Why Are Next-Gen Anchors Considered 'Better' ?

[osirissail]

- - The "Claw" anchor is the original Bruce anchor. The original Bruce was designed and start selling in the 1970's The owner of the Bruce Patent forgot to re-register after 10 years and the Patent lapsed. Somebody over at Simpson/Lawrence noticed that the Patent was no longer in force and they duplicated the anchor and called it the "Claw." Since they had no development costs they could sell it for half the price Bruce was asking. Bruce nearly went out of business and changed their original design (improved it) enough to qualify for a new Patent. Since the late 1990's it seems every marine parts company is gobbling each other up in a consolidation of the marketplace. So Simpson-Lawrence purchased Lewmar and shifted the "Claw" over to the Lewmar branch.
>>>>>Article Abstract:
Clyde Shipping Company Ltd, a Glaslow, Scotland-based marine leisure group, has acquired Whitlock Marine Steering Co of Luton, England, for $4.2 million. With the acquisition, Clyde Shipping has expanded its line of products with highly-respected brand names that includes Lewmar, Navtec, Norseman Gibb and Simpson Lawrence. Under the terms of the deal, Whitlock Marine will operate under Clyde' Lewmar Group but will still carry its own name.
Publisher: Soundings Publications, Inc.
Publication Name: Soundings Trade Only

[Hiracer]

Originally Posted by osirissail

Bruce nearly went out of business and changed their original design (improved it) enough to qualify for a new Patent.

Where does one purchase this improved Bruce anchor?

When was the new patent approved?

Originally Posted by osirissail

The "Claw" anchor is the original Bruce anchor.

Then why do people who line up the Claw at various sizes against the Bruce in the same sizes always note anatomical differences between the two brands? Upon close examination, they are NOT the same.

[capricorntwenty]

The problem with all anchoring is that many yachts NEVER have enough scope and never sufficient chain. All anchors will drag if there is not sufficient weight to pull the anchor horizontally along the floor.

I have seen the most amazing anchoring techniques with insufficient rode for the conditions; I have no Insurance on my Alpa 38 and consider my anchor to be my insurance and consequently I have a 60lb CQR with 200 feet of chain and when I anchor I stay put when others drag. I have had to weigh anchor by hand and use a technique that works for me by watching the state of the waves and the pull of my boat. I have had to weigh anchor many times due to others dragging, but other than that, I have been secure in many anchorages and consider the chain to be the most important part of my boat. My other anchors are a 60lb Fortress and another 60lb Danforth all with chain.

I can only suggest that any anchors that drag have insufficent rode, and preferably chain, to give sufficient horizontal weight.

[Ancora Latina]

Originally Posted by capricorntwenty

many yachts NEVER have enough scope

– RIGHT

many yachts NEVER have sufficient chain

– WRONG

Holding is (also) related to the pulling angle of the rode.

This angle is given by SCOPE – With strong winds,(> 30 knots) when the anchor has the biggest risk to drag or to break free, for identical SCOPE, the difference of angle between a full chain rode, rope rode or mixed rode is very small.. The weight of the chain as a negligible action to reduce the pulling angle or for damping wave shock loads.

I can only suggest that any anchors that drag have insufficient rode, (and preferably chain) to give sufficient horizontal (weight) PULL.

– RIGHT (with modifications)

João

[GMac]

Originally Posted by osirissail

- - The "Claw" anchor is the original Bruce anchor.

I beg to differ. The Bruce and the Claw (inc many others just the same) are (were) both made to differing levels of quality and are different shapes. Subtle but enough to make one far superior to the other.

The recreational Bruces stopped being made as they couldn't compete with the low cost chinese made copies, one being the Claw.

The original Bruces were made for oil rigs and holding big big metal in big big oceans and are both still being made and very different from what is seen on the bows of yachts. Bruce make a few models of anchors but none are recreational focused anymore.

