Rocna Vulcan anchor size for Grand Banks 42?

Group9,
Don't think so other than signs of wear and usage on the anchors.

Eric

Did you see my post 29?

Nomad Willy said:

Group9,
Don't think so other than signs of wear and usage on the anchors.

Click to expand...

That's not even it.

It's size and design. People who anchor out in all different kinds of conditions and bottoms, usually have very different anchors than people who rarely anchor out, or who rarely venture very far from home.

It's human nature. Most people don't like to buy something they don't really need. And, it's hard to justify a new anchor when all you do is day trip from marina to marina, anyway.

Bigsfish said:

Eric

Here is a question for you. Assuming your boat can easily carry the extra weight and your windless can lift the extra weight can an oversized anchor be detrimental?

Click to expand...

Yes, definitely. Specifically because you don't mention the degree of "detrimental" other than "boat can easily carry".

If one was to evaluate the average boat they would probably find that they were 25% or more overloaded w extra weight. Most any element of boat performance will be enhanced by weight reduction. Things most never think about like how promptly a boat slows or stops when throttled heavily in reverse. Lightness in a boat relative to performance is unquestionable.

Some would argue weight is a virtue. Some insignificant cases can be made. And the very essence of "trawler" is based on weight .. heavy cruiser. But "extra" weight is stupid. If you have an anchor that holds your boat what would you do w more weight? Show your friends that your anchor is really big? To grow hair on your chest .. essentially.

As I see it there's no excuse for excess weight.

Nomad Willy said:

Yes, definitely. Specifically because you don't mention the degree of "detrimental" other than "boat can easily carry".

If one was to evaluate the average boat they would probably find that they were 25% or more overloaded w extra weight. Most any element of boat performance will be enhanced by weight reduction. Things most never think about like how promptly a boat slows or stops when throttled heavily in reverse. Lightness in a boat relative to performance is unquestionable.

Some would argue weight is a virtue. Some insignificant cases can be made. And the very essence of "trawler" is based on weight .. heavy cruiser. But "extra" weight is stupid. If you have an anchor that holds your boat what would you do w more weight? Show your friends that your anchor is really big? To grow hair on your chest .. essentially.

As I see it there's no excuse for excess weight.

Click to expand...

What's the highest wind speed you have ever been caught at anchor in?

I upgraded my anchor this last time, after getting caught in an un-forecast 75 mile per hour squall in the Bahamas.

But, if I never left my home waters, I probably would have a lot smaller anchor. I know I had a smaller one on my boats back when I did only cruise close to home.

Saying the guy who only cruises his backyard, and the guy who cruises to far away places need the same anchoring capability is not really valid.

Fifty knots.

Using your philosophy why not a 200lb anchor? But then ya never know what will come along. 300lb anchor?

There's lots printed on the size of anchors to have. Read and pick a size.

And if you're paranoid and consider dragging the end of the world go all out.

With GPS anchor alarms many boats could downsize their anchor and rode. Dragging can now be almost considered an inconvience and if you're still uncomfortable post a watch.

"Saying the guy who only cruises his backyard, and the guy who cruises to far away places need the same anchoring capability is not really valid."
Where did I say that?

For those interested in some unscientific testing of various anchor brands, check out S/V Panope's YouTube videos. https://youtu.be/R2bBZ1WQSP4

Nomad Willy said:

Fifty knots.

Using your philosophy why not a 200lb anchor? But then ya never know what will come along. 300lb anchor?

There's lots printed on the size of anchors to have. Read and pick a size.

And if you're paranoid and consider dragging the end of the world go all out.

With GPS anchor alarms many boats could downsize their anchor and rode. Dragging can now be almost considered an inconvience and if you're still uncomfortable post a watch.

"Saying the guy who only cruises his backyard, and the guy who cruises to far away places need the same anchoring capability is not really valid."
Where did I say that?

Click to expand...

Well, thanks for all of those random (and, slightly weird) thoughts, but I prefer to let my experience, and my knowledge of the conditions I will be cruising in, to be my guide when choosing my anchoring gear. I hope you understand.

