Chesapeake Anchor Holding Power Test

My roll bar anchor (Supreme) has come up clean but I don't use it much.

Only big load of mud I've pulled up was on a Danforth.

One designer of a roll bar anchor.....what about the other's and their opinions?

Still on the Rocna website...
Features of the Rocna Original:

1. Instant set: The roll-bar ensures that it always lands on the ideal angle for penetration, plus reinforces the blade for massive strength"

Sometimes you have to invent your own problems to solve...

I taint no anchor slut! Began happily engaged then happily married to Danforths and that anchor design since late 50’s. Haven’t yet tried one other type; see no need.

Fortress Anchor interests me considerably with its 45 Degree capability, mud palms, and light weight. I see it as Danforth design on steroids.

I’m (slowly) in process of fooling around with some “mud-bottom-setting” anchor modifications; on lightweight aluminum "Viking" anchor (Danforth design manufactured in 1970’s +/-). Planning to purchase an FX-23… for mud bottom in SF Delta. I just sold a classic (original) 30 lb Danforth and still have four anchors aboard, 2-Danforths, 2-Danforth design. FX-23 will replace at least one maybe two!

From reading this exceptionally interesting thread as it has grown I feel confident that there are several well designed anchors available. Bottom condition and its general composition tends to potentially place more need for one design anchor than another.

IMHO… Having anchored hundreds of times over decades, with Danforth design anchors, in many different bottom conditions on both coasts, and, successfully 99.5% of the time - - > It’s how you gently release your anchor into the water allowing it to properly settle toward the bottom while you feed the rode as boat slowly backs away to point of approximately seven to one scope. Then resting a moment (2 to 5 minutes – depending on circumstances) with boat in neutral while anchor begins its own set via draw of current/wind. Then, remaining in idle place boat in reverse to better set anchor and slowely increase reverse power to make sure anchor set is well positioned; always keeping eye on land items to determine if anchor is pulling-through or if it is setting firmly! Once you feel anchor is well set the scope can be reduced to five to one. I feel that should be the least scope and only if needed due to wind/current swing conditions in relation to other factors in close proximity.

Correctly setting an anchor (of any type) is an art and it's actually pretty simple. All that is required is to follow the steps, take it slow, and have patience. Each time I set anchor gives me a thrill to do it correctly and successfully. I love to watch the anchor as it gently "float/glides-downward" away from boat's bow and the rode is being released at just the right amount and tension to keep the anchor in best position (angle) when it reaches bottom.

Many years ago dad and I were just a great pair for anchoring. He on the bridge, me on the bow! We had successful fun every time!!

I call this “Anchor Whispering”

Happy Anchor Setting Daze! - Art

manyboats said:

My roll bar anchor (Supreme) has come up clean but I don't use it much.

Only big load of mud I've pulled up was on a Danforth.

Click to expand...

Hummm - Danforth design was setting well into mud... I take it!

Djbangi said:

You are quite right, not a problem at all - only the designer of the anchor thinks so and he has put his money where his heart is, designed an anchor without a roll bar and denigrate his original design - you are right, just a fairy tale.

Either you think the designer great (as he designed your anchor) or you think him an idiot because he now says the design is flawed - you have chosen your route, we have the message, the designer thinks otherwise..

Click to expand...

I think what Rocna have done was quite predictable. Their previous model does not fit a number of boats because of the roll bar . Releasing a non roll bar model is quite logical.

I doubt if we will ever hear from Rocna which anchor they feel is superior. Manufacturers are generally reluctant to rate their models. Even Manson who produce almost every type of anchor available are very coy about which models they consider are superior.

The comments in the patent application are nothing extraordinary. No one claims the roll bar does not have disadvantages as well as advantages. Non symmetrical need some means of righting themselves and adopting the correct setting position and there is no perfect answer.

If the new anchor had been released first and they were writing a patent application for a roll bar, no doubt it would say something like:

The roll bar ensures the anchor adopts the correct setting attitude without the weight and bulk associated with a large amount of ballast on the tip. The thinner tip profile allows the anchor to penetrate hard and weedy substrates and the weight can be distributed to increase the fluke area.

It is great to see so many new anchors released. The Steel Spade is an excellent anchor and the Ultra is very good. The release of a new anchor with similar characteristics to these two anchors is promising. Time will tell.

Note : I am currently testing a Mantus anchor that has been provided at no charge.

angus99 said:

Just perfect!

Hey, mods. What about changing "Anchors and Anchoring" to "Anchor Sluts"? A great way to increase viewership with all the mis-directed Google hits you'll get.

Click to expand...