Below is one of the later models of Bruce rig anchors. This one is probably the closest in looks to what we are used to seeing on yachts. Some of the other models just look weird, very weird.

You want a pile of Claws? 40-50 odd here if you want to pick them up, we can't even give them away these days.

capricorntwenty - you are indeed wise and correct. Short Scoping is a big cause of dragging anchors.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by capricorntwenty

My other anchors are a 60lb Fortress

You carry a FX-125 on a 38' boat? Where do you store it? That thing is over 4' long and 3' wide.

Mark

[colemj]

Doh! I forgot they disassemble!

To quote Miss Emily Latella: "Nevermind"

Mark

[Wayward Wind]

I am thinking of buying a SARCA Excel. See Anchor Right Australia

Anyone has any experience or views on either the SARCA Excel or Super SARCA?

JohnC

[Eric ROGUE]

OP started this thread wondering about anchor for Chesapeake. On another forum someone who still likes their CQR and usually is able to anchor successfully with their CQR posted their story of dragging a heavy CQR all over a grass covered Chesapeake Bay creek bottom trying unsuccessfully to get it to set. He then talked about Colvin on his 48' K'ung **-Tse successfully setting his 110 lb Northhills in a grassy bay no one else could anchor in. There is next to no discussion in any of the forums about what anchors work tollerably well in grass, rock, or kelp.

Neither the OP nor I can handle 110 lb anchors. What anchor could we who sail without an anchor winch use that would work better than most other anchors in Grass, Rock, Kelp (any or all)? For me weight must be below 50 lbs (though I would prefer lighter) and the OP, I believe, would find 50lbs excessive even for an occasional use anchor. The suggested anchor can be intended as a keep it on hand to be gotten out when dealing with these conditions, or intended as the working anchor.

Evan has weighed in with his recommendation that a 44 lb Bruce / Ray would be a good choice, and a good choice for me to use as my working anchor.

Are there other good copies of Bruce besides the Ray? As long as the anchor won't break if I drop it on a sidewalk it is probably strong enough for my 26' 8,000lbs boat. I probably don't need the strength of the Ray whose superior fabrication comes at considerable expense - over eight times the cost of a 39 lb North Star Anchors claw made with "High Tensile CR-35 steel" (whatever that means. it's a cast anchor).

Has anyone besides Evan got comparative experience anchoring with Rocna/Supreme and the Bruce / Ray and/or other anchors in grass, rock, kelp?

Anyone with experience anchoring with fisherman type anchor of under 50 lb in comparison with other anchors in grass, rock, kelp?

I expect the Rocna and Supreme (of what minimum weight) would do well in heavy grass because of their sharp points. What about kelp? Evan reports poor performance in rock where they would not hold when the claw did.

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by seadog3315

I am thinking of buying a SARCA Excel. See Anchor Right Australia

Anyone has any experience or views on either the SARCA Excel or Super SARCA?

JohnC

Hmm, pretty impressive site

May have to move it up the list of anchor choice

Thanks

[osirissail]

Remember, the Claw vs Bruce change occurred some 20 odd years ago. The Bruce anchors that were sold since then are different - obviously as you cannot Patent something that has an expired Patent on it unless it is substantially different. Under that theory I shelled out twice the money and bought a Bruce rather than the Claw thinking that what the changes did make improvements and that would justify their higher price.
- - I understand the the Bruce anchor is no longer in production. The "made in China" - thing is very new to the anchor world and is logical as almost every major manufacturing sector possible has been forced (economically) to move their factories out of high cost "western" countries to the "very low cost, low regulation" Chinese. Caribbean islands (3rd world) have lost whole industries which they took away from USA workers to China as they cannot compete in wages and regulations. Even Indonesian factories have shut down as $5/week cannot compare to $5/month. Welcome to the capitalist world. . .

[Bash]

Originally Posted by Eric ROGUE

Has anyone besides Evan got comparative experience anchoring with Rocna/Supreme and the Bruce / Ray and/or other anchors in grass, rock, kelp?

