Why Are Next-Gen Anchors Considered 'Better' ?

[Eric ROGUE]

Maine Sail,

I'm glad you are still following this thread.

You were wondering on some forum who to credit for the photos of the claw type anchor with the broken shaft. GMac posted the photos. Here is the link. (Sorry I couldn't figure out how to post the dramatic pictures.)
SSCA Discussion Board • View topic - We are looking to upsize an anchor with a Bruce copy

Its my thanks for the list of forums you posted as part of a post where you chastised a certain, shall I say, "shrill advocate" of a certain brand anchor who was posting posts of a sort which would have been unwelcome on any of the forums. Hence your =NO. I include the list for others who may be able to find helpful information on some of these forums. I did. And I found the photo you wanted to be able to credit. I complement this forum on its tone, and quantity of high quality information.

Sailboatowners.com = NO Cape Dory Forums = NO Plastic Classic Forums = NO Cruisers Forums = NO Cruisers Log's = NO SSCA Forums = NO Boat US Forums = NO Cruising World Forums = NO Maine Coast Forums = NO

[Therapy]

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

DAUMMMM!!!

Those videos are great.

I am ready to hear about them too.

Gmac, do you know about these?

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by Therapy

DAUMMMM!!!

Those videos are great.

I am ready to hear about them too.

Gmac, do you know about these?

Sucks doesn't it?

I thought I had made my decision.

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by Eric ROGUE

Maine Sail,

I'm glad you are still following this thread.

You were wondering on some forum who to credit for the photos of the claw type anchor with the broken shaft. GMac posted the photos. Here is the link. (Sorry I couldn't figure out how to post the dramatic pictures.)

and on the next page a torn Delta



Serious stuff

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by cat man do

Sucks doesn't it?

I thought I had made my decision.

For sure!!!

I'm pretty miffed now!!

What am I going to do?????

[delmitch2]

Gemini 105M (Not even a 105MC. 800 miles since leaving Lake Ontario in June . A 7 and 9 year old onboard, love ourRocna 15 and sleep very well. Only used our shorepower cable twice since June!!!

[GMac]

Originally Posted by Therapy

DAUMMMM!!!

Those videos are great.

I am ready to hear about them too.

Gmac, do you know about these?

Sorry Gents I missed this one.

SARCA's or Super Sarcas as they call them now, we have played with them a lot and go through a nice number of them. They are good for smaller boats and the 6-9mt tinnies full of fanatical fishos love them due to the sliding shank.

Downsides - physically very big for their weight and holding power isn't large, they more often than not are in the bottom 1/4 when talking holding loads and will usually get well beaten by CQR's.

Price - in there with the main players and reasonable I'd say especially being Aussie built rather than in the east.

Would I fit one to my off the beach fizz boat? Possibly but I'd fit others first. On my offshore cruiser? Nope and it wouldn't even be considered in the mix. And it ugly.... not that that should have any baring at all in choosing what anchor to buy.

The Excell. Not had a chance to play hard with one yet. Have been promised one to have a crack with for a long while but yet to see it. Our thoughts just looking at the design and numbers we can find - Another Delta clone all beit a sexy one. We have no idea how they can claim holding loads hugely above Spades and it's off spring like Supreme, Rocna and the likes. We have not seen any thing that would suggest that the Delta design style is superior to the Spade style. I seriously doubt very much they are a bad anchor but I just can't see how they are supposedly so much better than many others. I think I'd look at Deltas, Excels, Sharks and a few of the others of the same design and by the cheapest of them as performance is highly likely to be very very similar. Actually I would go Excel over Delta as Anchor-Right does have high quality controls in place and it shows on the finished product, they are very nicely made.

Don't get me wrong as I do like innovation and Rex Mr Sarca is a good Aussie battler but we don't think he's quite on the right track. And his website is full of **** and dodgy marketing as seems to be the way with most anchor manufacturers these days. Something I often tell them all being the shy dude I am.

