Rocna or Manson Supreme? (OP Ducks His Head)

[Jim Cate]

When the Manson Supreme came out the designer of the Rocna (Peter?) had a website that explained the history. He claimed that he designed the Rocna anchor and needed a manufacturing partner, and as Manson was also in NZ and made knockoffs of other anchor designs he went to them. During the discussions that lasted over a period of months he showed them his design and explained the thinking. Then they went silent, followed by the introduction of the Supreme.

Didn't happen on my watch, so I have no data... but taking the Rocna web site as gospel, especially when one considers the later entries on that site, might be just a bit naive.

Who knows w hat really happened (if anything) behind those closed doors? And why didn't Rocna mention the (expired) Bruce patent that they were copying? And the Bugel (sans umlaut) general plan that they emulated? As I said, anchor designs are derivative, and sorting out who was first is difficult and not terribly important IMO.

To reprise: I have a Manson but would be as happy with a Rocna, and I don't care who was first.

Jim

[Factor]

As others have said, be careful where and when and how the Rocna was made. Some of them had all the structural integrity of a noodle. And a wet one at that. At least Manson have a history of quality. But like others, Get a Sarca Excel, I know where and how they are made and from what materials. And also as others have said, they don't destroy the seabed bringup up lumps of it either.

[mlydon]

I had a Manson supreme on my last boat, and a rocna on my current boat.

They are much of a muchness.....either will pound the crap out of a plow or claw. get whichever is easier for you to get. You’re sweating Lamborghini vs Maserati

My 2 cents,
Matt

[evm1024]

Gospel - exactly. Peter's attitude took a lot of creative writing to overcome. History at least as far as his website goes has been revised many times.

You have to go back in time for a better view. CF had a number of very heated arguments RE Rocna vs Manson - Who copied who. Just have to search for them.

Also, For more unvarnished info search ybw.com. Much of the ongoing drama of the soft shank debacle was played out there.

If you look on Peters website you see that he states that he offered the design to Manson in 2004.

The Manson “Supreme” is a variant of Peter Smith’s anchor design. Manson Anchors is located near the latter’s home in Auckland NZ. In 2004 Smith talked with Manson concerning licensing his new design. Seven months later Manson launched a new product identical in function with a few small variations.


However if you look on the Manson website you will see that Manson states that the Supreme came out in 2003.

In 2003, the Manson Supreme was launched, immediately winning global anchor competitions, and establishing itself as a global leader.

Again, some folks have lived through this and remember. Both Craig and Peter left very bitter feelings for some folks.

Also, At the time the Rocna was considered a ripoff of the spade.

Time allows us to file off the rough edges (and money lets us hire a good website designer/writer.

N.B. I'm not trying to put any person or opinion down. This is old history that has been revised a few times over the last 10 years. If you want to know what happened you need to go back to the "source".

[David B]

Originally Posted by Chotu

Oh, damn. I see the turned up lip you’re talking about at the rear of the fluke.

I’m in mud plenty. I got the wrong anchor? Ugh.

Maybe I should sell this and get another Manson Supreme?

If you go that way, don't overlook the Spade. I like that there is no roll bar, and therefore nothing to stop it digging deep.

[malbert73]

Watch videos of anchors setting and you’ll see that Mantus tops the rollbar anchors in resetting capability. I think the wider hoop makes a difference. And my experience on Chesapeake is better with Mantus than my prior rocna which failed to set/reset more than once

[thinwater]

The OP's question was Supreme vs. Rocna. Once it is below the surface of the water, I doubt there is an expert that could tell which is on the rope. They are very similar. He should be happy with the 80# Rocna.


Add Excel to the list. No roll bar, no clogging, very good at re-setting, holding equal per pound. It may look like a Delta, but that is where the similarity ends. IMO, the non-clogging performance is a big deal when it comes to resetting. I've had roll bar anchors (all brands) come up with all manner of fouling, sometimes failing to set.

[Gaia]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

I have a Manson Supreme because I vowed I would never be a source of money for Peter. But I am sure a Rocna is a good anchor.

Personally I believe all anchors are good if you set them well.

I beg to differ Sailorboy. We before MAR (modern anchor revolution &#128522 we bought a Bruce. When some rather well done tests came out showing the Bruce's main failing was in resetting, a crucial characteristic, we sold the Bruce and bought our first Spade. (I think they were the first of the modern anchors).

The decision was not based on personal experience. In spite of sailing full time and almost always anchoring out anchor choice should be made on thorough impartial tests conducted in all conceivable conditions. Not on other people's opinions unless those opinions are based on tests. Personal experience is simply not adequate. I firmly believe this after more than 60 years of sailing with the last 25 full time while almost always anchoring out until the virus came to visit.

All the highly rated modern anchors are maseratis or lamborghinis (to steal a nice phrase from a previous comment) according to the tests so don't sweat the choice.

One negative of the Spade is the problem of regalvanising as one loses the lead in the tip. We are as I write here from the Rio Dulce involved with this problem right now.

Jim sv GAIA

[groundtackle]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

IP theft by Manson??? I dunno 'bout that.

All anchor designs are derivative in my view, starting with a rock on the end of a vine no doubt. And in the case of Rocna vs Manson, well, the roll bar concept was originally patented by Bruce, though he never made one as far as I know. Then came the Buegel (sp?) from Germany... the first popular roll bar anchor to appear in the cruising fleet. It was a triangular flat plate with the roll bar at the wide end, and worked quite well. Some years later the Manson and the Rocna appeared, morphing the flat plate of the Buegel into a concave shape, curved in the case of the Manson, angular in the Rocna... and they too work well, likely with improvement over the Buegel. And then a slew of "new" roll bar designs came along, with models from Anchor Rite, Viking, Mantus and others, all of which claim to be even better than their predecessors... and they may be.

