I bought a new and exotic anchor four years ago and it did'nt set very often. Not much good but I did manage to get it to set just before a gale in Alllison Anchorage on our way up to Alaska w Willy (our boat). It blew over 50 knots for a day and a half and held fast the whole time. That anchor weighs 14lbs. This spring XYZ came out w a new version of the XYZ Extreme anchor. The first attached pic is of the original and the second and third is of the new version. On my recent trip to Petersburg and Wrangell I used the new XYZ 3 or 4 times and tried it out once before leaving on the trip here in Thorne Bay. The Thorne Bay anchor test was done without any chain. At a scope of 1-1 the anchor bounced along and produced little tension on the line. At 2-1 it dug in a bit twice but pulled out both times. At 3-1 the anchor set and pulled out and set again. On the trip I used 3' of 1/2" chain and 10' of 3/8" chain. The XYZ set every time w the chain at 3-1 scope and generated lots of tension on the line at 1200rpm in reverse. Using the same method of laying out the anchor my Manson Supreme (both my XYZ and Manson are 18lbs) set less decisively. The Manson never developed the tension in the line that the XYZ or even my 13lb Danforth consistently did. I suspect the Manson would do better if given 5 or 6-1 scope as it always ranks high in the anchor tests. Now when I expect rocky bottoms I use the Manson and otherwise use the XYZ. All the XYZ stuff can be seen on the XYZ web page and I see they have newer versions than mine. I have'nt used the new anchor in extreme conditions but if (IF) it holds like the original this could be the worlds present highest performing anchor. Theman behinnd the XYZ (Dragomir) wants me to find a big fishing boat and pull fwd at high throttle on my set XYZ. Have'nt done that but if I experience extreme high performance or problems I shall report.
Eric, it looks the business all right, and I certainly would not judge any anchor harshly which refused to set well with no or little chain. However, the only concern I would have is the rate they are continually changing the design. It smacks of them basically making a continual guess as to what shape it should be. That is, designing and selling on the run. Surely when making something as important as a major piece of safety gear, one should do a lot of search and development at ones own expense, then launch it, once the proven design has been put through the ringer, testing each feature to the max and then beyond, then back to that which works the best, not using a stream of buyers as the beta testers, so to speak. As it stands it's really a case of one owning an XYZ anchor mark....whatever...however many months have passed since the last update, rather like a computer program. This is a pity, because as a result, I wouldn't touch one now, a bit like Rocna have soiled their rep by allowing inferior materials to be used, and yet both are basically good designs, but run the risk of sinking without trace if they are not careful.
Well I've resisted saying this for fear of being too critical but since you ask...*** Discarding all anchor tests and testimonials I can't think of any anchor that LOOKS like it should perform well at short scope. What I think is this**** .....that an anchor's ability to perform at short scope is a function of it's geometry. Specifically and most importantly the angle of it's flukes relative to it's shank angle. To consider that alone is a very over simplified analysis. More accurately the angle of the pull point (the end of the shank usually) to the center of the surface area of the flukes. Notice how Fortress changes that angle to increase the holding power in soft bottoms but changes it back again for better holding power in sand and other bottoms. On claw types there is very little of the flukes that presents much of an angle of fluke to the direction of pull. So it would seem to me that the Claw type flukes should go through the bottom like an airplane wing offering very little resistance. Also the shank is long and makes like a lever to "rotate" the flukes upward and out of the bottom at short scope. The drag of the flukes of the Claw are quite low relative to the shank so this may help resist the tendency of the "lever out" tendency. Most anchors w long shanks have the flukes (and center of drag) higher up and depend only on the shape of the flukes to resist "levering out". Anchors in this category are lowest performers at short scope. Some are better than others mostly due to the variation in fluke angle to shank angle. The Delta, Manson Supreme, Rocna, Spade, and others are prone to break out at short scope because their long shanks act like "cheater bars" and lever the up and out at short scope. Most all these anchors perform well or supremely well at long scope. I bought the Supreme instead of the Rocna as it consistently performed better at short scope. Five to one scope in 50' of water is a 500' swinging radius and I don't often have that. Tom, as to your question all chain has the advantage of making the rode assume an angle of pull more like it would be w a longer scope than otherwise. This is of course due to the droop (catenary) of the rode due to the weight of the chain. This is amplified greatly if the weight of the rode is concentrated at the anchor end. Then the catenary is concentrated near the anchor and is of more benefit to keeping the anchor submerged in the bottom. The best rode for the most effective catenary is what the fishermen use on their reel winches. Extremely heavy chain to begin with, then some very heavy chain and then some heavy chain followed by nylon line. But w a wildcat chain drum only one size chain can be used so w all chain the yachtsman has somewhat the same total weight of rode but it's much less effective. Still much MORE effective than light or ultralight rodes like I've been known to use. It's been said that the catenary disappears in heavy storm conditions w an all chain rode so it would seem when one needs it the most the advantage is largely lost. Also at that time the stretch of nylon becomes a great advantage. Tie a 30' nylon line to a cleat and pull on the other end. You may think the nylon is part rubber. The best advantages of all chain is convenience and the ability to have a small swinging radius w light winds. At 3-1 Tom my guess is that there may be anchors that perform at full throttle or nearly so but probably not. The Fortress and the Manson Supreme have been tested to do so. At 1/2 throttle most anchors should hold w all chain but the Rocna and Delta and perhaps a few others should become questionable. At less than 1/2 throttle most any anchor will do w all chain. Of course they would do better w a combination rode of the same total weight. Soooo many variables. The displacement of ones boat and seas at the anchorage can drastically change the whole picture as can other variables. The above are my opinions and observations and may be very close to fact or way off in lala land.
