Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 01-27-2011, 06:51 AM   #21
TF Site Team
 
Peter B's Avatar
 
City: Brisbane
Country: Australia
Vessel Name: Lotus
Vessel Model: Clipper (CHB) 34 Sedan/Europa style
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,669
Send a message via Skype™ to Peter B
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
Markpierce wrote
Uh, my anchor will be a Bruce copy, not one of those newfangled and expensive types.* Not yet anyway.

Mark, if you have not actually bought your anchor yet, could I respectfully suggest you read what Marin has said about Bruce/Claws etc, and do yourself a favour, and get a Rocna, (as Sarca are not in the USA apparently), and you will not be sorry.* Actually, the Ultra are a damn good anchor, in fact share many characteristics of Sarcas latest* version, the Excel, but they are very pricey.* If they made a galvanised version now.......maybe different matter...?

*
__________________
Advertisement

Peter B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 07:05 AM   #22
Guru
 
City: North Charleston, SC
Country: USA
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,390
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
Conrad wrote:

A previous boat came with a Danforth that had been painted white. I didn't really think about it one way or the other until I started noticing that I could actually see it digging into the bottom when anchoring in shallow & clear water. *So about the only advantage I can see for shiny stainless is that you might be able to see it on the bottom under certain conditions. White paint is cheaper though.
Where I boat, you could only see the bottom if it was two feet deep or less.* I don't think that white paint is going to help me.

I think the stainless steel anchors (and chain) are for the marina crowd to "wow" over.
__________________

rwidman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 08:22 AM   #23
Guru
 
Codger2's Avatar
 
City: San Diego
Country: US
Vessel Name: "Sandpiper"
Vessel Model: 2006 42' Ocean Alexander Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,420
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
rwidman wrote:
I think the stainless steel anchors (and chain) are for the marina crowd to "wow" over.
I agree!* I have a polished SS anchor and it is deployed for "jewelry" impact only.
My "anchoring" anchor is stowed in the second anchor locker.

*
Codger2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 10:31 AM   #24
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,711
Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

If I had any "jewelry" to display here in Thorne Bay**** ....I'd get laughed at, sneered at or quietly snubbed. If somebody gave me an anchor like Walts I'd need to hide it. I think it's gorgeous my self though.

PS
Relative to Peter's recommendation of the Rocna it seems the Rocna is an excellent anchor but only if one has plenty of chain and scope. Mark needs an anchor for soft bottoms.
The best anchor for soft mud is the Super Max. The next on my list would be the Spade.
Next would be the Fortress or regular Danforth. At the bottom of the list would be the CQR and claws. However, I think any anchor should work well in mud that was'nt soft.
But in soft mud only one anchor works really well*** ...Super Max.

-- Edited by nomadwilly on Thursday 27th of January 2011 11:53:46 AM
Nomad Willy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 10:48 AM   #25
Master and Commander
 
markpierce's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Carquinez Coot
Vessel Model: 2011 Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,262
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
Peter B wrote:

Mark, if you have not actually bought your anchor yet, could I respectfully suggest you read what Marin has said about Bruce/Claws etc, and do yourself a favour, and get a Rocna, ...?


*
Peter, the Bruce (or the equivalent Danforth) comes with the boat as standard equipment.* I'll consider something "better" (but galvanized) whenever I feel deprived.

*
markpierce is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 11:11 AM   #26
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,711
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Mark,
With the Danforth on the Coot how would it be handled as in stowed and deployed?
Nomad Willy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 11:18 AM   #27
Master and Commander
 
markpierce's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Carquinez Coot
Vessel Model: 2011 Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,262
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Eric, the anchor will be stored on the bow's bulwark with the all-chain*rode below deck in a locker, deployed and recovered by the electric windlass.

markpierce is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 11:25 AM   #28
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:But in soft mud only one anchor works really well*** ...Super Max.
The bottom at the private island on which we have property has a soft mud bottom.* So far the Rocna has worked perfectly in it.* Sets first time, every time, and stays set.* Not saying other anchors won't do just as well, but the concave spade fluke of the Rocna is ideal in soft stuff because there is so much surface resisting the pull.* What doesn't work well in soft mud are CQRs and Bruces.* The last we know from very bad experience.