Aaah…no…I think we'll pass on that Angus. Thanks for the thought though...

Noelex said:

I think what Rocna have done was quite predictable. Their previous model does not fit a number of boats because of the roll bar . Releasing a non roll bar model is quite logical.
I agree.
I doubt if we will ever hear from Rocna which anchor they feel is superior. Manufacturers are generally reluctant to rate their models. Even Manson who produce almost every type of anchor available are very coy about which models they consider are superior.
Also correct...
It is great to see so many new anchors released. The Steel Spade is an excellent anchor and the Ultra is very good. The release of a new anchor with similar characteristics to these two anchors is promising. Time will tell.
Absolutely - good that the search goes on...
Note : I am currently testing a Mantus anchor that has been provided at no charge.

Click to expand...

Please keep us informed re the Mantus experience. However….Noelex, on a different tack, or minor thread hijack….
Is your avatar name related in any way to the popular range of NZ designed and largely built range of yachts, the outstandingly most successful being the Noelex 25 trailer yacht..?

Hi Peter.
The Noelex 25 and 30 were great yachts.
I owned one many moons ago when the internet first began. I used this name to identify the sort of yacht I owned and as people had come to know me by this identity, it seemed wrong to change when the boat was sold.

The Mantus is proving to be an excellent anchor, but I won't sidetrack this thread.

Noelex,

Thank you for the tip. One of my favorite anchors (Spade) has introduced not only one but two new anchors. The "Spoon" seems an appropriate name for a Spade but it appears to be a very close copy of the German Bugel. Not overly impressed but the "Seablade" looks positively brilliant. Has the traditional Spade shank profile but the roll bar is different than the Supreme or Rocna. It's smaller and shorter. Great promise I'd say but I thought that about the Manson Boss and haven't seen any great press yet. Yup really like that Seablade. I may even be able to see one as Fisheries Supply in Seattle is a Spade dealer.

Noelex you are right. If you want to be recognized then changing your avatar is counterproductive. Keep it the same and people will recognize you instantly w/o thinking. Musical avatars are confusing.

Like the Rocna I don't care for the promoters of the Mantus but it seems promising.

Peter B said:

Please keep us informed re the Mantus experience. However….Noelex, on a different tack, or minor thread hijack….
Is your avatar name related in any way to the popular range of NZ designed and largely built range of yachts, the outstandingly most successful being the Noelex 25 trailer yacht..?

Click to expand...

Peter, Noelex has an extensive and very good thread with lots of pictures comparing/promoting his 120# Mantus to a great many smaller anchors here: Photos of Anchors Setting. - Cruisers & Sailing Forums

For consistency of performance the Mantus results in the Fortress test were interesting.

Sadly Noelex bent the shank on his Mantus, which he downplayed, but from the evidence it was bent under less than arduous conditions and it was one of the new shanks. The fact that the roll bar also bent on the Chesapeake trials combined with the weak shank is not a good story.

Anyone know of an anchor model that never had a shank bent?

I work for a salvage, diving company and I have seen hundreds of recovered anchors of all types...many of all makes with bent shanks.

Mainly Danforth types...even fortresses...luckily they get replaced easy.

Djbangi said:

Sadly Noelex bent the shank on his Mantus, which he downplayed, but from the evidence it was bent under less than arduous conditions and it was one of the new shanks. The fact that the roll bar also bent on the Chesapeake trials combined with the weak shank is not a good story.

Click to expand...

As I recall, we had a discussion on another forum about the Mantus shank and we both thought it unlikely the shank of the Mantus would hold up in normal use. That was an unwelcome opinion to express from the point of view of moderator/promoters of that hook, but I am surprised that the "new improved" shank also bent. Are you sure about that? The Mantus seems like a good design if you can accept the limitations of a hoop style anchor, although manufacturing materials can turn a good design in to a poor performer, no matter how much its promoters try to pretend otherwise. The Fortress is the exact opposite - an ok design made a great deal better with the use of better materials and execution. Perhaps Mantus will take the same path at some point?

Delfin said:

As I recall, we had a discussion on another forum about the Mantus shank and we both thought it unlikely the shank of the Mantus would hold up in normal use. That was an unwelcome opinion to express from the point of view of moderator/promoters of that hook, but I am surprised that the "new improved" shank also bent. Are you sure about that? The Mantus seems like a good design if you can accept the limitations of a hoop style anchor, although manufacturing materials can turn a good design in to a poor performer, no matter how much its promoters try to pretend otherwise. The Fortress is the exact opposite - an ok design made a great deal better with the use of better materials and execution. Perhaps Mantus will take the same path at some point?

