Rocna 10 vs CQR 45

[Greg K]

Originally Posted by smj

My boat is worth more than a good enough anchor for the job to me, that’s why I forked out a whopping $285.00 for my Mantus 45lb anchor to protect my $100k+ investment in my boat. Money well spent

What additional benefits does your Mantus provide that go beyond "good enough for the job"?

No anchor brand is a substitute for good seamanship.
Ray Durkee said it best in a previous post.
Worth repeating.

" I agree that conditions matter. I have cruised extensively for 30 years carriyng 4 anchors and only occasionally deployed anything but my CQR. I have not had a problem with reset and have no idea where claims that they do not reset come from. Rocna spends a huge amount of that overpriced cost of their anchors on advertising. I saw a guy sawing off the roll bar of a Rocna in Maine last summer. When I asked him why, he said the damn thing just clogged with bottom muck and would do nothing but slide on reset. If I anchor in a place with very large reversing currents, I set a Bahamian moor. Trying to find one anchor to replace competent seamanship is a fools errand. But very profitable for the anchor manufacturers. Sometimes the only option to an anchoring problem is to pick up and move--to another position in the anchorage or out to sea. Several boats were beached in Central America recently in a roadstead when seas and winds came up suddenly and folks tried to hunker down behind their anchors. By the time they realized they needed to leave, they could not get their gear up before being driven ashore. Hoping you can buy one anchor that will set properly in all conditions and obviate the need for exercising seamanship is not only foolish, it is dangerous. But if you only want bragging rights at the dock, buy whatever you want to talk about. I personally think forums about the "very best anchor" are very dangerous. Fortunately, most folks are not really going anywhere and will not have their skills or anchors tested. "

[smj]

Originally Posted by Greg K

What additional benefits does your Mantus provide that go beyond "good enough for the job"?

No anchor brand is a substitute for good seamanship.
Ray Durkee said it best in a previous post.
Worth repeating.

" I agree that conditions matter. I have cruised extensively for 30 years carriyng 4 anchors and only occasionally deployed anything but my CQR. I have not had a problem with reset and have no idea where claims that they do not reset come from. Rocna spends a huge amount of that overpriced cost of their anchors on advertising. I saw a guy sawing off the roll bar of a Rocna in Maine last summer. When I asked him why, he said the damn thing just clogged with bottom muck and would do nothing but slide on reset. If I anchor in a place with very large reversing currents, I set a Bahamian moor. Trying to find one anchor to replace competent seamanship is a fools errand. But very profitable for the anchor manufacturers. Sometimes the only option to an anchoring problem is to pick up and move--to another position in the anchorage or out to sea. Several boats were beached in Central America recently in a roadstead when seas and winds came up suddenly and folks tried to hunker down behind their anchors. By the time they realized they needed to leave, they could not get their gear up before being driven ashore. Hoping you can buy one anchor that will set properly in all conditions and obviate the need for exercising seamanship is not only foolish, it is dangerous. But if you only want bragging rights at the dock, buy whatever you want to talk about. I personally think forums about the "very best anchor" are very dangerous. Fortunately, most folks are not really going anywhere and will not have their skills or anchors tested. "

The Mantus anchor is far superior to the CQR, in both reliability to set and the ability to hold. So why would I want to own a CQR when I can purchase a far superior anchor for less money? This is my opinion coming from pretty extensive cruising for over 30 years using BOTH the CQR and new gen anchors.
If I use an anchor that sets and holds better than another isn’t that a form of good seamanship, or just plain common sense?

[Wallaby]

Originally Posted by aqfishing

You never thrown a running anchor???

My anchor process (currently in the northern Bahamas--so grass over sand, or sand) consists of slowly approaching a likely spot directly upwind. I slow the boat to one knot, preferably less, aim for what looks like a sandy area, go to neutral and put the autopilot on straight ahead. Then, I proceed to the bow. I lower a Rocna (oversized) to the water and watch the flow past it. When it stops, and I am not over grass, I lower the anchor to about 2:1 scope, watching as the boat drifts back. Generally, I can see the the anchor and chain for a while. As the chain lifts up from the sand, I add more chain, allowing the boat to drift sideways to the wind. As the chain lifts, I add more chain until.... With about four to one scope, I let the chain tighten. Which should bring the boat back head to wind. My minimum scope is 5 to 1. Strong winds I'll go 10 to 1.

When the chain tightens again, I attach one of two 2-leg snubbers--one is 5/8" nylon and short at 12 ft (with rubber dock-snubbers built in). The other is 3/4" nylon and about 20-24 ft long.
Then, I will back down at idle speed.