A very very good point. And when a better XYZ comes along I may buy another one. People criticize politicians for changing their minds and being wishy washy but I think that's a sign of objectivity and a higher level of responsibility. As in evolution one should change when change is beneficial. You can't change the design of something without saying that the previous or original was less than perfect and perhaps people have a problem w that. To say that an anchor is better than all the others because it has stood unchanged for 50 years is stupid but when ever I use that S word I feel the need to stop and ask if I myself am falling into that category. But to say an anchor is a good product because people have been buying it for 50 years is probably correct. All anchors work and to what degree is the essence of what we've been talking about for a long time. And evolution will continue in anchor design as well as all other things** ...thankfully. So I admire a manufacturer that is offering me the best product he can at any given time. But I do feel that both my XYZ anchors are to some degree prototypes. Again** ...good point*** ...but I think taken in the wrong way perhaps.
Thanks and a long time ago I asked for a "design" section. Not that much interest I guess. Less now than there was at one time I think. More interest now in "fun" stuff and play than serious stuff like design and engineering.
Rambo? Probably not but the darn thing is dangerous. I came close to mutilation of myself several times and wonder if the XYZ will go by by in the courtroom.
You were there*** ....do you remember my request for the design category? I know it would seem like OTDE to many and we do have BoatDesign.net. but many have interest and little knowledge there. It seems TF is better now. Remember the fights we used to get in??? I duked it w Marin many times but I was just foolish enough to tangle w him. Wer'e friends now but a lot of hot water went under the bridge. But I miss the more meaningful topics we had in the past. That new fellow started a good one about the three things we like and dislike about our boats. The spell checker was better then than now.
I don't remember horns w you ha ha must have been harder on you**** ....sorry. Don't remember what it was about. Do you think we've run out of stuff to talk about? I think to a significant degree we have and the topics show that's largely true. Let me know when I ask you what kind of socks you wear.
Eric I thought your dissertation on the scope subject absolutely spot on, and am even willing to admit that all chain would probably not be the best option in the sort of places you visit, with such depth, but also often restricted swing room, and that the heavy chain/lighter chain, then nylon rode is probably the best way to go - limited only by the need then to have a drum type retrieval system, because of the differing specs of parts of the rode.
As to the XYZ, my interest lies in wondering how many mark X versions it will go through before they decide to leave well alone...?
How is your anchor winch set-up you finally got installed working for you by the way...?
The all chain thing is kinda like an engine that's too big. It's not ideal but works fine. And I can see why very few here would want to have a big ugly hydraulic reel winch on their boat ideal or not. As for me**** ....I want one. There is a guy interested in mine. Hope he buys it for a few good bucks and I will buy a new smaller one. He has a rather large Taiwan Trawler. The new winch and hyd pump will be about $4500 but I'm sort of to the point that I don't care. Talked to numerous fishermen that prefer the Bruce anchor to the Forfjord and one gillnetter that has a Danforth on her bow. I saw her come in at Ketchikan. Going fast using lots of throttle and placing her boat spot on every time. Did'nt notice she was a girl until she came out of the wheelhouse in her brief tank top and nice clevage. I asked her why she had a Danforth and she said it "came with the boat". About how it worked she said "works for me". And that clich'e sums up what we do most of the time. We run what we brung and usually don't change without good reason. We talk about the fine points of this or that here on TF and then go out and do what we do. My winch is working OK and it allows me to use some heavy (for my boat) chain on the end of the rode that increases my setting performance very noticeably. It makes 3 times as much noise as I was planing on and the line goes over to the port side of the drum and tries to climb over but never quite does it. Works OK. Has plenty of power though. Relative to scope any anchor that sets deep as in buried and backed down on hard at 5-1 or so scope will provide good performance at short scope up to and including moderate winds but will pull out in a gale. But type of bottom may have more to do w how an anchor burries than what kind of anchor is used. But poor anchor and poor bottom stack up leaves one w little holding power. Thanks for the "spot on" comment. Most here who don't agree remain silent. I'd like a little more positive OR negative input though.
As to the XYZ*** ...I don't want them to "leave it alone". If they can make it better why not?
"As to the XYZ ...I don't want them to "leave it alone". If they can make it better why not?"
Fair comment, except it makes you feel, surely, that you just have to buy their latest version, so how many past 'marks' 1,2,3, etc...are you going to be left with? I guess you could link them all together somehow and set them in a nice spot with a buoy, and make them a 'semi-permanent' mooring...? They'd by then weigh enough...
If the anchor I have has the kind of holding power I think it does I don't think I'll be needing any new design but of course I would then have the option. But it may be (hopefully) like having a car w 350hp and having the option of an up grade to 375hp. Good enough is**** ....well ...good enough. Some people NEED to have the latest, hottest and best things all the time***** .......deal me out. Actually I will have a 2nd XYZ after buying another pointed fluke tip** ...long story. Is Rex still thinking of selling has anchors in the US?