Click to expand...

No I'm not sure as Noelex has provided no explanation.

Mantus claim to have changed all shanks to the HT version by Dec 2013 (its on their website). Noelex, in early Sept 2014, had had his Mantus for 5 months. This suggest he received it in March. He is in Greece so it might have taken a month to get to him. The anchor was shipped in late Jan or Feb. Why would an anchor maker send an anchor with an 'old' and questionable shank for evaluation?

I think Noelex said the anchor bent after use in 20 knots of wind (though it might have bent on retrieval - but he made no mention of a difficult retrieval).

In the absence of any other explanation its the new shank.

The Mantus shank profile is about 60% of the width of a Rocna, Delta, Excel shank and will have 60% of the strength - assuming the same steel. Noting that the Excel shank uses steel stronger than either the Rocna or Delta. For its weight the Mantus has a larger fluke than any of the others - which will impose higher loads if lifted, broken out, too quickly (but shanks should be designed to accommodate this.

Many shanks bend - but not in 20 knots of wind.

Noelex...what do you think bent that shaft?

I hate speculation....

Djbangi said:

No I'm not sure as Noelex has provided no explanation.

Mantus claim to have changed all shanks to the HT version by Dec 2013 (its on their website). Noelex, in early Sept 2014, had had his Mantus for 5 months. This suggest he received it in March. He is in Greece so it might have taken a month to get to him. The anchor was shipped in late Jan or Feb. Why would an anchor maker send an anchor with an 'old' and questionable shank for evaluation?

I think Noelex said the anchor bent after use in 20 knots of wind (though it might have bent on retrieval - but he made no mention of a difficult retrieval).

In the absence of any other explanation its the new shank.

The Mantus shank profile is about 60% of the width of a Rocna, Delta, Excel shank and will have 60% of the strength - assuming the same steel. Noting that the Excel shank uses steel stronger than either the Rocna or Delta. For its weight the Mantus has a larger fluke than any of the others - which will impose higher loads if lifted, broken out, too quickly (but shanks should be designed to accommodate this.

Many shanks bend - but not in 20 knots of wind.

Click to expand...

Perhaps Noelex will clarify which kind of shank he had originally. His anchor follows the bigger is better approach in that it would be at least one size larger than the Mantus chart recommends, so one would expect a more robust performance.

Regarding shank bending, I know of one bent Ultra shank prior to the addition of internal reinforcement, but I have never heard of an Excel shank bending, nor a Rocna when their shank was made of Bisalloy. Too springy, I guess. The Fortress shank has bent, but I put that down to the fact that they will bury themselves so well you have to expect that to happen once in awhile.

psneeld said:

Noelex...what do you think bent that shaft?

I hate speculation....

Click to expand...

A thin mild steel shank would be a guess.

Photos of Anchors Setting. - Page 23 - Cruisers & Sailing Forums

psneeld said:

Noelex...what do you think bent that shaft?

I hate speculation....

Click to expand...

+1

Noelex was asked to elaborate on another forum, he chose not to respond. In the absence of any comment, and confirmation by testing of the steel, we are left with Noelex and Mantus statements (I simply quote their statements) - and I'm not quite sure why their statements are speculation. they seem very clear and unequivocal to me.

Its is very easy and cheap to test for the steel.

The original was based on mild steel, around 350 MPa, the new shank is meant to be based on ASTM 514 A, around 800 MPa. The 2 steels are like chalk and cheese and can be easily distinguished (on a well found yacht) within maybe 30 minutes).

Delfin said:

...I know of one bent Ultra shank prior to the addition of internal reinforcement, but I have never heard of an Excel shank bending, nor a Rocna when their shank was made of Bisalloy. Too springy, I guess. The Fortress shank has bent, but I put that down to the fact that they will bury themselves so well you have to expect that to happen once in awhile.

Click to expand...

No one wants a bent shaft.
If an anchor shaft bends, is it ok to straighten it and continue use, OR once bent, even straightened, it is then more prone to bend and time to get a new one, and send the old one to Eric for the collection.
And of course, if it needs replacing, with what?

BruceK said:

No one wants a bent shaft.
If an anchor shaft bends, is it ok to straighten it and continue use, OR once bent, even straightened, it is then more prone to bend and time to get a new one, and send the old one to Eric for the collection.
And of course, if it needs replacing, with what?

Click to expand...

In the job I just left working for a salvage business that retrieves and uses hundreds of anchors a year...especially during major oil spills...