The 'incredible TATS rig'. Sorry but all I can say about that is I do find it incredible that someone who has spent so much time sussing anchors thinks that gives good real life results. A brick pulled at 10:1 scope would get good results I'd expect but sadly in real life the worlds boats don't anchor at 10:1.

Anchor-Right does make one very very sexy set of bow rollers. Highly recommend.

BUT and this applies to a multitude of anchors - I'm sure the Excel will do 98% of what 98% of people want it to do. Just as the CQR, Bruces and some others have for many decades before the new ones came out and started stirring it all up.

{edit} Oh and annoyed to see piles of anchors in the back ground of the photos when we have been waiting a many many weeks for our supplies.

For those who are saying 'WTF' about now, the CF does get watched by the players so a subtle hint was just being dropped by a growing irate customer HINT HINT HINT

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by GMac

Sorry Gents I missed this one.

SARCA's or Super Sarcas as they call them now, we have played with them a lot and go through a nice number of them. They are good for smaller boats and the 6-9mt tinnies full of fanatical fishos love them due to the sliding shank.

Downsides - physically very big for their weight and holding power isn't large, they more often than not are in the bottom 1/4 when talking holding loads and will usually get well beaten by CQR's.

Price - in there with the main players and reasonable I'd say especially being Aussie built rather than in the east.

Would I fit one to my off the beach fizz boat? Possibly but I'd fit others first. On my offshore cruiser? Nope and it wouldn't even be considered in the mix. And it ugly.... not that that should have any baring at all in choosing what anchor to buy.

The Excell. Not had a chance to play hard with one yet. Have been promised one to have a crack with for a long while but yet to see it. Our thoughts just looking at the design and numbers we can find - Another Delta clone all beit a sexy one. We have no idea how they can claim holding loads hugely above Spades and it's off spring like Supreme, Rocna and the likes. We have not seen any thing that would suggest that the Delta design style is superior to the Spade style. I seriously doubt very much they are a bad anchor but I just can't see how they are supposedly so much better than many others. I think I'd look at Deltas, Excels, Sharks and a few of the others of the same design and by the cheapest of them as performance is highly likely to be very very similar. Actually I would go Excel over Delta as Anchor-Right does have high quality controls in place and it shows on the finished product, they are very nicely made.

Don't get me wrong as I do like innovation and Rex Mr Sarca is a good Aussie battler but we don't think he's quite on the right track. And his website is full of **** and dodgy marketing as seems to be the way with most anchor manufacturers these days. Something I often tell them all being the shy dude I am.

The 'incredible TATS rig'. Sorry but all I can say about that is I do find it incredible that someone who has spent so much time sussing anchors thinks that gives good real life results. A brick pulled at 10:1 scope would get good results I'd expect but sadly in real life the worlds boats don't anchor at 10:1.

Geez that's a bit of a bagging, don't you sell these ones?

What about all the endorsements for it?
Endorsements - anchorright.com.au

or the certification?
Cerification - anchorright.com.au

I admit that testing can be fudged, but if the test is equal, which the video seems to show, what would that suggest?

[GMac]

Been asked for Excels and have asked for Excels more than a few times. We do go through quite a few Super Sarcas.

Everyone has endorsements.

Cat does the Sarca have Lloyds Certification?

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by GMac

Been asked for Excels and have asked for Excels more than a few times. We do go through quite a few Super Sarcas.

Everyone has endorsements.

Cat does the Sarca have Lloyds Certification?

It has this from LLoyds, so I would suggest yes.

Do the others have NATA certification?
Do they have Marine Safety Victoria Test Certificate ?
Do they have SGS M&I NZ certification?

[barnakiel]

Seen the pics - so should we replace our anchors just like we do with the rigging or was the (Bruce) just a cheap cast off, or perhaps a single fatal sample?

Replace anchors? How often?

b.

[GMac]

Ahh My dear Cat, there's the rub and why I say there is way too much dodgy marketing on anchor maker websites. Anchor-right is far from alone so I'm not only picking on them, actually AR are far from the worst.