Next, since the 'hook' is a slot machined into a s/s plate 1/2" thick, I then drop another 10 to 15 ft of chain behind the hook, which acts as a bonus 'stretch' to absorb loading in gusts/waves. Both sets of snubbers are also chaff protected.

For winds over 15kts, I also deploy an anchor riding sail to minimize swinging at anchor, which can wriggle the anchor out of the bottom.



To answer your question: I do NOT throw a running anchor EXCEPT when I misjudge the sandy spot. And then the boat speed is nearly zero

[MHTinkler]

A "SPADE" design anchor of the appropriate size for your boat will almost always be better given equal conditions. This has been tested many times by lots of people and organizations. But it doesn't have to be a Rocna. Mantus and Manson Supreme make very good anchors at the fraction the cost of a Rocna. All three test remarkably close to one another with minor differences in performance depending on the particular test conditions. Any of the three is a good choice for most conditions. One size up is even better. (34 ft sailing catamaran with a 35 lb Manson Supreme on 100 ft of 1/4" High strength steel rode)
Has only dragged once in the last 7 years ( full time liveaboard). Turned out to be 6" of muddy sand over solid bedrock. Conditions no anchor would hold in, but only dragged during a violent thunder storm.
P.S. I always run an anchor alarm when newly anchored.
P.P.S. Rocna and Manson Supreme are one piece welded construction. The Mantus is nice because it is a three piece bolt together system. The shank, the spade and the hoop are separate and broken down they are easily stored in a very small space. Great if you want a huge storm anchor but have little room to store one.

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by smj

My boat is worth more than a good enough anchor for the job to me, that’s why I forked out a whopping $285.00 for my Mantus 45lb anchor to protect my $100k+ investment in my boat. Money well spent

Nice.

I forked over $300 for my 25 lb Mantus Anchor to protect my $2,000 investment in my boat.

Of course though, I used an old 20 lb. CQR for the first 10 years of owning it, but over those years, put probably another $10,000 into the boat while I sailed it

Good news was free delivery!

It was weird though receiving an anchor in a flat box!

[Nicholson58]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

We sleep well with our 55lb. Rocna on our "Benford Fantail 38". We had a CQR many years ago, there is no comparison in our opinion.

The CQR, so says legend, came about by adapting a plowshare to an anchor. It plows the bottom just as the heritage suggests. We had a 74# CQR, came with the boat. Set on the first drop 1 of 3 tries. It pulled and dragged. Your benefactor donated it to you because it’s terrible junk. We now have the biggest ROCNA I could fit, 121#. It never slips. It sets instantly. I sleep. We live on anchor seven months per year.

I couldn’t find anyone interested in the CQR. It is now the mooring for my beach cat.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Nicholson58

The CQR, so says legend, came about by adapting a plowshare to an anchor. It plows the bottom just as the heritage suggests. We had a 74# CQR, came with the boat. Set on the first drop 1 of 3 tries. It pulled and dragged. Your benefactor donated it to you because it’s terrible junk. We now have the biggest ROCNA I could fit, 121#. It never slips. It sets instantly. I sleep. We live on anchor seven months per year.

I couldn’t find anyone interested in the CQR. It is now the mooring for my beach cat.

Leads one to wonder how a 121 lb CQR would have done... just to make the comparison meaningful. I don't think your "experiment" proves much.

Jim

[Seamone]

You generous neighbour has actually not done you any favor. Rather have no anchor than a CQR. Problem is when you have a CQR, you think you have an anchor, while actually you do not. Rather have a Rocna, or most other anchors of a quarter size of the CQR and you will be much better off. Do yourself a favor and just dump the CQR.

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by Nicholson58

The CQR, so says legend, came about by adapting a plowshare to an anchor. It plows the bottom just as the heritage suggests. We had a 74# CQR, came with the boat. Set on the first drop 1 of 3 tries. It pulled and dragged. Your benefactor donated it to you because it’s terrible junk. We now have the biggest ROCNA I could fit, 121#. It never slips. It sets instantly. I sleep. We live on anchor seven months per year.

I couldn’t find anyone interested in the CQR. It is now the mooring for my beach cat.

Adapting a plow share to an anchor?

I doubt that.

That would be a total waste of time.

See attached photo of a plow share.

I've replaced lots of plow shares. Not easy because the nuts and part of the bolts have been filed off at a 45 degree angle by the dirt.

You see a plow share is the cutting edge of the plow. See photo of moldboard and share mounted.

You have to use a chisel and big hammer to knock off the nut or lower section of the bolt.

