Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-14-2011, 03:57 PM   #41
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: 10,265
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
Conrad wrote:*The Traveller has much smaller windows and ...*
*The McKeen Motor Car company made self-propelled railroad passenger vehicles which were heavily influenced by boat design: "turned-over boat bottom" for a roof, round, port-hole*windows, sharp front (bow), and round back (stern).* Not aware they carried Rocnas, however.* The aerodynamics of the design sucked in exhaust through open windows/ports, thus the oft-used nickname "skunk."



*
__________________
Advertisement

markpierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2011, 08:45 PM   #42
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,724
Rocna revealed

So whats the latest on the Rocna's? Looks like they are made out of cheap and weak steel but I've heard nothing bad about the design except the're weak on short scope and don't bury very deeply but hold very well despite that. Mostly because of the short scope issue I think the Supreme is a bit better but the Rocna is still one of the best performing anchors in the world. I modified my Supreme a bit by grinding off the extra part of the roll bar that sticks down below the bottom of the fluke and filled a hole about the size of an egg (w JB weld) so it should penetrate and dig a bit deeper than standard. I hav'nt tried the XYZ yet. Maybe I'm afraid.

PS,** I knew that Smith guy was a snake!


-- Edited by nomadwilly on Thursday 14th of April 2011 08:46:37 PM
__________________

Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2011, 09:39 PM   #43
Grand Vizier
 
Delfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,497
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:
So whats the latest on the Rocna's? Looks like they are made out of cheap and weak steel but I've heard nothing bad about the design except the're weak on short scope and don't bury very deeply but hold very well despite that. Mostly because of the short scope issue I think the Supreme is a bit better but the Rocna is still one of the best performing anchors in the world. I modified my Supreme a bit by grinding off the extra part of the roll bar that sticks down below the bottom of the fluke and filled a hole about the size of an egg (w JB weld) so it should penetrate and dig a bit deeper than standard. I hav'nt tried the XYZ yet. Maybe I'm afraid.

PS,** I knew that Smith guy was a snake!



-- Edited by nomadwilly on Thursday 14th of April 2011 08:46:37 PM
There are serious questions about whether the steel in the Rocnas is as advertised, or an extension of hype.* There are credible allegations from users and former employees on the topic, and tesing is being done to verify what the truth is (not by Rocna of course, but by others).* It is verified that Rocna has made up their RINA certification, and fiddled with test results.** So, I guess the jury is still out.* Craig Smith's toxic tactics seem to have backfired, but because the design came up with by his Pa is pretty good, Rocna still has many supporters.* What is clear is that most boaters will not test their anchors in extreme conditions, so deficiencies in manufacturing may not surface for most boaters.* For those for whom it does surface, the consequences may not be pleasant.

Just speaking for myself, I wouldn't trust an anchor made by Rocna anymore than I would buy an investment from Bernie Madoff.

*
Delfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 04:24 AM   #44
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,534
RE: Rocna revealed

Since we have been anchoring boats for thousands of years , and playing with lightweight anchors since Mr Danforth, the fellow with a "new" anchor ,( that costs more per pound than a commercial aircraft ) is always suspect of a con job.

Danforth, CQR, (not Chinese knockoffs) of a pound a foot of boat or more ,will usually do the job far better than the latest "story anchor.

Your anchoring gear is your Insurance, would you by insurance from some guy that claims to have just invented insurance?
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 04:31 AM   #45
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: 6,671
Send a message via Skype™ to Peter B
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:
So whats the latest on the Rocna's? Looks like they are made out of cheap and weak steel but I've heard nothing bad about the design except the're weak on short scope and don't bury very deeply but hold very well despite that. Mostly because of the short scope issue I think the Supreme is a bit better but the Rocna is still one of the best performing anchors in the world.
Quote:
_________________________________________
Quote:
Hi Eric, as an aside, and for what it's worth re that scope issue... I have the actual mag copy PMM April 2006, page 72, where in the article by the dashews called "Getting There', they describe how they have found the vessel after considerable sea miles, and on the subject of anchoring, Steve says, and I quote...
Quote:
"As you might expect, we like really big anchors.* Our primary hook is 250 lbs (A Rocna), and the advantage of this in everyday conditions is that we can use very short scope after it is set - typically two to one."
Quote:
Just thought you might like to hear that from an actual user. Hey...here's me defending Rocna, when I have one of it's main opposition, but I just like to correct mis-information.
*

*
Peter B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 08:09 AM   #46
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,376
RE: Rocna revealed