That Lloyds Certificate relates to ONE specific anchor and that one specific anchor only. It does not mean Sarcas are LR approved or Anchor-right is a LR approved manufacturer. I'd say that the LR test was done for a specific boat which is in Lloyds so had to have a LR checked out anchor. Doing one off tests is common, not only for Lloyds but also GL, ABS and so on. If you like you could get a LR test done on a brick, no idea why you would but you could. And they have changed the design since then anyway.

Anyone could also go to S&I in NZ and get a anchor tested, just like the LR above. They did have on the site, and may still do, they had 'NZ Maritime Certification'. Bloody hard when MSA don't certify anything. The Sarca and every other anchor here do not have any official NZ certification purely as it does not exist. Sacra has had the range Certified by a private company who has a office in NZ, that's all that Cert says. It was so the Sarcas could be fitted to commercial boats here that run in our SSM (Safe Ship Management) programme. SSM means you are OK to go to sea and unlikely to sink or blow up. Getting that Cert meant you didn't have to get a Cert for each anchor fitted to a boat. But it's all done private companies.

As for NATA and MSV. They are an Aussie State outfit and don't really count for much outside of Victoria, the NATA is Aussie wide. But it certainly isn't a bad thing as any independent testing, even if it's only one one or 2 anchors, can only be good.

So there is a perfect example of why I bitch to the anchor makers and seem to get a little hot under the collar at times. They are implying, hence the punters are buying or so they think, a LR or whatever approved anchor, when if fact they are falling for almost a case of the old smoke and mirrors trick.

I don't think that is fair to the punters who are looking for solid fact rather than marketing speak. If it was for a pair of underwear, it doesn't really matter but for gear that keep people alive while they sleep, that is a different story. I'm not going as far as to say dis-honest as I genuinely think they aren't like that or have that intention but I do call it at least a tad dodgy. And again, AR is far from alone, they all seem to be at it and at an accelerated rate as well......Grrrrrrrrrr.

There are only a few LR or Society approved anchors and/or approved manufacturing facilities. This come down to cost often as it does cost big bucks. By big I mean 10 of 1000's of dollars per anchor design to get approval.

But none of that means the product is not a good or poorly made anchor though. Sarcas are very well made actually as you would expect being Aussie made. The Spade, also very well made and a top end performer yet no Certification.

At least, as far as I know and have no reason to think otherwise, Anchor-Right haven't promoted Endorsements from people who never actually endorsed their anchor and use a completely different one. Not all makers can say that.

Here endth anchor marketing rant number 3 of the day.

[GMac]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Seen the pics - so should we replace our anchors just like we do with the rigging or was the (Bruce) just a cheap cast off, or perhaps a single fatal sample?

Replace anchors? How often?

b.

That was not a genuine Bruce only a knock-off. It wasn't the only one either, sadly.

Replace anchors when -
You lose one.
You wear one out, Yes it can and does happen.
You existing one rusts away to the point of spooky.
You bend or mangle your existing one.
You change your existing boating area to somewhere that may have a completely differing bottom type than your old grounds have.
Or if you just want too.

Otherwise if what you have is doing the business for you, keep it and spend the money on cold beer, loose women and fast yachts. Something like that anyway

[cat man do]

Gmac, having read your 2 separate posts above regarding Sarca and "other anchors" (which for the sake of this discussion I take to pretty much mean Manson Supreme and Rocna) tests endorsements and certification I believe you are saying that:

* Lots of Anchor Manufactures get tests done, but in reality they may not necessarily prove much apart from in "a particular circumstance, an anchor held a load"

* The tests leading to certification may only be on one anchor, not all.
I see for example that Manson has 5 lots of certification done, but I cant see on which anchor types and Rocna appears to have none at all.

*Tests leading to certification are better than nothing at all.

*Certification is a very expensive process and just because a wealthy company has it does not necessarily mean they have "the best" anchor

*Australian and NZ anchors are well made.

* Some anchors are better looking than others, but looks should not be a deciding factor compared to holding ability and build quality.

The bit that I would like to know more about is your comment regarding the sarca

Downsides - physically very big for their weight and holding power isn't large, they more often than not are in the bottom 1/4 when talking holding loads and will usually get well beaten by CQR's.