Then you can replace with a new share and new bolts.

It's an awkward situation though under there, and many times you'll bang your fingers with the big hammer instead of the chisel.

This while the bugs are chewing on you.

The plow I used was a 7 bottom so I had to change 7 of them each time with each having 3-4 bolts holding them on

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by Seamone

You generous neighbour has actually not done you any favor. Rather have no anchor than a CQR. Problem is when you have a CQR, you think you have an anchor, while actually you do not. Rather have a Rocna, or most other anchors of a quarter size of the CQR and you will be much better off. Do yourself a favor and just dump the CQR.

No anchor?

Wow.

If I had left my CQR off the boat, my boat would have been on the beach several times during nights with heavy onshore winds.

The old and worn CQR that came with my boat saved the boat quite a few times in bad situations.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Seamone

You generous neighbour has actually not done you any favor. Rather have no anchor than a CQR. Problem is when you have a CQR, you think you have an anchor, while actually you do not. Rather have a Rocna, or most other anchors of a quarter size of the CQR and you will be much better off. Do yourself a favor and just dump the CQR.

It is hard to equate such an opinion with the thousands of folks who have successfully anchored with CQR anchors for decades.

I agree that modern anchors are better, pound for pound, and I switched over many years back myself. But, for hundreds of nights at anchor prior to that switch I was kept in place by a 45 lb CQR knockoff (ABI). Not a problem with dragging, but occasional problems in setting. To this day I carry a different 45 lb CQR knockoff (Manson) as a backup to my 60 lb Supreme, and have used it successfully many times.

The current disdain for CQRs is mostly expressed by folks who have not cruised extensively with such hooks and are parroting internet cant. The OP, should he still be reading, in my opinion would be best served by using his slightly oversize CQR for the time being and if it proves problematical, well, then think about replacing it with a modern hook. I suspect that he has better use for his boat bucks just now!

Jim

Jim

[Nicholson58]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Leads one to wonder how a 121 lb CQR would have done... just to make the comparison meaningful. I don't think your "experiment" proves much.

Jim

Jim,
Fair statement. The CQR issue was not that it dragged or pulled out. It failed to set at all. It often lay on its side and never righted, never got the point in. The ROCNA can be dropped upside down and backward and it will still set in two shank lengths.

As an aside, we have also a 54# Bruce secondary. In the proper bottom it is remarkably capable.

I think any of the modern new designs perform about equally. Heaviest you can operate on the bow roller and pulpit. I had our pulpit modified to fit the roll bar.

[smj]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

It is hard to equate such an opinion with the thousands of folks who have successfully anchored with CQR anchors for decades.



I agree that modern anchors are better, pound for pound, and I switched over many years back myself. But, for hundreds of nights at anchor prior to that switch I was kept in place by a 45 lb CQR knockoff (ABI). Not a problem with dragging, but occasional problems in setting. To this day I carry a different 45 lb CQR knockoff (Manson) as a backup to my 60 lb Supreme, and have used it successfully many times.



The current disdain for CQRs is mostly expressed by folks who have not cruised extensively with such hooks and are parroting internet cant. The OP, should he still be reading, in my opinion would be best served by using his slightly oversize CQR for the time being and if it proves problematical, well, then think about replacing it with a modern hook. I suspect that he has better use for his boat bucks just now!



Jim



Jim

Fair enough. And I think the current love of the CQR is mostly expressed by folks who have no experience with the newer generation anchor and who either don’t read or are blind to the newer generation anchor tests and reviews.
Seriously, why would you subject yourself to a CQR anchor when there are many much better choices?

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by smj

Fair enough. And I think the current love of the CQR is mostly expressed by folks who have no experience with the newer generation anchor and who either don’t read or are blind to the newer generation anchor tests and reviews.
Seriously, why would you subject yourself to a CQR anchor when there are many much better choices?

Because the CQR works just fine for those folks.

Why would they be looking for a new gen anchor?

I would still be using mine if it wasn't so worn around the hinge pin. My CQR is probably 25 -35 years old at least. I still have it as backup though

It was on the bow roller when I found the boat. The PO had left the boat near here on his return cruise from Florida and the Bahamas. He started in Falmouth, MA 2 years before.

I found the boat 5 years after he left it here

[smj]

Originally Posted by thomm225

Because the CQR works just fine for those folks.

Why would they be looking for a new gen anchor?

I would still be using mine if it wasn't so worn around the hinge pin. My CQR is probably 25 -35 years old at least

I still have it as backup though

Did your CQR set as fast as your Mantus? Did you ever dive on your CQR and see how it set? Same with the Mantus?