraded to a 65lb Bruce (Lewmar). In the bilge is a Fortress FX35.

The Rocna does 100% of our anchoring. All bottoms, all weather. No idea why I would ever NOT use it.

The Bruce is there as a spare. Not sure why I would ever deploy it (except big storms -- 40+ kts). The only time I've ever used it is the last 12 months it has served as a tie-off anchor to keep me off the T-head at our dock (untill we rebuild the dock). It is stored on the bowsprit because it's a good place to put it, not because it is convenient or useful.

The Fortress is in the bilge. That's the Fortress' strong suit. Rather expensive as a primary, but super useful in the bilge.

[noelex 77]

In the "good old days" anchor designs only worked well in a small range of substrates. Multiple smaller anchor designs ready to deploy were required to cover a range of seabeds. This is how many older boats are set up.

Unfortunately, carrying multiple anchors on the bow means each anchor must be small, or at least have a small fluke area in order to fit two anchors side by side. The need to carry lengths of chain for each anchor made the total ground tackle weight very heavy despite the relative light weight of each anchor. This results in limited performance even when two anchors were deployed.

When using two anchors, as the boat yaws the force tends to be concentrated on one anchor only. There is a tendency for the anchors to "walk" backwards or break out when they are required to hold the majority of the load. Thus the holding power of two identical anchors is not enormously higher than a single anchor.

More versatile modern anchors that work with a wide range of substrates together with reliable electric anchor windlasses that enable even a short handed crew to manage larger and heavier anchors have changed the optimum set up significantly.

The modern KISS approach of fitting a single larger new generation anchor is a step forward in my view.

This is a much simpler solution without the complication and problems of setting and retrieving multiple anchors or swinging differently to the vast majority of boats that will be using a single anchor.

The larger new generation anchor is routinely deployed even in calm weather so if the wind picks up unexpectedly there is no requirement to change tactics and deploy a second anchor. This inbuilt security is especially valuable if leaving the boat.

These changes from two small, older generation anchors mounted on the bow to a single larger new generation anchor is a significant step forward in anchor security as well as reducing bow weight and the complication of anchoring. The change should be celebrated rather than mourned.

[Kettlewell]

The larger new generation anchor is routinely deployed even in calm weather so if the wind picks up unexpectedly there is no requirement to change tactics and deploy a second anchor. This inbuilt security is especially valuable if leaving the boat.

These changes from two small, older generation anchors mounted on the bow to a single larger new generation anchor is a significant step forward in anchor security as well as reducing bow weight and reducing the complication of anchoring.

Though there are disadvantages to going bigger than needed. When the windlass breaks for some reason, and it happens a lot, you will be pulling that thing in by hand. There was a recent thread on here where several of us pointed out how important it is to remove your anchor from the bow roller when tieing to a mooring due to the potential for chafe and disaster. Every pound of anchor makes that more difficult. Plus, I have noticed a tendency to anchor casually on very short scope since the weighty anchor and chain are secure in most normal conditions. But, when the wind pipes up at 2am and the tide is high your catenary might be gone and your 3:1 scope might not cut it, especially when the wind shifts 180 degrees. In other words, don't let weight mislead you into anchoring poorly.