Capt.Bill11
Guru
Yeah the setting issues are odd. But if it was very soupy mud I guess I could see it. They also didn't mention as I recall if they were using those mud shoes you get with a Fortress on the Fortress at the time of the test.
Chesapeake Anchor Holding Power Test
- Thread starter Anchor Brian
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Anchor Brian
Senior Member
Capt.Bill11, from the image of the Fortress, it didn't look like the Mud Palms were installed for whatever reason. We have included them inside the box with every anchor for the past 20 years or so, and with instructions to permanently install them.
Brian
Capt.Bill11
Guru
Interesting that you say that the mud palm should be installed permanently. Did that recommendation change over the years? For some reason I recall that it was optional in the past.
Anchor Brian
Senior Member
The Mud Palms were initially an option in the early years (late 80s-early 90s) and were available for free to anyone who called or sent in a card.
Capt.Bill11
Guru
Great, I remember something totally useless from decades ago. Now if I could only remember where I left my car keys yesterday.
brian eiland
Guru
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2013
- Messages
- 930
- Location
- USA & Thailand
- Vessel Name
- RunningTide
- Vessel Make
- 37 Louisiane catamaran
Just discovered this subject thread, and I'm reading thru it.
Long ago when I first moved to Annapolis Md to get involved in the boat business I lived aboard my 47' wood ketch which I anchored in the harbor of Annapolis (pre moorings). I had a sun awning over the deck, so my 'windage' at anchor was pretty substantial. We would get these summer squalls ever so often, and I was always fearful of the boat dragging its anchor,...which it did very often.
So what anchor was I using? I had discovered an anchor down in Fl that I used quite successfully out thru the Bahamas for 9 months. It was a relatively new product 'Wishbone' anchor (I'll see if I can dig up an old pic).
It was great in that sand covered coral of the Bahamas. It's single point fluke was well balance in line with the anchor rode, and it would quickly find a place to dig in. It would always lay 'flat' with its fluke pointed right at the ground, and on either face (upside down or rightside up). It would never foul its own anchor rode. And if it broke loose upon swinging it would quickly find another place to grab on to. BUT, what was its shortcomings? Annapolis harbor would test that. It's fluke area was just TOO SMALL for that soft mud on the bottom of the harbor. It would drag thru that soft mud when the wind really got the boat tugging at it.
The Danforth style won out, much better fluke area for the same weight/size of anchor.
With that in mind I eventually had a chance to test out a lighter weight version of the Danforth....the Fortress. My experience with these anchors down in the Keys was that they were just too light to grab the bottom quickly....they tended to skip along the bottom for a greater distance than I preferred. And what had me most worried about that situation was, if I were to swing around at anchor at night and the anchor become dislodged, how would it be on getting ITSELF reset fairly quickly. I was very much less than enthusiastic.
brian eiland
Guru
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2013
- Messages
- 930
- Location
- USA & Thailand
- Vessel Name
- RunningTide
- Vessel Make
- 37 Louisiane catamaran
Wishbone Anchor
Yes it was discussed previously on this forum, and here is a pic:
Yes it was discussed previously on this forum, and here is a pic:
Last edited by a moderator:
With that in mind I eventually had a chance to test out a lighter weight version of the Danforth....the Fortress. My experience with these anchors down in the Keys was that they were just too light to grab the bottom quickly....they tended to skip along the bottom for a greater distance than I preferred. And what had me most worried about that situation was, if I were to swing around at anchor at night and the anchor become dislodged, how would it be on getting ITSELF reset fairly quickly. I was very much less than enthusiastic.
And the lesson is to use a different anchor on that type of bottom??
FF
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2007
- Messages
- 22,552
For the folks that anchor overnight with a single anchor a RESET test of some sort would be interesting.
Say a 180deg shift in the line load ,
or a pull to breakout and then distance to resetting and holding a modest load.
Both would be interesting.
Say a 180deg shift in the line load ,
or a pull to breakout and then distance to resetting and holding a modest load.
Both would be interesting.
There are some who have posted with very real and critical comment on what Fortress have planned and there is much passion and advice.
Anchor testing is fraught with problems and given that there is some passion here and I like to see problems being addressed positively then:
If you think there are better ways to to test anchors, that address the various issues that have been raised, then it would be invaluable for 'the industry' (however it is defined) to have the benefit of the passion and knowledge available.
Can I suggest:
If you think there is a better, more fair, more accurate - whatever way to test anchors then make a proposition, think positive.
