Your thoughts on anchors

Eric, I'm not sure what you mean exactly by short scope, but the Sarca works well right down to 1 : 3 and that's often all I have to use, (unless she's really honking). Does that qualify as short scope..?

Marty,
Yes indeed the Claws are good at that. I'd get a considerably bigger Claw though. They are shy of holding power but will hold a boat at short scope in reasonable weather. I'd use a Claw in rocky bottoms too when you think you may bend a shank. May as well do that on an inexpensive anchor.

FF believes in having the right anchor for whatever occasion and your pair looks like a good team.

Peter,
For fairly nice weather 3-1 for me is fairly standard. I see no point in going to 7-1 unless 50 knot winds are predicted. But basically 3-1 is the lowest scope I'll regularly use. Of course that's w full consideration for high tide. If 3-1 would swing me over a rock and I wasn't sure about it's depth I'd rather go to 2.5-1 or even 2-1 in good weather.

After that it's time for fore and aft anchoring and I haven't done that.

But 3-1 is probably short scope for most on the forum. But short scope relative to someone that anchors at 7-1 most of the time would surely be 3-1. It's a relative thing.

I talked to a skipper a few years back and he thought most other skippers said they anchor at 5-1 but he thought most everybody actually was generally at 3-1. In other words boaters actually anchored at a much shorter scope than they claimed to not appear foolish or taking risks. Just fudging a little re what you say and what you do. I won't claim everybody's do'in it like the guy above but I'll bet quite a bit of that goes on.

One of the reasons I wanted a SARCA was for short scope and the reason I bought the Supreme is due to it's short S capabilities.

Another way of looking at short scope is knowing at what scope your anchor's performance falls off to the point that a 20 to 25mph wind would likely cause problems. That would be short scope and would vary from anchor to anchor. But the bottom would vary even more than that by a long shot.

So your question is a VERY good one as there are so many variables to broaden the range of "short scope". Anchors, bottom, weather, Boat, rode, and I'm sure there are others. Sombody here on this forum could think of 4-1 as short scope under certain conditions. Other conditions may produce a situation where only 2-1 (or less) could be considered short scope. I have anchored at 2-1 and have heard 3 or 4 others on the forum that have used 2-1. But unless I had an anchor that was known for short scope performance or if I had good experience at that scope w a certain anchor I would consider 2-1 to be SHORT ... Too short. And at times a medium scope may not be acceptable if the wind changes. So you can anchor at 2-1 and risk dragging or anchoring at 3-1 .. or so ... and risk the wind changing. I did that once and the wind changed. Bang! We hit the rock but no damage.

Most anchor tests test at 5-1 to 7-1 for long scope but they also test at 3-1. Never 4-1 or 2-1. So it appears that 3-1 is the bottom of the range of usable and safe anchoring scopes. But quite a few anchors do poorly at 3-1 in the tests. But in the tests they pull so hard it would represent extreme conditions that many or even most boaters will not encounter in years of boating.

So I'd say no. 3-1 is generally not short scope.
Close though.

One thing I do agree on is the poor estimate of most as to how much rode they have out. (Unless they have religiously marked off their rode and actually count the marks). Something I only fully realised myself when I installed a counter. I then found I was often way off as to how much I though I had out.
I can see why you place so much emphasis on short rode function, coming from where you used to be, where often you were anchoring in really deep water - the sort of depths I would just never attempt to anchor in and don't need to. Then for sure one needs a mixed rope/chain rode or the amount of chain, and therefore weight, could get ridiculous. However, in reality, most of us anchor in quite shallow water, (ie less than 30 metres, more often less than 12m, because you seek out a place that is), so all chain at at least 3 : 1 is fine under normal conditions...5 : 1 if in doubt, and 7 : 1 for a midnight screamer. It is in these conditions the newer anchors are at their best, mainly because of quick set on virtually any bottom.

By the way, I would really love to have your coment re the query I put on the XYZ anchor update thread...

Yes when we prepare to anchor we've got a lot on our minds so it's easy to forget the tide or the height of the bow above the water or where the shallowest place is in our projected swing. Lots of opportunities to overlook one of the many variables. You might be 5-1 in the north end of your swing and 2-1 to the west.

"midnight screamer"? I've only done two 50 knot "screamers" but now that I'm down south It'll prolly be the end of that .... but not guaranteed of course.

Any new word from Rex about the availability of SARCA anchors in the US?

The CQR can be difficult to set and the Rocna is proving to be awesome besides its designed by a Kiwi !!!

The CQR has been relegated to second string, injured reserve but is also available for sale..

manyboats said:

Yes when we prepare to anchor we've got a lot on our minds so it's easy to forget the tide or the height of the bow above the water or where the shallowest place is in our projected swing. Lots of opportunities to overlook one of the many variables. You might be 5-1 in the north end of your swing and 2-1 to the west.

Click to expand...

The rode/depth ratio wouldn't change when swinging on the anchor, as it relates to the anchor depth; not the boat depth. That is - unless your anchor is dragging.

AusCan said:

The rode/depth ratio wouldn't change when swinging on the anchor, as it relates to the anchor depth; not the boat depth. That is - unless your anchor is dragging.

Click to expand...

I was hoping someone else would point that out....