But they are all damn good anchors, and arguing about the differences between them is silly. It is obvious that there are happy owners of all the designs and the anecdotal claims of superiority are poorly supported. And theories about IP theft, well, not too easily supported. And one needs to also look at the non roll bar designs which employ the concave shape... who is the originator of that, and who is "stealing" the concept? And in the end, who cares? One buys the anchor that seems best for one's application, with little concern about it's history of development... at least that's what I do!

Jim

With all respect Jim,
As I understand it the Super Sarca was manufactured and released in Australia in 1996 by Anchor Right Australia, in 2000 Anchor Right had an short lived episode with a guy from N.Z. that involved a licensing agreement with him to manufacture the Sarca in N.Z. The agreement didnt work out and had to be cancelled by Anchor Right.
Twelve months into this agreement, Rocna popped up, then Manson Supreme . This was about five years after Sarca was introduced in Australia.
Sadly Anchor Right had to pull out of N.Z. cancel all agreements and stick with manufacturing in Australia.
So Sarca was around long before Rocna or Manson, and marketed in N.Z. by Anchor Right Australia 5-6 years before Rocna or Manson. Anchor Right Australia have been designing and manufacturing anchors for nearly 30 years.
Just sayin....
Nick

[Jim Cate]

With all respect Jim,
As I understand it the Super Sarca was manufactured and released in Australia in 1996 by Anchor Right Australia,

Nick, you doubtless know more about Anchor Right's history than I do, so I stand partially corrected. But IIRC, the Bruce patent on the roll bar concept was considerably before the SS was released in 1996* (per your post). And we didn't see many SS anchors in our bailiwicks in that time frame, but did see a number of Bugels (mostly on European boats) and found them quite interesting. Their owners swore by them, but of course, that's pretty common behavior no matter what anchor is involved!

To me the bottom line is that anchor design evolves slowly, and claims of IP theft are baseless without some evidenciary backup. Release dates for non-patented devices don't mean much, and all this arm waving does little to help with a newbie's selection of a suitable anchor for his boat.

Jim

* If Bruce was not the first to develop the roll bar idea, they would not have granted the patent... if I understand this process accurately!

[CarlF]

While the roll bar anchors hold great, I didn’t enjoy the cleaning exercise after anchoring in sticky bottoms like Maine. The roll bar also doesn’t fit well on some bows.

I've owned both a Spade and Ultra on different boats. The Ultra has been my favorite of all anchors dating back to a CQR. Both the Spade and Ultra come up relatively clean. They also seem to reset after a wind shift quicker than the roll bar anchors. In many cases it’s not even a “reset”, they just seem to slowly turn while staying buried.

While the Ultra is expensive, being stainless if comes up the cleanest of all and never needs regalvanizing. The hooked weighted tip of the Ultra also seems to work very well in hard, grass bottoms - for me a little surer than the Spade.

But I’d sleep well with any of the new age anchors.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Gaia

I beg to differ Sailorboy.

Why? You wrote 10 times more than my post and didn't say give any reason. But that's OK as anchors are a lot like boats, I don't really care what other people use.

[Gaia]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Why? You wrote 10 times more than my post and didn't say give any reason. But that's OK as anchors are a lot like boats, I don't really care what other people use.

Sorry Sailorboy I guess I could have been more direct. In your original comment you opined that "all anchors are good if you set them well". I chose to differ. Tests show that some anchors do not reset well. I chose the Bruce as an example. One could set the Bruce well but if it didn't reset when current or wind direction changed one wouldn't be happy.

For me that made the Bruce not a 'good' anchor.

I assume you agree?

Jim

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by CarlF

While the roll bar anchors hold great, I didn’t enjoy the cleaning exercise after anchoring in sticky bottoms like Maine. The roll bar also doesn’t fit well on some bows.

I've owned both a Spade and Ultra on different boats. The Ultra has been my favorite of all anchors dating back to a CQR. Both the Spade and Ultra come up relatively clean. They also seem to reset after a wind shift quicker than the roll bar anchors. In many cases it’s not even a “reset”, they just seem to slowly turn while staying buried.

While the Ultra is expensive, being stainless if comes up the cleanest of all and never needs regalvanizing. The hooked weighted tip of the Ultra also seems to work very well in hard, grass bottoms - for me a little surer than the Spade.

But I’d sleep well with any of the new age anchors.

You should add Excel to the Spade and Ultra non-roll bar list. Weighted tip, reliable setting and rotation, comes up clean, same holding capacity range. While it may superficially resemble the Delta, there are considerable, important differences.

[David B]

Originally Posted by thinwater

The OP's question was Supreme vs. Rocna. Once it is below the surface of the water, I doubt there is an expert that could tell which is on the rope. They are very similar. He should be happy with the 80# Rocna.


Add Excel to the list. No roll bar, no clogging, very good at re-setting, holding equal per pound. It may look like a Delta, but that is where the similarity ends. IMO, the non-clogging performance is a big deal when it comes to resetting. I've had roll bar anchors (all brands) come up with all manner of fouling, sometimes failing to set.

Interesting to note - roll bars seem to me a way to get an anchor to dig in where the design is not quite right. Anchors like Spade and Excel seem to have no problem flipping over when they need to, and digging in without a roll bar, and as per my earlier post, that roll bar has to have some effect being dragged down into the substrate, and now you comment on the fouling potential of it too.