Anchor makers, the media, the boating public want a fair and acceptable way to test anchors - if you know of a better way - come up with ideas. Not ideas on what answers are needed but how to get them.
Its easy to be critical - much less easy to satisfy the sceptics.
But secondly any ideas need to be based on some form of reality - so consider how the testing is to be funded. If you think funding 'too high' then maybe rethink the testing protocol to get closer to what is economically feasible.
Maybe this needs a new thread (if so can you send me a PM in case I miss it
).
A second point - Fortress are to address anchor testing in soft mud. To me this is slightly refreshing. All, most of the anchor tests on the newer models appear to have had a slight focus toward hard seabeds and mud has been ignored - but maybe Chesapeake is an exception and soft mud only occurs there (and near where I live)
But I do wonder why soft mud has not merited attention of the anchor makers?
Finally - I confidentally expect Fortress to come out on top, but if its 10% or 20% it will be a bit of a non-event. If its greater than 30% then, to me, its real improvement (or positive). But ignoring the placing of Fortress - they have no axe to grind, other than to show Fortress is better - what will be interesting is how the other anchors - and there is a reasonable cross- section, are placed - as having no axe to grind (or furrow to plough) they, or their placings, ought to be considered fair.
And finally - Fortress have invited a cross section of the boating media, have Chuck on board and will need a decent crew to complete what is proposed. The media are not being paid (I know, I was invited and sorely tempted). People talk, there are too many to keep any shenanigans secret, there will be too many who know too much about anchor testing and Fortress know they would not survive anything but the highest integrity. To my mind the testing has merit - even if we know the answer.
Anchor testing is fraught with problems and given that there is some passion here and I like to see problems being addressed positively then:
If you think there are better ways to to test anchors, that address the various issues that have been raised, then it would be invaluable for 'the industry' (however it is defined) to have the benefit of the passion and knowledge available.
Can I suggest:
If you think there is a better, more fair, more accurate - whatever way to test anchors then make a proposition, think positive.
Anchor makers, the media, the boating public want a fair and acceptable way to test anchors - if you know of a better way - come up with ideas. Not ideas on what answers are needed but how to get them.
Its easy to be critical - much less easy to satisfy the sceptics.
But secondly any ideas need to be based on some form of reality - so consider how the testing is to be funded. If you think funding 'too high' then maybe rethink the testing protocol to get closer to what is economically feasible.
Maybe this needs a new thread (if so can you send me a PM in case I miss it
).A second point - Fortress are to address anchor testing in soft mud. To me this is slightly refreshing. All, most of the anchor tests on the newer models appear to have had a slight focus toward hard seabeds and mud has been ignored - but maybe Chesapeake is an exception and soft mud only occurs there (and near where I live)
But I do wonder why soft mud has not merited attention of the anchor makers?
Finally - I confidentally expect Fortress to come out on top, but if its 10% or 20% it will be a bit of a non-event. If its greater than 30% then, to me, its real improvement (or positive). But ignoring the placing of Fortress - they have no axe to grind, other than to show Fortress is better - what will be interesting is how the other anchors - and there is a reasonable cross- section, are placed - as having no axe to grind (or furrow to plough) they, or their placings, ought to be considered fair.
And finally - Fortress have invited a cross section of the boating media, have Chuck on board and will need a decent crew to complete what is proposed. The media are not being paid (I know, I was invited and sorely tempted). People talk, there are too many to keep any shenanigans secret, there will be too many who know too much about anchor testing and Fortress know they would not survive anything but the highest integrity. To my mind the testing has merit - even if we know the answer.
Last edited:
Anchor Brian
Senior Member
Thanks for your comments. As the time has drawn closer, and I have learned more about the writers coming aboard, I believe now, for a wide variety of reasons, that the scrutiny we will be under is going to be far greater than what I had originally envisioned.
Add to that the uncooperative nature of any common bottom like soft mud, which is found in bays, lakes, and rivers, and there is certainly a measure of risk involved.
But at the end of the day, important information will be gathered on anchor performance capability in a difficult bottom, the result of which will help boaters decide on the best product for that application.
Regards,
Brian
Last edited:
healhustler
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,198
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Bucky
- Vessel Make
- Krogen Manatee 36 North Sea
By publishing on TF the intention of Fortress to do such a test, one surely can log a reasonable sample of the skepticism in the boating public right here. I doubt that Fortress ever imagined the test wouldn't be under scrutiny. The announcement on TF about the test was a good step toward adding integrity to results much too transparent to deny.