*
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 11:29 AM   #29
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
markpierce wrote:

*
Peter B wrote:

Mark, if you have not actually bought your anchor yet, could I respectfully suggest you read what Marin has said about Bruce/Claws etc, and do yourself a favour, and get a Rocna, ...?

*
Peter, the Bruce (or the equivalent Danforth) comes with the boat as standard equipment.* I'll consider something "better" (but galvanized) whenever I feel deprived.

*
For San Francisco Bay the Danforth-type anchor seems to be very popular.* Two of them were on our boat when we bought it.* I assume this is because the boating there is all in the bay and up the river, which so far as I know all tends to be muddy bottoms.* For that--- assuming it's not mud under a crusty surface--- a Danforth should be ideal.

I wouldn't trust a Bruce as far as I could spit but it obviously works for an awful lot of people.* So I think your plan of using what you get before deciding to change is a smart one.

*
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 11:44 AM   #30
TF Site Team
 
Baker's Avatar
 
City: League City, Tx
Country: Texas
Vessel Model: Carver 356
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,630
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Bruce has always worked well for me in soft mud. I think itis interesting to see all of the positive experiences of the Bruce in this thread when all of the "tests" show it is the worst. And I have seen the Supermax in action. It really is an amazing anchor in mud. The only downfall is when you bring it up, it has half the Earth attached to it.....it's always something.
Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 11:54 AM   #31
Master and Commander
 
markpierce's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Carquinez Coot
Vessel Model: 2011 Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,262
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
SeaHorse II wrote:


rwidman wrote:I agree!* I have a polished SS anchor and it is deployed for "jewelry" impact only.
My "anchoring" anchor is stowed in the second anchor locker.
"Jewelry" is right!* Compared galvanized to SS Rocna anchors -- the SS models were nearly three times as expensive.

*
markpierce is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2011, 01:21 PM   #32
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,711
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

I've got a lot of other things to do in early spring so I think I'll pass on the winch. The boat came w an oval deck pipe, a chain locker below, a Sampson post, a Danforth anchor and assoc hdwre on deck to keep it secure. The 15lb Fortress has much more area than the steel Danforth I have. I assume the Danforth was original w the boat and I've used it in at least 30 knot winds w 3-1 scope. I can use the weight savings of the aluminum anchor to add a bit more chain. No reason to believe that won't hold me up to 50 knots. For rock bottoms I'll use my Manson Supreme 17lb w about 12 ft of chain. Mid summer we'll be back to Thorne Bay and by then should know if we need better ground tackle.
Still have an experiment to do w the XYZ as well. So**** ...off to West Marine for a Fortress.
Nomad Willy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2011, 05:14 AM   #33
TF Site Team
 
Peter B's Avatar
 
City: Brisbane
Country: Australia
Vessel Name: Lotus
Vessel Model: Clipper (CHB) 34 Sedan/Europa style
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,669
Send a message via Skype™ to Peter B
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
markpierce wrote:Peter B wrote:Mark, if you have not actually bought your anchor yet, could I respectfully suggest you read what Marin has said about Bruce/Claws etc, and do yourself a favour, and get a Rocna, ...?
Peter, the Bruce (or the equivalent Danforth) comes with the boat as standard equipment.* I'll consider something "better" (but galvanized) whenever I feel deprived.

Mark, how is it possible for you to be buying a new vessel, and just have to take the anchor alternatives they supply with it?* That, 'scuse my French, is, as you guys say...dumb-arsed.* Surely with something as important as the bit that sticks you where you want to stay, and you are paying for it, it's possible to say, "sorry guys, you can keep the whatever anchor you normally put on these things, I want this type of bow set-up and one of these".....I know I would......

*
Peter B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2011, 09:40 AM   #34
Master and Commander
 
markpierce's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Carquinez Coot
Vessel Model: 2011 Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,262
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
Peter B wrote:

Mark, how is it possible for you to be buying a new vessel, and just have to take the anchor alternatives they supply with it?* That, 'scuse my French, is, as you guys say...dumb-arsed.* Surely with something as important as the bit that sticks you where you want to stay, and you are paying for it, it's possible to say, "sorry guys, you can keep the whatever anchor you normally put on these things, I want this type of bow set-up and one of these".....I know I would......