Peter

As best I understand, Dashew was refering to the weight/size of the anchor allowing lesser scope, not the anchor "design." He said the same about his overweight Bruces* he used for decades, lesser scope can be allowed if the anchor is oversized. Once again, size matters.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 08:34 AM   #47
Guru
 
hollywood8118's Avatar
 
City: Port Townsend Washington
Country: USA
Vessel Name: " OTTER "
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander Europa 40
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,482
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:


Hollywood, you may want to debate with Steve his sailing vessel's ability to sail to weather. He is very accessible and I'm sure he'd take you up on a bet.
*Years ago, when Steve ... who I very much admire by the way... made the switch to power from sail was calling his new boat a " unsail boat ". At the time I did drop him a note which to my surprise he did respond to.* He must of been having a bad day when he responded to my comment when I said " call it what it is... A power boat".** Regarding the Deerfoot and Sundeer sailboats. They are awesome boats... but just as most cats.. they don't do well close hauled. You need to sail the polars to really make time.* I also believe I was quoting Dashew on the 5 kt rule.*

Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I do prefer fast boats, cars airplanes to slow ones for their sleek lines.* But in a voyaging boat I would rather have a Delfin than a Windhorse.* The Windhorse is fast... no doubt. But it is limited in every other function.*

Luckily we all like different boats or it would be really boring to walk around a marina

HOLLYWOOD

*
hollywood8118 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 09:01 AM   #48
Guru
 
Codger2's Avatar
 
City: San Diego
Country: US
Vessel Name: "Sandpiper"
Vessel Model: 2006 42' Ocean Alexander Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,421
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
hollywood8118 wrote:
Luckily we all like different boats or it would be really boring to walk around a marina
*I can honestly say that I have never seen an ugly boat! Sure, I know there are home builts and modifications to production boats that may be offensive to the purest but when one considers what the mission (intent) was for the designer/builder, even a tree house sitting on a raft looks good to me. (Well, maybe not GOOD, but certainly understandable.)

*
Codger2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 09:02 AM   #49
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,724
RE: Rocna revealed

Tom,**** "size matters"*** ....indeed. Not even I will argue about that. But once an anchor is set weight does not matter** ...just size, strength and design. As to short scope work I think design is the dominant factor. The Danforths, the Supreme and the Super SARCA seem to have a significant edge here and think short scope performance is important. The Fortress and the Supreme (according to tests) retain 90% of their holding power at 5-1 when at 3-1. The SARCA has less holding power but can be dependant to perform well on any bottom and at any scope in any conditions. Of course that's not true but it looks like the SARCA can come much closer to doing that than any anchor in the world. FF has a strong point about anchoring and insurance. I saw an ad for Danforth anchors in that 1953 Motor Boating mag and they were implying it was an anchor that had been depended upon for a long time THEN (1953). In pleasure boats there is no more popular anchor than a claw and they are challenging the Forfjord in the Alaska fishing fleet. Just because some puffed up jerk like Rocna Smith comes along and tells us all other anchors except his are garbage is nonsense.
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 09:19 AM   #50
Guru
 
JohnP's Avatar
 
City: Toms River
Country: USA
Vessel Name: D U E T T E
Vessel Model: 1996 36' Island Gypsy
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,109
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
FF wrote:

Your anchoring gear is your Insurance, would you by insurance from some guy that claims to have just invented insurance?
********* Excellent Question--- My feelings exactly!* JohnP

*
JohnP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 09:46 AM   #51
Guru
 
Moonstruck's Avatar
 
City: Hailing Port: Charleston, SC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Moonstruck
Vessel Model: Sabre 42 Hardtop Express
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 7,854
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
JohnP wrote:FF wrote:

Your anchoring gear is your Insurance, would you by insurance from some guy that claims to have just invented insurance?
********* Excellent Question--- My feelings exactly!* JohnP

*

*I may be guilty of that. Last year* Moonstruck's insurance is underwritten by Lloyds of London

*
Moonstruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 10:48 AM   #52
Guru
 
JohnP's Avatar
 
City: Toms River
Country: USA
Vessel Name: D U E T T E
Vessel Model: 1996 36' Island Gypsy
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,109
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
Moonstruck wrote:JohnP wrote:FF wrote:

Your anchoring gear is your Insurance, would you by insurance from some guy that claims to have just invented insurance?
********* Excellent Question--- My feelings exactly!* JohnP

*

*I may be guilty of that. Last year* Moonstruck's insurance is underwritten by Lloyds of London

*
The jury is still out on this one.* Insurance may predate Lloyds by quite a few centuries. lol********* JohnP
*

*
JohnP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 11:08 AM   #53
Guru
 
Moonstruck's Avatar
 
City: Hailing Port: Charleston, SC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Moonstruck
Vessel Model: Sabre 42 Hardtop Express
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 7,854
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
JohnP wrote:Moonstruck wrote:JohnP wrote:FF wrote:

Your anchoring gear is your Insurance, would you by insurance from some guy that claims to have just invented insurance?
********* Excellent Question--- My feelings exactly!* JohnP

*

*I may be guilty of that. Last year* Moonstruck's insurance is underwritten by Lloyds of London

*
The jury is still out on this one.* Insurance may predate Lloyds by quite a few centuries. lol********* JohnP
*

*

*According to my info, the pirates probably invented insurance or would you call it protection.* Lloyds is credited with inventing the first modern day insurance.* They are still at it.* Have any space shots you want insured?

