Rocna Redeemed

[Just Bob]

Rocna did have a bad batch out, but that's over, read this from the new owner of Rocna:


"As of 20th September 2011, the Rocna Anchors license – including all rights to the Rocna design and brand –were re-assigned by designer Peter Smith to Canada Metal (Pacific) Ltd., a Canadian company with state of the art manufacturing and engineering facilities located in Vancouver, Canada and Ningbo, China. Canada Metal produce the Martyr line of anodes, CMP chain, Octopus autopilot drives, and Intellisteer remote steering systems.

"Canada Metal was aware of the challenges that faced Rocna well in advance of taking on the license, and is fully committed to supporting Rocna customers. During our due diligence process, we determined that the Rocna product was of sound design and provided exceptional utility.

"As part of the acquisition process, Canada Metal conducted an extensive and comprehensive analysis of quality control procedures, certifications, marketing materials, and production procedures. Information derived from our (on-going) investigation indicated that for a period beginning in 2010, the shanks of some Rocna anchors were manufactured using a steel alloy that did not meet the published manufacturing specification.

"These anchors were subjected to rigorous testing and evaluation. The results confirmed that, while not meeting the published design specification, they do not pose any safety concerns, and still exceed industry proof load strength requirements. When subjected to typical pulls in the course of anchoring, they will endure loads greater than the breaking strength of the appropriately matched chain without bending.

"Regardless of the lack of a safety issue, Canada Metal will exchange anchors for those concerned customers. For more information, contact Rocna or the Rocna UK distributor Marine Factors Ltd. at the contact information below."

— John Mitchell, President, Canada Metal (Pacific) Limited"

 

[Nomad Willy]

I'm curious how you came by this statement and what interest you have in posting it here? Do you just have a passion for that anchor (there is already one here that does) or have the other boaters on your float been looking at your anchor strangely as if they think it should be made of better materials?

It's hard to imagine Peter Smith still making anchors out of inferior materials after all the flack he's taken (he deserved it) so I think most people probably assumed that problem has been fixed.

I see some roll bar anchors but even taken together they are definitely a minority among anchors here in the PNW and that may mean little as most people have the anchor they have as it came w their boat.

It's not very often someone pops up w a bold statement in favor of some product and I'm sure you have genuine reason.

 

[Just Bob]

As to your question. I do own a Rocna 55, but am not an overly passionate owner, there are many good anchors. I did not learn of their issue until after I purchased ours. I called Canada Metals and was assured ours did not come from the batch made with inferior steel, however if I was in the least bit uncertain, they would gladly cooperate with West Marine (where we purchased it) to give us a refund. I thought that said a lot about who they were.

I posted this because of the comment that someone might want to think twice about buying one due to the problems. I thought it would be helpful for folks to know it was safe to purchase what has overwhelmingly been determined to be a good design.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Bob wrote "however if I was in the least bit uncertain, they would gladly cooperate with West Marine (where we purchased it) to give us a refund. I thought that said a lot about who they were." Well perhaps they were a bit paranoid about the baggage they bought (literally) into and thought it would take drastic measures to insure a chance of success in the anchor market. I think they've over done it. If you thought the anchor was inferior I doubt that you would have bought it. Apparently ther'e having trouble getting their brain around that one.

Well it's a great anchor setting well and holding very well given what is typically considered proper scope. I personally have some doubts about how the roll bar anchors work but anchor testers have practically no doubt at all. Many anchors have come and gone and the fact that a few roll bar anchors have achieved better performance than most indicates to me that anchor performance has considerably further to go. But at the moment (w enough scope) they are about as good as you can get. I have a Manson Supreme myself.

 

[Nomad Willy]

My father called himself Bob. Actually insisted people not call him Robert but Bob.

 

[Delfin]

Rocna did have a bad batch out, but that's over, read this from the new owner of Rocna:


"As of 20th September 2011, the Rocna Anchors license – including all rights to the Rocna design and brand –were re-assigned by designer Peter Smith to Canada Metal (Pacific) Ltd., a Canadian company with state of the art manufacturing and engineering facilities located in Vancouver, Canada and Ningbo, China. Canada Metal produce the Martyr line of anodes, CMP chain, Octopus autopilot drives, and Intellisteer remote steering systems.

"Canada Metal was aware of the challenges that faced Rocna well in advance of taking on the license, and is fully committed to supporting Rocna customers. During our due diligence process, we determined that the Rocna product was of sound design and provided exceptional utility.

"As part of the acquisition process, Canada Metal conducted an extensive and comprehensive analysis of quality control procedures, certifications, marketing materials, and production procedures. Information derived from our (on-going) investigation indicated that for a period beginning in 2010, the shanks of some Rocna anchors were manufactured using a steel alloy that did not meet the published manufacturing specification.

"These anchors were subjected to rigorous testing and evaluation. The results confirmed that, while not meeting the published design specification, they do not pose any safety concerns, and still exceed industry proof load strength requirements. When subjected to typical pulls in the course of anchoring, they will endure loads greater than the breaking strength of the appropriately matched chain without bending.

"Regardless of the lack of a safety issue, Canada Metal will exchange anchors for those concerned customers. For more information, contact Rocna or the Rocna UK distributor Marine Factors Ltd. at the contact information below."