You are absolutely right, Larry. Coming here before the test and setting out the logistics of the test, accepting the comments here and following up with explanations gives the test much more credibility than coming here after the test and saying "Here are the results and here is how we did it". At the very least, Brian and Fortress get a lot of credit for being open and upfront and being willing to discuss everything in an open forum. Many more companies should try it.
I look forward to seeing the results.
I look forward to seeing the results.
You are absolutely right, Larry. Coming here before the test and setting out the logistics of the test, accepting the comments here and following up with explanations gives the test much more credibility than coming here after the test and saying "Here are the results and here is how we did it". At the very least, Brian and Fortress get a lot of credit for being open and upfront and being willing to discuss everything in an open forum. Many more companies should try it.
I look forward to seeing the results.
__________________
THD , unfortunately it will never be that simple, Brian from being with a well respected company such as Fortress has had to battle through this lot, Brian himself is very much a man of his word, still he has had to answer the criticisms, I for one applaud him for going ahead with it given the amount of requests, skeptics, and doubts that have been expressed.
As Brian said, since he has made this test public it has attracted far more interest than one would have imagined, question is after this is all over would he do the same again.
As I am to an anchor Manufacturer I also became involved with the Marine authority’s to develop a more reliable method for testing anchors, we did achieve our goal but we to made a public statement of where and when this was going to take place.
Logistics was a major hurdle, where could it be done, three lots of permits were required, a safety contingency plan the list goes on, I haven’t even mentioned the skeptics yet let alone our enormous associated costs, un fortunately THD you will not see to many anchor test broadcast with prior public scrutiny, would I broad cast it again, never.
Keeping in mind that we accept the fact that many of the views from the forum is also a good thing, I am not complaining it’s just a question of mine, do I need it, the reason these anchor threads will continue is because an anchor design looks so simple it encourages comment, nothing brings out the passion like anchor designs, and then the claims one makes with his design.
A few years back all of you good people helped to bring to attention a shonky company making anchors out of material—steels that were inferior to that of what they had you believing, certain events with those anchors raised doubt over the strength of those steels, you the skeptics, because of your suspicions’ a great outcome was the result, they were exposed and paid the price, probably forgiven now but never the less you the public with your skepticism were responsible for poetic justice.
But this is what it is all about, all of the believers and skeptics bring about better understanding of just whom we are dealing with, allows us to examine, believe on a case by case bases, I am an anchor manufacturer, this will be a rare event, there will be plenty of anchor test by manufacturers, and magazines but very few with prior knowledge to attend.
Regards Rex.
.
I look forward to seeing the results.
__________________
THD , unfortunately it will never be that simple, Brian from being with a well respected company such as Fortress has had to battle through this lot, Brian himself is very much a man of his word, still he has had to answer the criticisms, I for one applaud him for going ahead with it given the amount of requests, skeptics, and doubts that have been expressed.
As Brian said, since he has made this test public it has attracted far more interest than one would have imagined, question is after this is all over would he do the same again.
As I am to an anchor Manufacturer I also became involved with the Marine authority’s to develop a more reliable method for testing anchors, we did achieve our goal but we to made a public statement of where and when this was going to take place.
Logistics was a major hurdle, where could it be done, three lots of permits were required, a safety contingency plan the list goes on, I haven’t even mentioned the skeptics yet let alone our enormous associated costs, un fortunately THD you will not see to many anchor test broadcast with prior public scrutiny, would I broad cast it again, never.
Keeping in mind that we accept the fact that many of the views from the forum is also a good thing, I am not complaining it’s just a question of mine, do I need it, the reason these anchor threads will continue is because an anchor design looks so simple it encourages comment, nothing brings out the passion like anchor designs, and then the claims one makes with his design.
A few years back all of you good people helped to bring to attention a shonky company making anchors out of material—steels that were inferior to that of what they had you believing, certain events with those anchors raised doubt over the strength of those steels, you the skeptics, because of your suspicions’ a great outcome was the result, they were exposed and paid the price, probably forgiven now but never the less you the public with your skepticism were responsible for poetic justice.
But this is what it is all about, all of the believers and skeptics bring about better understanding of just whom we are dealing with, allows us to examine, believe on a case by case bases, I am an anchor manufacturer, this will be a rare event, there will be plenty of anchor test by manufacturers, and magazines but very few with prior knowledge to attend.
Regards Rex.
.