*
I like the Bruce. ...* I suppose for the same*reason Rocna users haven't upgraded to a better anchor yet.* Peter, have you upgraded yet?* Why not?<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="genmed"><tbody><tr><td width="100"></td><td width="40"></td></tr></tbody></table>

*
markpierce is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2011, 10:02 AM   #35
Guru
 
skipperdude's Avatar
 
City: Whittier AK
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Apache II
Vessel Model: 1974 Donald Jones
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,147
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
markpierce wrote:

I like the Bruce. ...* I suppose for the same*reason Rocna users haven't upgraded to a better anchor yet.* Peter, have you upgraded yet?* Why not?
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="genmed"><tbody><tr><td width="100"></td><td width="40"></td></tr></tbody></table>

*
I like my Bruce.

I did a little survey walking the docks in my harbor.**A good 75% of the boats were equipped with the same.

Could be everyone just gets the same ones the commercial fishermen use but I have had no problems with mine.

*I once set it with a 36 ft Bayliner rafted on me between two islands during a tide change. The water was moving so fast it looked like we were on step.

SD

*
skipperdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2011, 10:15 AM   #36
Grand Vizier
 
Delfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,493
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

The Bruce type seems to work fine in the heavier sizes.* I had a 44# with all chain on our sailboat, and watched it drag just off Kaanapali while we were sitting on the beach faster than you would have believed.* Delfin has a 176# Bruce and held firm in a 40 - 50 knot gusts on the west coast of Vancouver Island.

If I couldn't carry the bigger size that will set just from the sheer weight, a design that digs in quicker in lighter weights would probably be my choice, with the Rocna at the top of the list.* The Bruce was designed to anchor oil rigs and must be real whoppers for that job.* Once set, I don't think there is a better anchor than the Bruce because of the amount of metal it presents perpendicular to the directon of drag, but getting it to set seems to be a matter of its weight and bottom conditions.*

Just my experience, though.
Delfin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2011, 10:21 AM   #37
Master and Commander
 
markpierce's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Carquinez Coot
Vessel Model: 2011 Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,262
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
Delfin wrote:

The Bruce type seems to work fine in the heavier sizes.* I had a 44# with all chain on our sailboat, and watched it drag just off Kaanapali while we were sitting on the beach faster than you would have believed.* Delfin has a 176# Bruce and held firm in a 40 - 50 knot gusts on the west coast of Vancouver Island.

I had a 15-pound Bruce "lunch hook" for my 22-foot pocket cutter and it set and held, everytime, first-time in the SF Bay/Delta mud.

*
markpierce is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2011, 10:49 AM   #38
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
skipperdude wrote:
I did a little survey walking the docks in my harbor.**A good 75% of the boats were equipped with the same.

*
We bought a Bruce for our boat about two days after getting the boat for two reasons.* One, almost every powerboat in our marina had one as did a good number of sailboats, and two, its reputation for setting in a variety of bottoms.* Today, most powerboats in our marina still have Bruce anchors as do a number of sailboats.* Boats that don't have a Bruce in our marina are most likely to have a CQR.* The anchor I never see except on very old boats, particularly ones that that are rarely or never used, is the Danforth type.

There is a huge "get what everybody else gets" factor in boating and I've noticed this is particularly true of anchors.* Of course there is no way without talking to all these people if they actually USE their anchor--- I suspect most don't or rarely do.* So it really doesn't matter what's on the bow to them.* But I have noticed that more of the boats around us that are used regularly are switching away from the Bruce and CQR to newer types.