*
Moonstruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 11:12 AM   #54
JD
Guru
 
JD's Avatar
 
City: New Bern NC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Stella Di Mare
Vessel Model: Mainship 34t
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,702
RE: Rocna revealed

Moonstruck wrote:

"According to my info, the pirates probably invented insurance or would you call it protection.* Lloyds is credited with inventing the first modern day insurance.* They are still at it.*"

So are the pirates it seems.
JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 01:12 PM   #55
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,534
RE: Rocna revealed

Open a shop in my old area of the Bronx , and you will probably have lots of folks selling "insurance"!
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 02:04 PM   #56
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: 10,265
RE: Rocna revealed

This makes my life easier.* My Coot is coming with a 33-pound Bruce-like anchor which is undersized, but should be fine for*my initial boating activities*for sheltered, lunch-hook, mud-bottomed conditions.* But when I upgrade and with Rocan*no longer*"in the picture," I'm now considering only two choices: heavier Manson's Supreme or Ray (Bruce-like).* What will probably "swing" the decision (pun intended)*is the ability for the anchor to remain buried or reset itself*when there are wind/current changes.
markpierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 09:51 PM   #57
Grand Vizier
 
Delfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,497
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
markpierce wrote:
This makes my life easier.* My Coot is coming with a 33-pound Bruce-like anchor which is undersized, but should be fine for*my initial boating activities*for sheltered, lunch-hook, mud-bottomed conditions.* But when I upgrade and with Rocan*no longer*"in the picture," I'm now considering only two choices: heavier Manson's Supreme or Ray (Bruce-like).* What will probably "swing" the decision (pun intended)*is the ability for the anchor to remain buried or reset itself*when there are wind/current changes.
*Mark, my own experience with different Bruce/Claw/Ray type anchors is that they work really well if heavy, as in over 100#.* In fact, they are probably hard to beat in that class since the weight gets them dug in and once dug in, they present perhaps the biggest surface area in resistance to drag. In the smaller sizes, the new generation anchors can't be beat for quick setting in most conditions.* You mentioned the Manson, but I wouldn't rule out the Fortress, which always tests well, and if the Sarca Excel is ever available in North America, that would be my choice.

I have been criticized in private messages for raising the question of the reliability of Rocna in their commercial claims.* While the question of metallurgy is still being tested to see if former employees, current customers and former vendor claims are accurate regarding sub-standard materials, Rocna's dishonesty in other claims is pretty hard to question.* I came across a posting on another site that sums up the situation much better than I could, and I'll offer it as an excellent summary comment on the issue until other credible test results are in and available.* This is from a guy name Maine Sail, who has posted some very favorable videos on the Rocna that you can see on Youtube.* In fact, he likes the design very much.* However, he is also aware of the issues I have raised, and responded in this way to a straightforward question on whether he would use a Rocna or a Manson on his own boat. The 'Steve' referred to is Steve Bambury, CEO of Rocna.
<h2 class="posttitle icon">*</h2><blockquote class="postcontent restore"> Originally Posted by nikonf3blue
Maybe Mainesail could "put this all to bed" and tell us what anchor is he going to hang off his bow this Spring. Cheers K.Brown
Answer:



<blockquote class="postcontent restore">It will be my Rocna. The big "but" is, will I continue to recommend this product to others? Perhaps I will in the future, IF Rocna decides to play HONESTLY I may. For now their misleading "Sail Data" and the claims they are stronger than a Manson Supreme I find unsupported and misleading. Steve has made changes to the RINA claims, which is excellent, but it should have never been intentionally worded like that in the first place and was only changed when folks picked up on the dishonesty.

Both of these points still go unsupported and the sail data lacks a clear and concise methodology of their interpretation of the data and what data points were "selected" to arrive at those numbers. Steve's explanation DOES NOT work any way I have sliced and diced the data. The "Our anchor is stronger, and yours is abysmal" rhetoric has now finally been challenged by Manson. To this challenge there has been no real response from Rocna head quarters, which leads me to only two scenarios;

1) The claims that the Rocna is stronger were flat out bogus?
2) They already know the answer and will not get on camera only to see their product beat by the Manson Supreme adn eat crow?