Where did you get this information from?
Which tests?
Could the testers have had a vested interest in making another anchor look better than others as they were re sellers for those brands?

The reason I ask this is of course, because I have read many tests and they all have differing results, in some the Sarca is the best in others it is Rocna or manson or some other brand all together.

and

Would I fit one to my off the beach fizz boat? Possibly but I'd fit others first. On my offshore cruiser? Nope and it wouldn't even be considered in the mix.

Is this because of the above tests you have read?
or have you some first hand experience we should be hearing about?

Obviously, like most people I am trying to get the best anchor to suit my needs plus some at a reasonable price.
2 out of 3 that I am looking at are at a reasonable price and
are made in NZ and Aus
have good endorsements
and have certification, though one of them I am not sure on which product.

The 3rd product has a similar amount of metal and labour content as the others
is made in NZ
Also has good endorsements
But has NO certification
And is considerably more expensive than the others

Which one?
I feel no more enlightened than I was last time I went through this exercise, but do feel a fair bit more confused especially with your above comment about sarca.

[GMac]

Sorry to cause confusion Cat. I'll try and clarify it better. There is a bit too it so grab a beer and settle in.

1st 'other' anchors means 'other' not any specific anchor/s. There is no intention to line any anchor up against another unless specified. Some anchors maybe be mentioned but only as examples in an attempt to make myself understandable rather than an endorsement of any type.

Certification and Approvals -
A company can get themselves checked out and if they meet the requirements, which are quite onerous, become 'An approved manufacturer'. This means that, we'll pick Lloyds (LR) as an example, LR basically become their quality assurance company. In doing so LR will get technical people to check out the design, check out the facility where they are all made, check out the dudes who actual make them each day which includes if they can weld properly for example (they do make them do test welds which are checked), do actual field testing of the products to see they do work and hold together and up to what sort of loads, in the case of anchors. LR will check that all out and if happy will give a blanket approval to a company for all (generally) products to be 'made by a LR Approved facility'. LR will also check the place and people at set intervals to make sure they aren't slipping, this can be as often as every 6 months and at the manufacturers expense.

That doesn't mean an 'approved manufacturers' product is any better or worse than one that is not. It just means they build to a high set quality, which is checked often, and the individual product meets a set of specific number/loads i.e. HHP (high holding power), SHHP (super high holding power). Just because someone is an approved manufacturer also doesn't mean all their products are, say SHHP, they maybe a mix of HHP, SHHP and some items with no specific approval at all.

Once approved the companies products does not have to jump through so many hoops if it is to go on a boat that is in some Classification that requires approved gear. Most Classification Societies will accept each others Certification, not all but most. There is upper weight limits that when reached does mean each specific anchor needs additional checking (basically load testing for construction strength) even if from an approved manufacturer.

For example Fortress is ABS approved, Manson is LR and there are a couple of others. To become 'approved' costs big bucks to start with and does have a reasonably high ongoing cost. This is the main reason many don't get approval, it's not that they probably couldn't just they don't want, for whatever reason, to spend the big coin. In a lot of cases they just don't make a lot of BIG anchors so the pressure to be approved isn't so great. In Fortress and Manson's cases, again just as examples, they supply a lot of anchors to big boats i.e. superboats which are all in Class or Survey as most call it, so by being 'approved' they have short cut the process of Certifying the anchors supplied to these boats. So over time the getting approved costs can be blended into each anchors cost hence minimising the pain to everyone.

There is some limits and quirks but that's the gist of it. And that same applies to other many things even anchor chains.

Now 'Certification of an individual' item as opposed to 'the range' or facility -
This is common and happens a lot. Basically for the same reasons as above, some boat in Class wants a anchor and as the maker isn't 'approved' so they have to Certify that specific anchor. When I say 'that specific' I mean the very anchor that will be going on the boat, not the type or range. The LR Cert Anchor-right has is a good case of this. Some boat wanted to run a 145kg Sarca and the boat was in some Class, so they had to get the anchor checked out.