Last edited:
Rex-
I appreciate your candor, and certainly can appreciate the difficulties you outlined. Each manufacturer has to weigh the costs and the benefits and the level of irritation they are willing to endure. Nonetheless, it is refreshing to have a manufacturer willing to endure us here on TF. Admittedly, we can be a cantankerous bunch! But there seems to me to be a benefit to manufacturers to coming to a forum like this and that can be done without jeopardizing the testing, complicating logistics and adding a great deal of additional cost. I am not referring only to anchor manufacturers. How may threads have complaints or discussions about how various items work when actually on a boat? Or complaints about the ergonomics of various items? Seems to me that participation on a forum such as this is very cheap pre-production research, if done correctly, for a manufacturer.
Again, thanks for the reply.
I appreciate your candor, and certainly can appreciate the difficulties you outlined. Each manufacturer has to weigh the costs and the benefits and the level of irritation they are willing to endure. Nonetheless, it is refreshing to have a manufacturer willing to endure us here on TF. Admittedly, we can be a cantankerous bunch! But there seems to me to be a benefit to manufacturers to coming to a forum like this and that can be done without jeopardizing the testing, complicating logistics and adding a great deal of additional cost. I am not referring only to anchor manufacturers. How may threads have complaints or discussions about how various items work when actually on a boat? Or complaints about the ergonomics of various items? Seems to me that participation on a forum such as this is very cheap pre-production research, if done correctly, for a manufacturer.
Again, thanks for the reply.
Hi THD,
Yes well Having a forgiving forum such as the TF encourages Manufactureres out of their cubby holes and be a little more transparent, so if compliments are flowing I think the TF is worthy with a better cut of customers than some I know.
Any way you have encouraged me THD for what it is worth to particpate when it comes to anchors, now is not the time but after Brian has finished his anchor testing I would like, but rather somone start a thread on anchor testing, I will stick my neck out by introducing our method of testing anchors,cost involved, accuracy, untold and unforseen problems and most important the method.
Keep my offer in mind as some may find it interesting.
Regards Rex.
Yes well Having a forgiving forum such as the TF encourages Manufactureres out of their cubby holes and be a little more transparent, so if compliments are flowing I think the TF is worthy with a better cut of customers than some I know.
Any way you have encouraged me THD for what it is worth to particpate when it comes to anchors, now is not the time but after Brian has finished his anchor testing I would like, but rather somone start a thread on anchor testing, I will stick my neck out by introducing our method of testing anchors,cost involved, accuracy, untold and unforseen problems and most important the method.
Keep my offer in mind as some may find it interesting.
Regards Rex.
Anchor Brian
Senior Member
Gents,
Thanks for your words of support.
Rex, I have always considered you to be a pioneer in anchor design and testing, so your words are particularly gratifying.
All the best,
Brian
Thanks for your words of support.
Rex, I have always considered you to be a pioneer in anchor design and testing, so your words are particularly gratifying.
All the best,
Brian
healhustler
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,198
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Bucky
- Vessel Make
- Krogen Manatee 36 North Sea
Rex: Thanks for your offer to contribute genuine data to this eternal debate. There are a few here who know it all, many who don't, and some who never have to. A good cross section of our society, no? In the face of real-life test criteria and data like you mentioned, even "we" might be able to agree on something.
Rex-
Thanks for the offer and I am sure we will be able to get such a thread started in the near future. As you well know, anchor threads are not hard to come by here.
I am glad you decided that we may have some value to you here. Despite our bitching, moaning and complaining about virtually all things marine, we all love it and do appreciate those companies that work to make our boating lives better (or more miserable as the case may be!).
I for one will be looking forward to your future contributions and hope we may, in some small way, contribute to your products.
Thanks for the offer and I am sure we will be able to get such a thread started in the near future. As you well know, anchor threads are not hard to come by here.
I am glad you decided that we may have some value to you here. Despite our bitching, moaning and complaining about virtually all things marine, we all love it and do appreciate those companies that work to make our boating lives better (or more miserable as the case may be!).
I for one will be looking forward to your future contributions and hope we may, in some small way, contribute to your products.
Healhustler WROTE:
Rex: Thanks for your offer to contribute genuine data to this eternal debate. There are a few here who know it all, many who don't, and some who never have to. A good cross section of our society, no? In the face of real-life test criteria and data like you mentioned, even "we" might be able to agree on something.
__________________
Larry
"I'd rather be happy than dignified".
Larry
Sounds like you have sumed me up well? thanks for all of your welcoming comments, were are going well so far, normaly mention a anchor or tetesting one, I would be ducking.
Like I said after Brian has done his testing I will look at providing detail and answering questions, if we can keep it on track we may all learn something.
If you dont hear from me just send me a PM.