I have been through the Sail Data line item by line item and can't for the life of me figure out how or where they came up with that data that would remain a fair and objective analysis of the data. I would LOVE a DETAILED line by line explanation of which data points were used to make that graph.

It is still a great anchor, you won't hear me say otherwise, but I can't stand behind a manufacturer who intentionally tries to mislead customers, WHEN THERE IS NO NEED TO DO SO, no matter how good the product especially when there is another product so similar, for less money, and has a Lloyds "certifications" of SHHP, not that it really matters for beans but if you are going to claim it, when you don't have it, then I guess it's fair game.

Show me it is stronger, and be HONEST with your Sail Data Set, and lose the Pit Bull/Playground Bully attitude and defamatory behavior towards your competitors and I may continue recommending a Rocna. I don't personally see ANY of those items happening so I will continue to recommend the MS for now...

Sadly a good anchor has been the innocent road kill of Craig's antics.


*
Delfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 10:00 PM   #58
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,724
Rocna revealed

<a>file:///Users/erichenning/Desktop/Practical%20Sailor%20Large%20Anchor%20Tests-5.pdf</a>

<a>Mark,</a>

Have you seen this anchor test? The Ray did very well but this is a Manson test and many think claws only work well if they are very large and not so good if they are smaller like what most of us would use. I think that notion is bunk and can see no reason for that to be true. In the bay area a Fortress would prolly be the best you could buy but there is the storage problem. A solution for that problem would be to install a hawse hole in the bow like the guy did in the picture below. Would look very nautical also. The Supreme would prolly be the best "swinger" but mud can get thick enough to plug the roll bar hole. I'm not you but if I was I'd consider a steel Danforth and the hawse hole. Or Windline makes bow rollers for Danforth types.












-- Edited by nomadwilly on Friday 15th of April 2011 10:12:51 PM
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	sth71062.jpg
Views:	62
Size:	137.8 KB
ID:	5696  
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 10:24 PM   #59
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: 10,265
RE: Rocna revealed

Quote:
Delfin wrote:
*Mark, my own experience with different Bruce/Claw/Ray type anchors is that they work really well if heavy, as in over 100#.* In fact, they are probably hard to beat in that class since the weight gets them dug in and once dug in, they present perhaps the biggest surface area in resistance to drag. In the smaller sizes, the new generation anchors can't be beat for quick setting in most conditions.
*Carl,

I agree that the Bruce-types aren't as efficient as far as raw holding power for a given weight.* Still, the lunch hook for my 24-foot auxiliary sailboat was an 11-pound Bruce.* It never failed in that role, and was always quick-setting in the mud-bottoms of the Bay Area.

*
markpierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 10:44 PM   #60
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: 10,265
Rocna revealed

Quote:
nomadwilly wrote:
<a>Mark,</a>

Have you seen this anchor test? The Ray did very well but this is a Manson test and many think claws only work well if they are very large and not so good if they are smaller like what most of us would use. I think that notion is bunk and can see no reason for that to be true. In the bay area a Fortress would prolly be the best you could buy but there is the storage problem. A solution for that problem would be to install a hawse hole in the bow like the guy did in the picture below. Would look very nautical also. The Supreme would prolly be the best "swinger" but mud can get thick enough to plug the roll bar hole. I'm not you but if I was I'd consider a steel Danforth and the hawse hole. Or Windline makes bow rollers for Danforth types.
*Eric, I had re-read that article earlier today.* I've found even extremely light (like 11-pound) models set quickly but*I've read and been told they*need to be heavier than many other anchors for the same holding capacity.

At this point, I'm not willing to spend the thousands of $$ installing a hawse hole and redoing the windlass, particularly to accommodate an anchor design I'm not enamored with.

While the Danforth types are very efficient for a given weight, they*don't appear to be*very versatile as to their usefulness in some bottom types.* I don't like their having moving parts ready to pinch a body part nor their capacity for bringing up lots of sticky mud.* They also tend to "sail" and not dig in when they move through the water as when*one is attempting to anchor in a strong current.* Also, I'm concerned about*their capability to reset themselves.* I'm willing to "settle" for a heavier, less efficient design avoiding those negatives.

I wonder if spending three,*six*times or more for a*forged anchor like the Manson*Bruce-like compared to a cast Lewmar Bruce-like*is worthwhile.*

*


-- Edited by markpierce on Friday 15th of April 2011 11:36:22 PM
__________________

markpierce 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 owners, seems you need a better anchor markpierce Anchors and Anchoring 251 05-26-2015 06:44 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 03:58 AM.


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