I went from a Bruce to a Delta because the Bruce performed great in sand or mud but poorly in vegetation, where it often wouldn't penetrate to set. But I discovered that the Delta performed poorly in silt and soft mud, where it tended to plow/drag in a stiff breeze. So I finally changed to a Rocna, and have found it to outperform both the Bruce and the Delta in all conditions, especially in terms of how quickly it sets. I've spent some 50 days on the Rocna at this point, and have not yet had it drag or fail to set.

As far as rock is concerned, I haven't anchored in rock in decades.

[Maine Sail]

Originally Posted by osirissail

- - The "Claw" anchor is the original Bruce anchor.

This is factually incorrect and misleading.

The Genuine Bruce is and was the only Bruce anchor. It was manufactured by Bruce Anchors and only Bruce. The Bruce Anchor Group is still very well alive and producing anchors, just not for recreational vessels.

The Lewmar "Claw" is, and always has been, a knock of of the Genuine Bruce that is different in many ways. The angle of the shank, the wings/flukes and over all shape are NOT identical to the Genuine Bruce. It is also not a heat treated anchor as the Genuine Bruce was.

I have personally had an original Bruce and a Lewmar Claw side-by-side and they are absolutely not identical nor are they the "same".

Quote:
"The "Claw" anchor is the original Bruce anchor"

Sorry, it is not. Similar in look, yes. But the Lewmar Claw is absolutely not the original Bruce.

Originally Posted by osirissail

The original Bruce was designed and start selling in the 1970's The owner of the Bruce Patent forgot to re-register after 10 years and the Patent lapsed. Somebody over at Simpson/Lawrence noticed that the Patent was no longer in force and they duplicated the anchor and called it the "Claw."

The US patent was filed in 1971 and granted in 1974 and was a 14 year patent. A "duplicate" anchor would suggest it is the same in shape, size, dimension, construction and angles as the original. The Lewmar Claw is not the same as the Genuine Bruce in any of those measures. It is a knock off of the Genuine Bruce and is similar, but not the same.

Lewmar even freely admits that the dimensions of the Claw are "similar" but "not the same as the original Bruce" and that the anchor is not heat treated as the Genuine Bruce was. The lack of heat treating is a major difference and one Bruce was not willing to compromise on to be "competitive".

One other point about the Lewmar Claw is that Lewmar only puts a three year warranty on it..? Hmmm? The CQR & Delta Fast Set, other Lewmar anchors, have lifetime warranties, but not the Claw?

Perhaps Lewmar does not have the full confidence in the construction quality to even match the other anchors they sell and own? Food for thought anyway..

There is a difference between the Genuine Bruce and all the knock off anchors including the Lewmar Claw.

The Manson Ray is probably the best constructed "claw" style anchor but like the Genuine Bruce you will have to pay for this level of quality.

[Tom Spohn]

Eric, Based on earlier tests conducted here in Puget Sound I am using a Fortress FX16 for mud and a 35# Davis Talon (somewhat similar to Delta) for gravel and weeds. We live in an area of 12'tides where you wake up the next morning facing the opposite way you were when you anchored. So the 180 degree veer tests were important to me. Take a look at results at site #2 which is gravel and kelp. Oh yes there is no power winch on my boat which is another reason I like the Fortress. This is an old test and I suspect things may be different with tests of more modern anchors, but I have never dragged anywhere in the Sound anytime, even in high winds. I plan to keep what I have.

1995 Anchor Study

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by capricorntwenty

I have a 60lb CQR with 200 feet of chain and when I anchor I stay put when others drag.
.

I don't have a whole lot of personal experience but read a lot. Not just here.

I am pretty sure that a weight (bulb of metal) and enough chain will stop a boat from dragging the mess.

Given enough weight of chain no anchor would be needed at all.

I want the anchor to do most of the work, not the accumulated mass.