Regards Rex.
Rex: Thanks for your offer to contribute genuine data to this eternal debate. There are a few here who know it all, many who don't, and some who never have to. A good cross section of our society, no? In the face of real-life test criteria and data like you mentioned, even "we" might be able to agree on something.
__________________
Larry
"I'd rather be happy than dignified".
Larry
Sounds like you have sumed me up well? thanks for all of your welcoming comments, were are going well so far, normaly mention a anchor or tetesting one, I would be ducking.
Like I said after Brian has done his testing I will look at providing detail and answering questions, if we can keep it on track we may all learn something.
If you dont hear from me just send me a PM.
Regards Rex.
Nomad Willy
Guru
Brian,
Will you be using your adjustable shank in the test?
Will you be using your adjustable shank in the test?
Anchor Brian
Senior Member
Eric, yes. We will be using the 45° shank/fluke angle for this soft mud bottom, and if there is time and an interest, we will also test the Fortress at the 32° harder soil angle to see the difference.
Thanks,
Brian
markpierce
Master and Commander
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2010
- Messages
- 12,557
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Carquinez Coot
- Vessel Make
- penultimate Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Been saying/thinking that all the time.
caltexflanc
Guru
See post 19. This needs to be done in a realistic fashion, the way a boat actually clocks.
Do boats only 'clock'? What happens in a tidal river (which might have the soft mud in which Fortress appear to be testing, have tested). What happens when a storm cell passes over and you are unfortunate enough to have the center of the cell pass directly overhead (so sudden wind shift through 180 degrees)?
As has been pointed out - many anchors given time will 'shuffle' round and stay set.
Does a well set anchor in soft mud (say) move anyway, does a poorly set large anchor perform the same way as a well set small anchor?
The options seem pretty limitless
Hopefully Fortress' recent test will give a base line from which to start - for soft mud - or raise other questions that might be more important.
Nomad Willy
Guru
Here's a reset test;
Practical Sailor Jan 2001
Best to worst;
1 Spade Model 80 .. 16.5lbs
2 Bulwagga ... 17lbs
3 CQR .... 35lbs
4 Barnacle ..25lbs
5 Delta .. 22lbs
6 Danforth Deepset .. 20lbs
7 West Performance .. 25lbs
8 Fortress ... 10lbs
9 Vetus ... 12lbs
10 Bruce ... 22lbs
11 Supermax (Adj shank) ..26lbs
12 Claw .... 22lbs
13 Supermax (fixed shank) ..26lbs
14 Nautical Engineering .. 20lbs
15 Hans C--Anchor .. 15lbs
Part of this test was holding power. Read the test.
And part of the text ...
"In the best test group, those that did not break out and moved very little (from not measurable to no more than 6"), were the Bruce, the Fortress FX-16, the Supermax (with the adjustable shank) and the Spade."
More of the text ...
"Better test results—meaning that the anchors either didn’t break out completely or that they reset them- selves very quickly in between 6" and 3'—were the Barnacle, the Claw, the Bulwagga, the Danforth Deepset, the Herreshoff Bronze and the West Ma- rine Performance2."
Practical Sailor Jan 2001
Best to worst;
1 Spade Model 80 .. 16.5lbs
2 Bulwagga ... 17lbs
3 CQR .... 35lbs
4 Barnacle ..25lbs
5 Delta .. 22lbs
6 Danforth Deepset .. 20lbs
7 West Performance .. 25lbs
8 Fortress ... 10lbs
9 Vetus ... 12lbs
10 Bruce ... 22lbs
11 Supermax (Adj shank) ..26lbs
12 Claw .... 22lbs
13 Supermax (fixed shank) ..26lbs
14 Nautical Engineering .. 20lbs
15 Hans C--Anchor .. 15lbs
Part of this test was holding power. Read the test.
And part of the text ...
"In the best test group, those that did not break out and moved very little (from not measurable to no more than 6"), were the Bruce, the Fortress FX-16, the Supermax (with the adjustable shank) and the Spade."
More of the text ...
"Better test results—meaning that the anchors either didn’t break out completely or that they reset them- selves very quickly in between 6" and 3'—were the Barnacle, the Claw, the Bulwagga, the Danforth Deepset, the Herreshoff Bronze and the West Ma- rine Performance2."
Last edited:
markpierce
Master and Commander
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2010
- Messages
- 12,557
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Carquinez Coot
- Vessel Make
- penultimate Seahorse Marine Coot hull #6
Hmm. The list doesn't appear consistent with the ending paragraphs.
Similar threads