HaHa quarter speed,
Was pushing the envelope of thinking to get ahold of the concept of how much weight, too heavy or too light.
Years ago I designed a boat and built it. I came to a slightly interesting pause when it came time to buy the cleats. Five cleats in a typical layout. The boat was 28' long, an OB and I knew it had to be light to perform well. I wanted aluminum for obvious reasons but my beer buget wouldn't handle it. First thought was black plastic and knew I'd take flack for that. In the end I went for small galvanized cleats. And real small for fender cleats.

Living in Juneau Easy Rider's first winter was a trial of snow and wind. Anyone ever hear of the Taku Winds? Can't stand up on the streets downtown and the harbor gusts are very unfriendly. I had a philosophy of tying my boats loose and almost lost her the first Taku wind. Winters in Juneau found me tying real tight after that.

Well, I had fender washers backing the cleat bolts and had no failures. Part of the reason things went well is that the boat was so light. 28' long and mostly 3/8" plywood, 2x2 longitudinals and one frame .. two counting the cabin bulkhead. I made one fairly minor structural modification to the hull bottom near the keel. Too much flex. Took 10' seas and much worse in Dixon Entrance.

Now most of my anchors are 13 to18lbs and haven't dragged after a set. They say a dirt biker or a skier than dosn't fall down at times can't be very good at what they do. To know the limits one must get their feet wet. I admit doing that is risky business but in the bigger is better mode one would never know. Any boat wouldn't be badly named called Risky Business. Well never knowing is bliss I suppose but I like to know my limits.

Haha you could throw it back at me and say "why haven't you tried 6lb anchors?"

Hi Eric

I do understand your point but I wold rather err on the side of caution and usually buy an anchor two sizes over what the maker calls for (I don't trust their recommendations.

Thanks.

Bigsfish,
Yes indeed I hope you found my scope on the matter interesting. Your position is typical of most on TF .. a conservative group.

Happy hookers are golden.

Hi Eric

Most enlightening.

Thanks.

FWIW

I am changing back to our original Bruce from a Rocna . For our use there was no noticeable difference between the two and the Bruce is a better fit on the bow.

Bob

I did the same Bob.

But my 33lb Claw was not original and I've not used it yet. But (as you say) it fit beautifly on the bow. All my other anchors I need to lift up vertically w my boat hook to store on deck and holding it out away from the boat is too tough on my rotater cuff (shoulder) now. In a week I'm having an operation for that.

Is your Bruce 44lbs?

33.

Since both of you are equating the Bruce to the Rocna, is that a endorsement of the Bruce or a complaint of the Rocna?

I say that because I used a Bruce for many decades and had pretty good success but it was far from perfect in some bottoms but I feel the new generation anchors are far superior.

BTW we decided to go down to the Keys for a few weeks and we stopped at a place that has a thick grass on the bottom and I had doubts the Boss would set the first time. Dropped the anchor and backed down on it and that sucker is stuck to the bottom.

Neither, in my specific area and circumstance the performance is identical. I am going back to the Bruce because it is a better fit on Ebbtide. The Rocna will be made up and stowed in the laz as a spare.

Bob

Group9 said:

Once, you've been in a 75 mph squall on a lee shore, there is no such thing as too much anchor.

On our 42 foot motor yacht (40,000 lbs), our primary anchor is a Mantus 85 pounder.

It may look silly, but it feels good!

Click to expand...

Very very very true.
60ft and a 150lb Manson Supreme for us.

We've had a logged 80+ knots on us and multiple 45+ and have never ever dragged

12 mths on the hook and I sleep like a baby.

I understand some may not like an oversized anchor but I prefer being erring on the side of safety.

I greatly appreciate all the comments. Trying to stay on track as I've narrowed it down to brand (Rocna) and style (Vulcan) as what I think best fits my needs. I realize that there are a vast number of options for anchors and almost all of them work very well (or no one would buy them nor would there be passionate supporters of a particular brand/model).

I'm just asking if any forum users have actual experience of the two sizes (55# and 73#) on a GB 42. I have space for two anchors at the bow - I want to keep the 35-H Danforth and replace the 45# CQR (bent shank). The CQR comes up through the bow platform - thus the Vulcan style.