— John Mitchell, President, Canada Metal (Pacific) Limited"

I could be more convinced that it is "over" if CMP were a bit more honest in their public pronouncements. By stating that defective anchors were rigorously tested and it was determined that in straight pull test tests no safety problems were revealed, they are not being entirely honest. A straight pull is not when the substandard metallurgy would be evidenced. It is in a veering situation that these anchors fail, so by putting out a public statement that no safety problem exists would be tantamount to Ford saying that the Pinto showed no safety problems when hit from the side, when it was being hit from the rear that caused them to burst into flames.

 

[Delfin]

I would love to start this as a new thread but do not know how to move this, so if you or someone that does would like to - ok by me.

As to your question. I do own a Rocna 55, but am not an overly passionate owner, there are many good anchors. I did not learn of their issue until after I purchased ours. I called Canada Metals and was assured ours did not come from the batch made with inferior steel, however if I was in the least bit uncertain, they would gladly cooperate with West Marine (where we purchased it) to give us a refund. I thought that said a lot about who they were.

I posted this because of the comment that someone might want to think twice about buying one due to the problems. I thought it would be helpful for folks to know it was safe to purchase what has overwhelmingly been determined to be a good design.

Bob, it is not the design of the anchor that is the issue. It is the integrity of the manufacturers of the design that is the only concern. The original owners were shown to be deceitful. The current owners may not be, but as noted on the previous thread, their public statements don't give a lot of comfort.

The simple fact remains that the quality of steel the original manufacturer specified as crucial to the design is not being used, even by the current owners. Maybe that is "good enough", but it should be noted that competitors to the Rocna - Manson and Anchorite - use the kind of steel the Rocna deemed essential. So given the choice, why choose a Rocna, when better quality products for basically the same price are available? I wouldn't object to Rocna selling their product as a cheaper, lower quality substitute for people who don't feel they need the best. What I do object to is the manufacturer pretending that sub standard quality relative to the competition is of equal quality and deserving of equal cost. It is not.

 

[Marin]

Eric--- the statement Just Bob posted is actually pretty old news. I read it some time ago, perhaps even more than a year, when Canadian Metals acquired the rights to manufacture and sell the Rocna line of anchors. It was either on the Canadian Metals website or the Rocna website, I don't remember.

 

[Nomad Willy]

OK Marin ...

Many others may want to know or to see that letter. Or talk about it.

Our boats are old too but we're us'in um.

 

[Marin]

Actually I believe that statement was posted here on TF when it was released. So it's probably in the archives somewhere.

Just saying it's not new news. If people want to talk the whole issue to death (again) I have no problem with it

We have an original Rocna, it's made out of what it's supposed to be made of, and so far in all the years we've had it its worked flawlessly. So the whole thing's a non-issue for us.

 

[Peter B]

Bob I started a new thread called "Rocna Redeemed".
My father called himself Bob. Actually insisted people not call him Robert but Bob.

Minor thread hijack, Eric, but my father, (called Robert), also always preferred Bob...

Now, back to anchors......

Oh, and as a PS, although several batches of Rocnas were made from steel somewhat below that specified, in all honesty, I doubt any current owner/user of one of those is ever likely to have it put to sufficient veering stress to suffer deformation, and you would probably only find it out when you up-anchored to head off, and if so, clearly the current manufacturer would exchange it for a new one, so I would not lose too much sleep over it...really...

 

[Andy G]

As it's Christmas, and a little thread hijacking is allowed,socool my father was also christened Robert , and was known as 'Rob' to the family, 'Bob' to his mates & 'Rusty' to his mother

Haven't come across many Roberts/Bob's or Rob's on the forum, nor Rocna's

 

[bobofthenorth]

As far as the Rocna thing goes, haven't we talked it to death ad nauseum already? That's what the search function is for.

I was christened Robert and my mother refused to allow anyone to call me Bob while I was living under her roof. Her fear was that I would then grow up as "Bobby" and she didn't want that. So I didn't become Bob until I went off to university. "Bobofthenorth" came when I was on the CAAR board and we used to hold teleconferences with 3 Bobs from across Canada on the same call. We used bobofthenorth, boboftheeast and bobofthemiddle as identifiers to make it easier for the recording secretary.

 

[Nomad Willy]

First of all I disagree w those that say we've already talked this "to death" and should shut the fluck up. As long as someone has something to say I think he should say it and certainly he should have the right to say it as that's what the forum is for. That's why we're here and I'm going to do it. Bobofthenorth I'd much rather talk to you than read the archives but reading the archives is usually good background and reference for new talk to bounce of in a new direction.

And I DO agree w Carl that CML saying that anchors made of substandard materials is not a good reason to place much confidence in their company. And Peter an anchor w a bent shank (it was the shank that was defective wasn't it?) will probably not perform well and quite likely not at all so even if it is fairly unlikely to cause an accident the potential is definitely there. Think of an Rocna set on a N wind. Wind changes to W and gets strong and the fluke is jammed between rocks and the shank gets bent then the wind goes So. The anchor gets pulled out and won't reset. All of that is unlikely I admit but CML should have (in my opinion) said safety is "probably" not an issue or that "performance issues are unlikely" ...... but to say the defect "does not pose any safety concerns" ....... clearly the're trying to lead us away from the bad smell. To say there is no safety concern about the weak shanks sounds to some extent like Peter Smith talking.

HAHA Interesting about all the Bob's. Robert seem too formal?