Where's the Boss

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Nomad Willy

Nomad Willy

Guru
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
18,745
Location
USA
Vessel Name
Willy
Vessel Make
Willard Nomad 30'
Certain anchors get most of the attention both good and bad.

When the Boss first came out I was very impressed and expected great performances but it seemed to Peter out. And then it went dead ... at least as far as I knew. Now I see more and more of them. I saw one on a GB in Seattle and yesterday in LaConner. Both looked big.

I'm in the process of modifing my Manson Supreme and what I have planed will change the Supreme into something that will look surprisingly like the Boss.

There must be TF members here w a boss anchor that could tell us something about it. Many have been asking for real world input. What is out there on the Boss.
 
I too am somewhat interested, though I don't necessarily need to replace the Manson Supreme I currently use. There are several offerings by several vendors in this line.


Rocna Vulcan
Mason Boss
Sarca Excel (too a degree. It has the tabs, however it has the convex shape of a plough/delta rather than the concave shape of the traditional Rocna or Manson Supreme.


As these lines were introduced to provide an answer to those who's anchor and line/chain run through the bow pulpit rather than over it, I'm curious to see how they're setting and holding performance compares to their predecessors.
 
Another thing I thought of is that the Spade's Oceane and it's decendant the Sword look even more like the Boss. The Oceane and Sword weren't super performers (in tests) either but I've only seen one test result. Perhaps they are popular in Europe. I'll look in my test srashes when I get home.
 
Being a new member and having read various things about the Boss I can add that two years ago I bought a Boss because it looked like once dug in it should hold very well (however it is ugly). I came from a Bruce which probably worked and held 90% of the time (I always set the anchor). I try to anchor in sand or mud and I boat in Florida and the Bahamas.

Now that's out of the way. I'm impressed by this anchor. It digs in easy and I have never dragged even in a shift of wind or current. I use a chain rode and once the chain comes tight the boat is fixed. My boss is 60 pounds, I also have an Ultra of 60 pounds but have never had to use it. The only place the Boss doesn't hold is about 150 feet off Elliot Key when the bottom is scoured and is coral that can't be penetrated. Anchored in sand one day in 25 knot winds I never moved and the next day I motored up over the anchor to retrieve it and I could see was chain. That boat would never move.

Disclaimer, I always read good things about the new style anchors with the roll bar but could perceive a problem in getting the anchor to dig in past that bar.

Hope this helps some.
 
"Certain anchors get most of the attention both good and bad."

When someone wants to sell steel that costs a few hundred bucks a TON with some welding for $10-$20 a pound , there is a requirement for HYPE.

That last years HYPE is long forgotten is not unusual.
 
When I stand at the waters edge on the beach, my feet with only tiny motion seem to work their way into the sandquite rapidly.

I find it curious why some think that a rollback anchor can't manage to wiggle in an inch or so thick rollbar.

Sure lots of pictures don't show it burying when others do...but maybe it doesn't have to. The holding power tests no matter how flawed seem to show rollbar nexgen anchors holding their own against the competition. :D
 
I considered the Boss as a strong contender in my selecting a new anchor. I was intrigued by the shape of the flukes that mimicked a roll bar without having a roll bar. The only thing I could find on it was a video that West Marine put up. It was early in the introduction period, and there were no actual usage reports. I still think that it could possibly be a very good choice, and your report backs that up. However, there isn't much material on usage available, or at least I haven't found it.

I chose the Sarca ExCel, and couldn't be happier with it. It's good to hear of your good experience with the Boss. I will be interested in anymore info. Thanks for posting.
 
psneeld,
You are right but it's common knowledge that the deeper a given fluke gets burried the greater holding power it will have. But the real world tests and user experience shows that they hold quite well. Very well in tests as very high tension is applied to the rode and moderately so w user testimony as almost all user testimony is in benign conditions.

The roll bar is bad for performance but other features that help an anchor perform are also bad for holding power. The fluke won't control itself to maximize it's effectiveness so it's a matter of choosing one (or more) non-fluke features for control. Few of these features help holding power very much and some not at all.

In the example of a roll bar anchor like your Supreme the Vulcan and Spade use a weighted chamber to basically do the job of the roll bar. Since there's plenty of anchors w each of those features it's obvious that it dosn't make much difference which is employed to control the anchor.

And how deep an anchor gets burried is important but the bottom may only allow several inches of penetration so probably the biggest fluke wins. A bottom w only several inches of sand on top of a hard pan perhaps a Danforth would outperform most all others as there will be more of the loose sand on top of the flukes. With a hard bottom but soft enough for your Supreme to penetrate it's likely it will hold better as more sand will be on top of the fluke. A bigger area of sand w the Dan and perhaps the same amount of sand vertically w the Supreme.
You can stand on the hard beach and all the wiggling of toes in the world may not produce any penetration at all.