That Cert shows that in Dec 02 Mr Curran, who will be a LR person, went to John Robinsons Ltd and witnessed a proof test. This is a load test of the construction strength. Along with that they (AR) would have had to show material content as in what exactly was the steel it was made from, handed over design drawings for approval, done field tests and lots of things like that. The process is very detailed and looks closely at just about ever aspect of the item, in this case an anchor. Depending on which Class or part of the boat is in will dictate certain things like size and holding loads required.

If said anchor came up to speed, which it did or no Cert, it will be required to be stamped with a traceable number (shown on the bottom of that Cert) which will be linked to a specific boat. In theory, that boat when getting it's annual Survey will be checked to see the anchor on the front is indeed the one shown on the Cert, if not some hands will be smacked, possibly very hard.

But having one specific anchor approved does not mean the entire range or the manufacturer is. It is ONLY for that one specific item, nothing more. It is possible, and absolutely no way am I suggesting AR would do it as I really don't think it's their style, someone could get one item approved after 'making sure' it is better, stronger or whatever than they usually do and then continue making crap from there on.

As mentioned earlier, you can get a Cert done or attempt it on just about anything. Getting one off Certs is common, we do it 4-5 times a year on stuff for specific boats. The gear is exactly the same as we normally deal with but as some our suppliers aren't a approved manufacturer we have to jump through the hoops. All our BIG gear does come from an approved manufacturer so that makes most of the real big stuff a bit easier.

As a FYI – to get a specific LR test done on a specific bit of gear that is from an approved manufacturer but outside the size or type guidelines for the Class it costs US$400. That is just for a LR man to stand there and watch the proof load test, nice coin if you can get it really. The rest of the requirements will already be known to LR as part of their ongoing 'manufacturers approval'. To get a LR Cert on something not from an approved maker can cost 1000's depending on just what it is.

So there's the rough run down on Certification and Approvals. So you can see while AR show a LR Cert it is only for one anchor they made 7 years ago and has next to nothing do to with any other anchor they have every made certainly not the entire range. Hence your confusion and my annoyance at why you are confused, you should not have to be with important gear like this. I have spoken to AR about this on a few occasions, just as I have with other outfits who are doing things along similar lines.

Right the next bit.

* Lots of Anchor Manufactures get tests done, but in reality they may not necessarily prove much apart from in "a particular circumstance, an anchor held a load"

* The tests leading to certification may only be on one anchor, not all.
I see for example that Manson has 5 lots of certification done, but I cant see on which anchor types and Rocna appears to have none at all.

*Tests leading to certification are better than nothing at all.

*Certification is a very expensive process and just because a wealthy company has it does not necessarily mean they have "the best" anchor

*Australian and NZ anchors are well made.

* Some anchors are better looking than others, but looks should not be a deciding factor compared to holding ability and build quality.

Basically yes to all of the above. Except for 2 bits.

One is that is that is a well known 'secret' some manufacturers do look for places their product will do well in before 'documenting' the results. A little understandable I suppose even if not entirely honest.

And two, To get a design or range approval they will test a significant number of the range across all sizes. What's more they can and sometimes do run those tests again later just as a check so nothing had better have changed.

Once a item is approved it can't be changed without, say, LR approving the change, which would come with more checking testing and so on. It is all very detailed, extensive and has tight rules. Bust them and you're outta there baby and don't come back.

Due to Manson being probably the biggest supplier to Superboats they are fully Lloyds up and almost everyone of their anchors also has design approval. It saves everyone a lot of time and money. They were also the 1st and 2nd to ever get Lloyds 'Super High Holding Power' approved anchors, the Supreme being the 1st and a new Superboat one the 2nd. I believe Rocna are working on some approval at the moment, believed to be RINA, an Italian outfit.

As you can see for some getting approved is not really that necessary as they just don't play up in the very big boat area. Quite understandable I think. That's is probably why AR hasn't rushed into LR or one of the big fella organisations Approval. As the majority of Sarcas go onto boats that aren't in any Class they don't need too. But it's good to see they have local Victoria Marine Board approval, that is likely to be a bit of both quality checking and a local requirement possibly. We do send stuff to boats in Vic and often have to satisfy the The Vic Board it's up to speed.