I would have to say that an anchor properly bent back into shape has a good chance of being completely serviceable. But in many cases...the anchor is not bent back exactly and does not seem to be "as good as new"...the geometry is bad and the worst seem to be the danforths and similar designs. Any narrowing of space on those designs tends to fiddle with the ability for the flukes to rotate properly and set...even the smallest clamshells or grass wads seem to keep them from setting...or one fluke bent down seems to make them flip or pivot before setting.

psneeld posted:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceK
No one wants a bent shaft.
If an anchor shaft bends, is it ok to straighten it and continue use, OR once bent, even straightened, it is then more prone to bend and time to get a new one, and send the old one to Eric for the collection.
And of course, if it needs replacing, with what?

In the job I just left working for a salvage business that retrieves and uses hundreds of anchors a year...especially during major oil spills...

I would have to say that an anchor properly bent back into shape has a good chance of being completely serviceable. But in many cases...the anchor is not bent back exactly and does not seem to be "as good as new"...the geometry is bad and the worst seem to be the danforths and similar designs. Any narrowing of space on those designs tends to fiddle with the ability for the flukes to rotate properly and set...even the smallest clamshells or grass wads seem to keep them from setting...or one fluke bent down seems to make them flip or pivot before setting.

Rex Wrote:

Scott thats interesting, maybe our Super Sarca solves some of those problems as we are packing a good order for Canada as we speak for the oil spill containment booms.

Why I dont know as they would we be quite expensive as we send them air mail, every year a couple of times they order these so keep your eyes open and let me know if you see any.

Regards Rex.
__________________

Advertisement

BruceK said:

No one wants a bent shaft.
If an anchor shaft bends, is it ok to straighten it and continue use, OR once bent, even straightened, it is then more prone to bend and time to get a new one, and send the old one to Eric for the collection.
And of course, if it needs replacing, with what?

Click to expand...

Shanks can certainly be bent back, but they will be even weaker after than they were to begin with. You can't restore the crystalline structure of the steel once deformed unless heated to plasticity, even if you can restore the original gross shape of the bent piece. Mantus has an advantage of being able to replace the shank, and perhaps that was their original intent - manufacture a weaker product that is cheaper, then replace the bent shanks after people complain. I would speculate that is the case, although I remember on Cruisers Forum when a number of posters thought the shank was substandard, the engineer for Mantus posted a chart with his calculations that their shank was as strong as anyone else's, so maybe they thought that really was the case. I believe my calling the calcs "bogus" earned me my first official reprimand from that site. I only wish I had received a plaque or something because I was kind of proud of that, but no. These calcs were subsequently disappeared from the thread by agreeable Mantus promoting moderators and shortly thereafter Mantus announced they would be replacing the mild steel shanks with ones made of stronger stuff. My guess is that it is still weaker than competitors simply because its cross section has less steel than the competitors, but maybe that doesn't matter to most people under most anchoring conditions.

The basic design certainly looks like an improvement to me over the Rocna or Manson, and the Fortress tests bear that out (at least in that seabed) but perhaps at the cost of a huge hoop that is also apparently weak enough to bent. What I would like to see is a version made up with a shank of the same 900 MPa Knox uses in his hooks. Personally, I wouldn't want one even then because I don't think hoop anchors are the optimal design. Something Peter Smith and I now agree on.

Northern Spy said:

Sometimes you have to invent your own problems to solve...

Click to expand...

In all the posts on this thread, this is the smartest, most intelligent, most meaningful, most insightful, and most accurate one of the bunch.

I've got a meeting coming up with some of the communicators and brand managers I work with, and I'm going to use this thread as an example of how speculation by people with little more than armchair theory to work with can spin what in actuality is total guesswork and bias into something that can come across as having a fair degree of credibility.

It's a great example of how the perception of a product can be affected by made-up problems stemming from made-up situations.

Incidences of ASTM 514 A (or HT) shanks bending are notable by their absence - but I'd like to see someone bend one straight in the absence of a workshop.

If you bend a mild steel shank you can bend it straightish sufficient to allow you go and find a new anchor (or new) shank. My thought of bending a HT shank would be you would be on a hiding to nothing and either you need an alternative anchor (which would need to be rated as the same size as the one you bent) or you can no longer anchor.

If you are a 'one anchor' man - I'm not quite sure what you do with your vessel when you are on the beach bending the shank straight?

Seems a good case for reliable anchors (in the first place) and for carrying at least one spare, correctly sized.

Marin said:

In all the posts on this thread, this is the smartest, most intelligent, most meaningful, most insightful, and most accurate one of the bunch.

I've got a meeting coming up with some of the communicators and brand managers I work with, and I'm going to use this thread as an example of how speculation by people with little more than armchair theory to work with can spin what in actuality is total guesswork and bias into something that can come across as having a fair degree of credibility.

It's a great example of how the perception of a product can be affected by made-up problems stemming from made-up situations.

Click to expand...

Uhhh, I think you might have missed Spy's point.....

Rex said:

psneeld posted:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceK
No one wants a bent shaft.
If an anchor shaft bends, is it ok to straighten it and continue use, OR once bent, even straightened, it is then more prone to bend and time to get a new one, and send the old one to Eric for the collection.
And of course, if it needs replacing, with what?

In the job I just left working for a salvage business that retrieves and uses hundreds of anchors a year...especially during major oil spills...

I would have to say that an anchor properly bent back into shape has a good chance of being completely serviceable. But in many cases...the anchor is not bent back exactly and does not seem to be "as good as new"...the geometry is bad and the worst seem to be the danforths and similar designs. Any narrowing of space on those designs tends to fiddle with the ability for the flukes to rotate properly and set...even the smallest clamshells or grass wads seem to keep them from setting...or one fluke bent down seems to make them flip or pivot before setting.

Rex Wrote:

Scott thats interesting, maybe our Super Sarca solves some of those problems as we are packing a good order for Canada as we speak for the oil spill containment booms.

Why I dont know as they would we be quite expensive as we send them air mail, every year a couple of times they order these so keep your eyes open and let me know if you see any.

Regards Rex.
__________________

Advertisement

Click to expand...

Sure...

Delfin said:

Uhhh, I think you might have missed Spy's point.....

Click to expand...

I think his point is exactly what he said. In my opinion, this thread is the best example of people basing their opinon of a product (in this case, anchors) on total guesswork, made-up theories, and baseless speculation that I think I've ever seen.

What makes it even more.... unique.... is that the whole thing is about a bent piece of metal that's supposed to dig into the bottom and keep a boat floating in the same place. So when I start reading about how the principles of aerodynamics help keep this bent piece of metal stuck in the bottom, that's when it really becomes worthy of including in a communications/branding meeting.

Marin posted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delfin http://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s42/chesapeake-anchor-holding-power-test-15941-32.html#post272537
Uhhh, I think you might have missed Spy's point.....


I think his point is exactly what he said. In my opinion, this thread is the best example of people basing their opinon of a product (in this case, anchors) on total guesswork, made-up theories, and baseless speculation that I think I've ever seen.

What makes it even more.... unique.... is that the whole thing is about a bent piece of metal that's supposed to dig into the bottom and keep a boat floating in the same place. So when I start reading about how the principles of aerodynamics help keep this bent piece of metal stuck in the bottom, that's when it really becomes worthy of including in a communications/branding meeting.


Rex Wrote:

Best way to settle all of the tooing and throwing on the Mantus is for Greg to have his anchors proof tested and type approved, whether it be for S/H/H/Power or lesser, “High Holding power” at least you then know what you’re buying.

You know it would be a couple of years back now, I think on SAIL Net, Greg said he could understand peoples concern re bolted shank, and shank strength, Greg said he was going to have Lloyds test and certify his anchors to put these concern’s to bed, (or words to that effect) , Still hasn’t happened or we would not be having these discussions, once certified if someone bends a shank then the anchor is not at fault as it has been built to a standard, shanks still bend but less.

To be certified with the above by either approval type tells the customer you have a well made tested anchor, it is to a standard, this is way better than nothing, it means most of the arguments can be resolved Re shank strength, I say this because proof testing will sought out anchor design and steel quality, proof testing is an absolute killer in deforming a shank, IT NOT ONLY TESTS THE STEEL BUT THE PROFILE AND SHANK DESIGN, if anyone thinks they will easily pass this proof testing then I suggest they do the Exercise, remember this has to be carried out by a licensed or NATA approved company.

If you think a company could buy this piece of paper I would be happy to say dream on, buying the piece of paper in this day and age you would have to be not only brave but silly, everything you do these days there is more accountability.

Regards
Rex.

Some issues have been raised and I am happy to address them.
The different questions will need a few posts to answer, but bear with me and I will try to cover all the areas.

Firstly I do object to any suggestion that I downplayed the situation or provided no explanation.

Mantus sent me the anchor at no charge, but I have promised everyone a complete warts and all report. I have included photos of every single set of the anchor and rather extensively documented the bent shaft explaining exactly how it occurred (and I will repeat those details here).

I just counted the photos and I have posted 21 photos of the Mantus with the bent shank. These photos will show up in google searches often without people realising that this was the old mild steel not the current high tensile ATSM 514 shank.