IMO the road to the best anchor for a skipper to use is a good balance of holding power and setting dependability ... along w scope flexability and the way the anchor mounts the bow.
 
Last edited:
Psneeld. I certainly value your opinion and can see where in soft sand you would be 100% correct but what about other than soft sand such as mud or grass growing on the surface of the bottom. My thought was even if the roll bar impeded the burying of the anchor a few % I wanted an anchor that gave me the largest advantage in staying in one spot.
Even if your correct and the bar has zero effect what did I lose by going to a bigger surface anchor that doesn't need the bar to right itself?
Not to put any other anchor down because I'm not that familiar with but a half dozen but I'm very satisfied with the Boss. I too would like to see more reports on various anchors as I prefer to anchor out.

Moonstruck I agree about the lack of reports on the Boss. The one I read was about a sailboat on the west coast of Florida and the young couple seemed to find it very good. I was sold on it because my feeble brain told me that the larger the surface that you could bury the better an anchor should hold (if you can bury it) so I took the plunge. After all having a boat means I overpay for everything. LOL. After two years I'm happy and would buy it again.

Thanks.
 
Bigfish wrote;
"Even if your correct and the bar has zero effect what did I lose by going to a bigger surface anchor that doesn't need the bar to right itself?"

You gained a bigger and heavier shank that impedes penetration as much as the roll bar.
 
"You gained a bigger and heavier shank that impedes penetration as much as the roll bar."

Possibly you are correct, without having both shanks to weigh and measure I'm not sure.

Thanks.
 
For openers just observe the length of the Vulcan shank. A very long curve. And so long it was deemed weak by it's makers so they added extra metal on the outboard edges to form a bit of an I beam. Beautiful pice of work but heavy and dragy. Contrast the Spade. It's got the same length shank but hollow built up fabrication. Much lighter. And formed like a knife. But the Spade has a very heavy ballast chamber. And that probably impeeds penetration more than a roll bar.
 
I posted this on the Vulcan thread a month or so ago, but here it is again as this thread seems to have a paucity of owner reports. I like the Boss.


David


"I was a big fan of the original roll bar Rocna and used it for a hundred or so effortless sets one spring and summer on a previous boat.

So I purchased a Manson Boss which is very similar to the Rocna Vulcan for my Mainship Pilot 34 where the roll bar won't fit on the bow sprit.

I have only anchored a few times, but so far it is working as well as the original Rocna: sets easily and holds well. The shape with deeply upward curved flukes makes the roll bar unnecessary. The roll bar did two things I believe: It helped right the anchor if it hit the sea bed upside down. And it added weight to the front of the plow to help it dig in. The tip on the Boss is weighted and the curved flukes help it right itself."
 
Eric. I really not familiar with the Vulcan except that it resembles the Boss which I am familiar with, the maker even machined a slot so you can back the anchor out of being entrapped (I don't use that feature). I have used it a few hundred times and the only drawback is that it is ugly. I'll accept ugly in return for faithful (not talking about wives). LOL
 
Bigsfish said:
Eric. I really not familiar with the Vulcan except that it resembles the Boss which I am familiar with, the maker even machined a slot so you can back the anchor out of being entrapped (I don't use that feature). I have used it a few hundred times and the only drawback is that it is ugly. I'll accept ugly in return for faithful (not talking about wives). LOL
Click to expand...

As the great American philosopher, Dr. Hook, sang, "When you're in love with a beautiful woman, watch your friends". Baker is a nervous wreck.:D
 
And the other rock song from my days "Make an ugly woman your wife and be happy the rest of your life". Ugly is relative. LOL
 
Here's a photo of our Rocna just after it was set in the Bahamas. I always jumped in the water to check after anchoring, but scraped up my leg one day so had to stay out of the water for a while. I asked my wife to swim down & take a picture for me (what a woman!). By morning, after a 20-25 knot blow overnight, all you could see was chain disappearing into the sand.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2906 copy.jpg
    IMG_2906 copy.jpg
    108.2 KB · Views: 72
Bigfish wrote;
"Eric. I really not familiar with the Vulcan except that it resembles the Boss"

Most here (including me) think the Vulcan looks like a Spade. Indeed they both have a ballast chamber, a look alike fluke and the same shaped shank.
The Vulcan was extremely ugly in it's prototype stage but bloomed at production. I like the anchor but not fond of the makers.
I would think the Boss is very close to ideal in design but haven't seen it perform in a test. Would love to see Steve of SV Panope get ahold of the Boss .. or/and the Vulcan. I think he's out cruising.