I, too, favor going up a size, but the Rocna site stresses their anchors are sized right & a 55# is suitable for a Grand Banks 42 Classic. If it's the appropriate size, then less weight to haul and handle. Just hoping someone w/same set-up could confirm...again, thanks for all the comments.

Thanks all!

F B

While I can't provide an exact comparison I do have a 43 GB and a Boss (somewhat similar to the Vulcan. Went with the 60 pound Boss and consider the extra weight like an insurance policy. If I had to do it all over again I would do the same. I know Eric is an advocate for light weight anchors but I prefer to carry the extra weight and sleep really well in the squalls we have in the southeast.

Choose well YOUR life may depend on it.

Just my SSO.

FBoykin said:

I greatly appreciate all the comments. Trying to stay on track as I've narrowed it down to brand (Rocna) and style (Vulcan) as what I think best fits my needs. I realize that there are a vast number of options for anchors and almost all of them work very well (or no one would buy them nor would there be passionate supporters of a particular brand/model).

I'm just asking if any forum users have actual experience of the two sizes (55# and 73#) on a GB 42. I have space for two anchors at the bow - I want to keep the 35-H Danforth and replace the 45# CQR (bent shank). The CQR comes up through the bow platform - thus the Vulcan style.

I, too, favor going up a size, but the Rocna site stresses their anchors are sized right & a 55# is suitable for a Grand Banks 42 Classic. If it's the appropriate size, then less weight to haul and handle. Just hoping someone w/same set-up could confirm...again, thanks for all the comments.

Thanks all!

Click to expand...

Before you make the final decision, have you considered the Sarca Excel..?
SARCA in Action - anchorright.com.au
You'd need about a no 6 Excel ie 30kg = 66lb.
For you vessel one of those would be ideal, and they have the reputation of being quick setting in virtually any bottom, and ultra hard holding as well. They are designed for those boats where the anchor shank comes up through the pulpit platform. See their performance on the Anchor setting videos thread if in doubt. They are now available in the US.
http://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s42/anchor-setting-videos-23378.html

I use a Super Sarca, and love it - sets quickly in virtually any bottom and holds hard - but it has a roll bar and would not be ideal for your pulpit platform I suspect.

Peter B said:

Before you make the final decision, have you considered the Sarca Excel..?.

Click to expand...

I was wondering when you'd jump in Peter.

Bigsfish wrote;
"I know Eric is an advocate for light weight anchors but I prefer to carry the extra weight and sleep really well in the squalls we have in the southeast."

Not so actually. I've given the wrong impression it seems.
I'm an advocate of getting and using the RIGHT weight anchor. Not "lightweight" or oversized. Since "the right weight" is rather hard to pin down I understand why pushing oneself to get an anchor that is heavy enough to leave little doubt that it is indeed heavy enough is common practice. Size is relative to holding power and anchors that have been tested in various tests are much more of a known commodity. If one gets a low performing (holding power wise) like a Bruce or Claw one uses a big anchor. I have a 33lb Claw on Willy now but wouldn't consider a 33lb XYZ or Supreme. If I had a CQR I'd have a 44lb. And I wouldn't feel secure w a Navy anchor less than 50lbs. But 10lbs would be fine w a Fortress.

But the often stated "get the biggest anchor that will fit on your boat" or that "the winch can handle is not very smart. My Avalon car has 268hp. WAY too much for general transportation. If I was building one for myself I'd go for about 125-150hp. Same w anchors. You only need what you need.

So it's much easier to choose (or reject) a well tested anchor like a Supreme, Delta or Spade than one w unknown or not well known performance. The Vulcan has not been tested much or at all as far as I know. I wouldn't stick my neck out and recommend it here but It's probably a very good anchor and to be honest I had thoughts about buying one but I don't like the company AND it hasn't been tested.

But as to anchor weight one's main working anchor shouldn't be "lightweight" ... but it should be the RIGHT weight and (if possible) not overweight.

Sorry Eric for putting my words in your mouth. I would have been better served by saying you prefer the minimum weight that will securely hold the boat under most conditions. If we look at anchoring as a bell curve you want to cover 80% of that bell and not worry much about the two extremes while I would prefer to cover 95% of that same curve.

My apologies.

Lightweight Anchors

Bigsfish wrote;
"I know Eric is an advocate for lightweight anchors ...."

It seems that way but no .... l like anchors the right size. Not too light and not too heavy. I was once pulling my rode by hand and pushing the envelope of light anchors. Learned a lot and didn't drag anchor but that was part luck I admit. Even a 25# anchor gets heavy w a lot of line out. So I started observing that others were using really big anchors and talk'in bout even bigger. After anchoring in two gales w less than 20# anchors really big anchors seems silly.

But for the newbie or someone that's anchored in benign conditions many times succesfully the right size seems elusive. How big is too big and how small is too small? Good and hard question.
Anchor manufacturers are all over the map. Some spec for breezes and others for 50 knots. And the biggest variable is typically not mentioned .. the bottom. At least some recommend really big to avoid lawsuits and perhaps sell more steel. But the recomendations give some scope if one reads several or more.
Then if you take stock in what boats are equipped w new the scope gets even wider.
Then on TF one often hears "if people aren't laughing your anchor is too small." That advice overlooks the fact that they may be laughing because your anchor is too small. Or "use the biggest anchor and winch your boat can handle". That dosn't say much for anchors.

It's much easier to choose anchors that have been tested at least twice in a big comprehensive test. Some anchors are excellent that are only average in holding power. Some do well where others don't in weed and kelp. Many these days get plugged w mud. Some hold well in heavy mud. None hold well in light light mud but the difference in performance there say something about the design. Some don't even break out during strong reversals.

So the perfect anchor hasn't been designed and some are only best in certain locations. The old addage of having several different type anchors for different bottoms is not as important as it was in the 60's but still holds plenty of merrit. Many times I've dropped an anchor and it didden't set and deploying another of a different type did set. Line up all the anchors that we talk about on TF and there will be many different looking anchors even w/o the Bullwagga.


HaHa I see my post #54 did succeed. This post was because I thought 54 tanked because I jumped up to do something and forgot to actually post. 56 was to replace 54 ..Oh well.

FWIW, our 75# Rocna with roll bar comes up through the bow platform of our 46' Grand Banks with no problem. It sits next to a 45# CQR which goes over the top of the platform with no interference at all. Suggest the OP try the roll bar model for fit before a deciding on a Vulcan. West Marine will let you do that.

Peter B said:

Before you make the final decision, have you considered the Sarca Excel..?

Click to expand...

Looks to much like a lewmar delta to me




and in my experience they are as useless as a plow, unless your intention is to scrape trenches and plant crops on the bottom, but, thats just my observation.


Perhaps the Excel has something different.

Simi 60 said:

Looks to much like a lewmar delta to me

and in my experience they are as useless as a plow, unless your intention is to scrape trenches and plant crops on the bottom, but, thats just my observation.


Perhaps the Excel has something different.

Click to expand...

Yes, Simi, your observation is wrong, but I can see why you said that. The differences are subtle, but make a huge difference. However, in it's day, the Delta was a good anchor, and a decided advance over the CQR, for sure.

Mind you, but for his pulpit set-up, I would have recommended the Super Sarca. However, its roll bar is thinner, but larger in diameter, and more vertical to the shank than the Rocna's, which I think gives it a setting edge, (less likely to just drag in soft mud), but as Hmason mentioned, the Rocna's more forward-facing roll bar does allow for it to be drawn up through a pulpit slot.

Over the years, I've owned a Manson Supreme, a Rocna, a Mantus, as well as a Bruce, a Fortress, several CQRs and several Danforths. I've mostly anchored in sand and mud, all over the Gulf of Mexico, Florida and the Bahamas.

For anyone to say a Bruce is as good as a modern spade anchor is slightly baffling, and I can only attribute it to the fact that they must regularly anchor in bottoms that are of vastly different composition than me.

Now, on the other hand, having owned all three, I haven't seen a dime's worth of difference in the performance of a Manson Supreme, Rocna, or Mantus spade anchor. All three have been amazing.