Anchor fluke modification

Ok, first off, my anchoring experience is much less than many others. I have used a CQR and did not care for its lack of holding power and inability to reset at times, I have a fortress and like it in certain muddy conditions but mostly I rely on my Rocna and have it on our Willard 30 as well as our GB 36. My question after looking at a Sarca on line is, what do you think of an anchor like the Rocna/Sarca et al that had their "fluke" that pivoted on the wide end to dig in and set in mud like a Danforth? Sort of a combo kind of anchor. No real idea if that is structurally sound or even a consideration, just a thought that developed after seeing pics of the anchors. Thinking more of steel instead of the lightweight Fortress but this is just a virtual discussion anyway.

Keith wrote:

"what do you think of an anchor like the Rocna/Sarca et al that had their "fluke" that pivoted on the wide end to dig in and set in mud like a Danforth?"

Are you talking about the anchors laying on their side while setting or initially penetrating the bottom? And how this compares to the sharp fanged Fortress? I think the SARCA regularly penetrates from an upright (shank up) position. However Manson Supremes and Rocnas set laying on their sides most of the time if not always. I think there is considerable differences in how much scope is required to present the fluke tip to the bottom ... and I don't see how any anchor can penetrate w it's fluke tip up off the bottom.

Eric, probably not thinking about all the details of set. Just pictured a Rocna type with its fluke that pivoted a little like a Danforth/Fortress that hold better in Mud. I have had my Rocna take longer to set in mud than my fortress. So my brain just pictured a Rocna with a movable fluke like the Fortress and wondered if it made any sense. I was actually hoping you'd jump in and give some feedback/thought on this. I like the Rocna and the Fortress and carry both to meet our needs.

I think I see what you mean now Keith.

A hinged shank on the Rocna that would allow the throat angle to vary much like a Danforth. That's the most interesting concept I've heard on anchor threads. Yes ..... I think it's fairly obvious one could have excellent short scope performance w the Rocna if it had a wider throat angle. You're dream'in in the right direction I think but there's a problem. First of all the anchor would always open to the maximum throat angle w any pull on the rode. Secondly the wider throat angle would present the fluke at an angle closer to 90 degrees to the direction of travel when setting and thus be unlikely to penetrate the bottom unless it was absolute soup.
I'm sure that Rocna, Delta and many others that make anchors of that type have thought of that and tested their anchors and found that setting becomes a problem w wider throat angles. If not then there's an opportunity here for someone.
My Danforths have set at very short scope at times and in my head they shouldn't. I don't understand why. I think the upwards pull on the shank would keep the flukes above the bottom. I've never anchored w no chain at all and most likely the chain keeps the flukes down. And w the Rocna types the chain keeps the shank down where the fluke tip tears into the bottom. I have for several years concluded that the main purpose of the chain is to weight the shank down so the anchor can do it's job.

As to your needs I think most any anchor will suffice.

Thanks Eric. We have used all chain rode on our Willard and our GB and have not had a problem setting, except in Garrisson Bay with the Willard. It took 3 tries to get it set in the mud/clay there. Next time on our boat I will check the angle of the Rocna to see what it is compared to our fortress. Not trying to reinvent anything here once again,must playing with a thought.

I'd really love to see how they all really set sometime. Get the scuba gear and go watch them.