Your testimony anchoring "a few hundred times" w the Boss sounds very good indeed. I assume you consider it a very good high performance anchor. As I mentioned earlier "OldDeckhand" here on TF speaks highly of the Boss too.
 
Last edited:
Eric

"I assume you consider it a very good high performance anchor. "

Yes, it the best anchor I've ever owned anchoring in my area. I try to avoid grass and reefs. My last anchor, a real Bruce, I though was treally good but this is great. Before the Bruce I used Danfort anchors and they worked but never trusted them on a change of tide and in the Bahamas where I often anchor in mini channels I always used a Bahamian more. I have so much faith in the Boss I only drop that in the middle and have full faith it will reset and I'll be in the same spot in the morning.
I think all the new class of anchors are really good and the difference between them are no very great.
BTW I considered the Spade and was ready to buy it but I didn't like the attitude of the person at the Ft Lauderdal boat show.
I'm not scared to buy new technology even if I don't understand it. LOL
 
dvd said:
Here's a photo of our Rocna just after it was set in the Bahamas. I always jumped in the water to check after anchoring, but scraped up my leg one day so had to stay out of the water for a while. I asked my wife to swim down & take a picture for me (what a woman!). By morning, after a 20-25 knot blow overnight, all you could see was chain disappearing into the sand.
Click to expand...


I think that's maybe the only pic I've seen with the rollbar almost completely buried. Think I remember Noelex's pics mostly (all?) showing the rollbar more exposed? And maybe it's the only report I've read of the rollbar eventually being completely buried.

I haven't followed the Rocna's closely, but have seen theory about the rollbar impeding further penetration...

Wish we could dive usefully on our anchor from time to time to see what's what. It's so muddy here, it would take more than just a quick free dive. My impression, though, is that sometimes our anchor is completely buried including the whole shank along with about 2-3' of chain. Usually takes forever to clean all that goop off...

-Chris
 
I replaced my 33b claw with a 25lb Manson Boss recently on my Mainship 30.

My cruising area is CT Shoreline, Long Island, Block Island, Cuttyhunk, Napatree etc.

The Manson is performing very well so far this season. It seems to set quicker setting and I have difficulty retrieving once it is set.

The jury is still out but so far I am happy with my decision.

Cheers
 

Attachments

  • Manson.jpg
    Manson.jpg
    58.4 KB · Views: 148
ranger42c said:
??

Why or how would ballast impede penetration?

-Chris
Click to expand...

Chris,
It's a chamber. Wedge shaped under the tip of the fluke. Probably several square inches on the aft end. 2" X 2" about. Kinda like a big Dracula heart peg. Driving a chamber filled w lead through anything but mud takes quite a bit of force. An anchor is in a fluid .. the sea bottom. Sand, rocks ect mixed w water. Some is very hard packed and some like sand is very fluid (loose).

Most pics of anchors in catalogues tend to not show the ballast chamber. Take a look the next time you have a chance.
The Boss, Rocna and Supreme don't have a weighted tip as in a ballast chamber. They have a fluke that is thicker at the tip and does provide a small bit of ballast but it is still very thin compared to a ballast chamber. And made of steel .. not lead. So the toe or tip of the fluke remains knife like and penetrates well.


Thanks Willpep,
Most here prefer the shackle having the pin through the chain as you have done and many (at least) use a bolt through the slot to keep the rode at the boat end of the shank.
 
Last edited:
Nomad Willy said:
psneeld,
"You are right but it's common knowledge that the deeper a given fluke gets burried the greater holding power it will have."

There are so many factors that contribute to or deter from a fluke penetrating deep in the seabed. Manufacture design, weight, fluke sharpness, fluke angle, fluke tip pointing into the seabed, initial set speed and pull, scope and finally the actual seabed substrate. I will not criticize another company's design or anchor. I only promote the benefits of the Super MAX Anchor. There are many excellent anchors for the consumer to consider. Some anchors can and do outperform other anchors. However, and many do not want to hear this, the difference in holding performance between the higher performing anchors is often the user's skill in proper setting the anchor. Not every anchor sets the same. This is why I advocate using the manufacturer's recommendation on proper setting procedure for a specific anchor rather than one method that deviates from the manufacturer's recommendation. I feel it is wrong then to say an anchor does not perform well when the setting technique is not consistent with the manufacturer's recommended setting procedure.

"And how deep an anchor gets burried is important but the bottom may only allow several inches of penetration so probably the biggest fluke wins."

Most "experts" agree that one should outfit a boat with the largest anchor possible or reasonable on a boat. I tried some various heavier sizes (2) of the Super MAX on my Willard 40. On the 112 lb version, all I did was drop the anchor on to the seabed and I was set. However, it did not fit on my bow comfortably or reasonably. On the 75 lb version, it fit better on the bow and still set almost immediately. I could use that model but the 50 lb model still combines the setting and holding characteristics I want with the appearance that is appropriate.