*


-- Edited by Marin on Friday 28th of January 2011 11:50:09 AM
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2011, 12:00 PM   #39
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,711
RE: Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Marin,
The Dude's talk'in about fishing boats and they do indeed use their anchors. Charter boats use their anchors frequently, sometimes several times during the course of a days bottom fishing. And they anchor deep (200') and at short scope. Your'e sure right about " "get what everybody else gets" " and fishermen sure aren't above that. But if they get something that dosn't work**** out it goes. I sorta like the claws but feel they are so popular mostly because they nest so nicely on the bow. But in this country "get what everyone else is getting ......NOW" is an extremely strong force. Remember when a huge number of people bought a new car every year just to have the bran new latest thing?* I think you got caught up in the hype on this anchor thing and would be better (or just as well) off w a claw anchor bigger than the one you had/have. I think it is/was a 33lb. If you had just gotten a 44lb claw your anchoring worries would have been over.
Nomad Willy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2011, 12:35 PM   #40
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Rocna owners, seems you need a better anchor

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:

I think you got caught up in the hype on this anchor thing and would be better (or just as well) off w a claw anchor bigger than the one you had/have. I think it is/was a 33lb. If you had just gotten a 44lb claw your anchoring worries would have been over.
I don't believe that at all.* We had a number of bad experiences with the Bruce (as do a surprising number of other people we know) and when we almost lost the boat to the thing we decided to see if there was something better.* Other boaters we talked to at the time who had Bruces related similar bad experiences and it began to dawn on us that this anchor--- which is still incredibly popular--- is perhaps not what it's cracked up to be.

At that time the Rocna was almost unknown in the US.* We'd certainly never heard of it.* We were researching other anchor types when a post to the GB forum brought the Rocna name to our attention.* We asked a few experienced boaters in our marina about it but none of them had ever heard of it either.* So we looked into it, read a lot of stuff about it, talked to the company in New Zealand, and since it seemed from all the testimonials that it* was outperforming most other anchor types on a general basis, we bought one.* They have since become much more well known and popular in this country.* But at the time we got ours--- some five years ago I think--- they were quite unknown.* So we certainly didn't succumb to any "buy what other people have" fever since at the time nobody else around us had one.

Among the people we know who have had bad experiences with a Bruce are people with different anchor weights all the way up into the 60 or 70 pound range.* Having an anchor a mere eleven pounds heavier than the one we had would have made no difference whatsoever to the experiences we had, particularly the last one.

As I've said before I am convinced the Bruce is a poor design as a small anchor.* The fact a lot of people have good luck with them is, I believe, more due to the fact that most recreational boats are never really put to the test with their anchors rather than the Bruce is an effective design when scaled down to sizes most of our boats would carry.

Designs don't always work equally well when scaled up or down.* The Bruce is, in my opinion, a design that works very well at the sizes and weights of its original purpose, which is anchoring oil rigs in the North Sea.* But taking that same design and reducing it to a few feet across and some* 30, 40, 50 pounds or so, I believe there are far superior designs that set better and hold better in that size and weight range.

When we were starting our search for a better anchor I asked a very experienced, long-time sailor and marine engineer why the CQR was so popular.* It's a puzzling design to me because it's set up to move forward in the direction of pull (like a farmer's plow) rather than resist the pull.* The only resistance to the pull is the double-fluke design's tendency to dig down as it moves forward.* But if it doesn't dig down, all it will do is move forward.* So for years I'd wondered why they were so popular.* When I asked this guy--- who has a CQR on his own 40' sailboat--- he said its popularity was due primarily to the fact it was the first anchor to come out that stowed well on the bow of a sailboat.* It's why he bought his so many decades before.* So Eric's comment regarding an anchor's popularity due to its ease of storage is right on the money in my opinion.

One of the things that really impressed us about the Rocna was the first time we saw the design everything about the design made sense to us (unlike the CQR and the Bruce).* We could see immediately how every feature worked and why it worked.* So we felt-- -and after using it for all this time, still feel--- very confident about it because its design makes total sense to us.* I'm not going to say the Rocna is the best anchor ever because I have no data to back that statement up and there are too many variables to say that any anchor is the best ever.* But in comparison to what we use to have, the Rocna is vastly superior.

-- Edited by Marin on Friday 28th of January 2011 01:49:40 PM
__________________

Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rocna revealed Delfin Anchors and Anchoring 155 10-08-2011 02:20 PM
CT-40 Owners? Tony B General Discussion 0 08-07-2011 08:01 AM
Credit where credit is due regarding Rocna Delfin General Discussion 7 07-31-2011 08:47 AM
Rocna put to bed Delfin Anchors and Anchoring 9 06-18-2011 09:48 PM
Rocna Anchor botemon General Discussion 5 10-30-2007 10:43 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012