How do we know about Sarca and the rests loads? We have our own testing programme/s. As I'm a sceptical bastard who has issues with marketing (which was the cause of the recent world wide financial meltdown along with greed) we do our own to find out the real truth rather than rely on vested interests i.e the manufacturers. As I'm sure you would guess it is highly unlikey anyone is going to come out and say 'Our gear sucks really but buy it anyway'.

Results and snippets of some of our tests are out in the wild being used by a couple of people in places.

Our test findings are put in with real life users feedback, (if you speak to anyone who has run into me they will tell you I am a nosey bastard who asks lots of questions about their gear and how they both use and find it), with other Test results from around the place and just stuff we see each day. Our results usually are in-line with most published ones or at least pretty close. Sadly the Sarca doesn't stack up well in most tests, both ours and others. Mind you neither does the CQR and they are still probably the most commonly used anchor world wide, which suggests 2 things to me.
1 – The loads people actually require are generally below what they think they get and require.
2 – Set-up and use a Sarca or CQR (and others) well and you'll be fine. History has also proven this.

A bit of a case of why have a Ferrari that can do 220mph when you can't go faster than 60mph on the roads anyway.

We don't publish results as being here on the front line of the anchor wars, 2 of the main combatants are only down the road, I can't be bothered with the bitching I'd get from the ones who didn't perform as well and the others. Generally our results pretty much mirror most independently published results.

But soon we may be publishing a very interesting set of numbers. Won't be for a while as they will be real life numbers from real life users going about their real life everyday boating. To get a nice big sample range is going to take time. The 1st set of numbers is very interesting but only a months worth each from 2 boats. The loads are lower than we expected and we generally already think many overstate the loads that are bandied about. We need a good storm or 2 really. I have a tug boat ready to go in the next big blow, which will be very interesting to see with it's big blunt and buoyant bow. With my gadget we can see exactly what happens when a gust of wind hits the boat or a decent wave and the interaction and loads of that and the anchoring system. All a bit exciting really even if in slow motion.

I'm often asked and have even been accused by one manufacturer (of whose product we sell a fair whack of) of favouring one anchor over another. Generally that is quite correct BUT only after I know what boat it's wanted for and how the user intends to use it. We do believe all anchors have good points and equally all have bad points, even the latest and greatest. Just like each boat and user is individual we fit anchors individually based on what is best for the specific situation it will be used in rather than the bank account of any specific manufacturer. It's highly possible 2 people can come in with the exact same boats and we could suggest 2 differing anchors as they use each boat differently. We run a very much 'horses for courses' programme rather than 'here's the horse, make your course fit around that'. It does annoy some manufacturers but they aren't the ones we are trying to keep alive at 3am on a crappy night. Hence we have the largest range under one roof, possibly in the entire world.

So Mr Cat, if I was you I'd be looking for a commonly referred to good anchor, set it up well and boat happily. Don't buy anything you are not happy about, that is counter productive to sleeping well.

By 'commonly referred to good' I mean people who have boats similar to your will have a bloody good idea if the anchor they use works well or not. Or you could take a punt, may have and are very happy but equally some haven't done quite as well. Personally I would suggest one of the new generations but then I'm not the one asleep on your boat on a shitty nite so don't have to be as happy as you with the choice.

Yes I do have my favourite/s for assorted reason but don't think it's fair for me to say so here*. I will say they are from the new generation range though.

Fondling an Ultra again today and must say if you are a fan of bling on your bow, you have to suss those. Grade A bling for sure but as they are all stainless they do cost a bit as stainless does. Almost had to have a cold shower are I put it down, as sad as that may sound

And I hope that by now I haven't sent you into a catatonic haze or driven you into alcohol related problems

* - yeah OK, so I'm scared of getting the crap kick out of me by a annoyed manufacturer. I'm way to pretty to die just yet