"IMO the road to the best anchor for a skipper to use is a good balance of holding power and setting dependability ... along w scope flexability and the way the anchor mounts the bow."

Well said.

Steve
Click to expand...
 
Nomad Willy said:
Chris,
It's a chamber. Wedge shaped under the tip of the fluke. Probably several square inches on the aft end. 2" X 2" about. Kinda like a big Dracula heart peg. Driving a chamber filled w lead through anything but mud takes quite a bit of force. An anchor is in a fluid .. the sea bottom. Sand, rocks ect mixed w water. Some is very hard packed and some like sand is very fluid (loose).

Most pics of anchors in catalogues tend to not show the ballast chamber. Take a look the next time you have a chance.
The Boss, Rocna and Supreme don't have a weighted tip as in a ballast chamber. They have a fluke that is thicker at the tip and does provide a small bit of ballast but it is still very thin compared to a ballast chamber. And made of steel .. not lead. So the toe or tip of the fluke remains knife like and penetrates well.
Click to expand...


Hmmm.... Fat peg versus thin blade theory. OK, thanks. Hadn't paid close attention to the various pictures.

Is that all theoretical critique, or have you actually experienced that with ballasted anchors?

I'd imagine the "quite a bit of force" would maybe be more of a handicap on some boats than on others. We've got a fair amount of horsepower and boat weight...

-Chris
 
ranger42c said:
I think that's maybe the only pic I've seen with the rollbar almost completely buried. Think I remember Noelex's pics mostly (all?) showing the rollbar more exposed? And maybe it's the only report I've read of the rollbar eventually being completely buried.
Click to expand...

I used to see that all the time when I'd dive on my Rocna.

Unless of course I was anchoring on hard bottom with a thin layer of sand over it.
 
Capt.Bill11 said:
I used to see that all the time when I'd dive on my Rocna.

Unless of course I was anchoring on hard bottom with a thin layer of sand over it.
Click to expand...


Interesting. A completely-buried anchor always seems (to me) to have an advantage!

-Chris
 
Not always Chris,
Buried won't have much holding power in a very soft bottom.

Chris wrote;
"Hmmm.... Fat peg versus thin blade theory. OK, thanks. Hadn't paid close attention to the various pictures.

"Is that all theoretical critique, or have you actually experienced that with ballasted anchors?"
Never used a ballasted anchor so it's "theoretical critique". My "theory" is that if you can get a non-ballasted anchor to set why use extra weight. Seems just "extra" to me. Why not get a bigger fluke anchor instead?

Steve,
In a few words (but not limited to) how do you set the MAX.
Steve wrote;
"Most "experts" agree that one should outfit a boat with the largest anchor possible or reasonable on a boat.
I could carry an 80lb Claw on my W30 but why do that when lots of anchors under 25lbs will hold the boat in a 50 knot wind? So I don't consider that "expert" advice. Perhaps it was a long time ago.
 
Last edited:
OK. I need to educate myself here. In a real soft bottom what creates holding power if not being buried?

Thanks.
 
Mostly fluke area.

But fluke sharpness, fluke to shank or throat angle, fluke aspect ratio, shank slenderness and others elements of design are significantly involved. But mostly fluke area. And w a given fluke area and thickness of and the weight of apendages (shanks, stocks, roll bars ect) all take away fluke area as the weight of appendages needs to be subtracted from the overall weight of the anchor. So for a given anchor weight all appendages and ballast subtract from the surface area on the anchor. So from a standpoint of anchor performance (generally speaking) the anchor w the smallest and most knife like form of appendages and little or no ballast will be the best performer. And any appendage or ballast needs to increase performance more than an increase in fluke area (matching the weight of the added feature) or fluke area is better.

But basically fluke area is king in soft bottoms. Look at the Chesapeke Bay Mud test on this forum.

Anchors like the Super SARCA, Super MAX, Danforth, XYZ, Fortress, Bulwagga and Davis Tallon are all excellent in mud. There are others too but no anchor is good in really soft mud except Fortress or Danforths.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Adopo
Supreme Court Upholds Back-Door Denials of Boat Insurance Claims
Replies
6
Views
1K
SteveK
SteveK
DavidM
Liability as Captain or Crew
Replies
21
Views
3K
Hippocampus
H
JoeKel
Liveaboards in south Florida - What are our rights?
2
Replies
57
Views
10K
rwidman
rwidman
S
Krogen Krogen manatee 36 - pre buy
Replies
5
Views
730
Mac2
Mac2
jhance
Where to drop anchor when stern tying?
Replies
8
Views
2K
hollywood8118
hollywood8118

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom