Forfjord

The Forfjord is a twin fluke anchor definitely related to the Danforth but w three huge differences. Instead of being very light it's very heavy. The flukes are wide apart while the Danforths flukes are close together to very close together. And the Forfjord lacks the stock of the Danforth. At one time (I think) all anchors had stocks and the CQR, Dreadnaught and Forfjord were stockless and were referred to as stockless anchors. Without the stock the Forfjord was free to rotate within the bounds of what the flukes would allow. If the bottom is a little bit more favorable to penetration on one fluke it would dig in and I'm not sure if the other fluke would follow * ...or follow equally. Seems to me there would be a strong chance only one fluke would bury. And then the Forfjord would be much like a Kedge. But I had similar thoughts about the Bruce and as I recall those notions were shown to be wrong. But (also as I seem to recall) those that understand the Forfjord *said the beauty of that is that once buried the Forfjord, if pulled from another angle will allow one fluke to break out temporarily while the anchor repositions itself thus not really breaking out. Most to many anchors break out completely and need to reset completely. But the Forfjord does not have sharp flukes and little of the anchors weight is on the fluke tips when in a setting position on the bottom. And many are modified for better holding in mud by welding extensions onto the side of the flukes but that could make the penetrating issue even worse. Dragging in mud is obviously an issue as many of the Forfjords in Craig have the "mud mod". The Forfjord is probably almost indestructible *....even small ones. I've seen several Bruce's w bent shanks (one bent almost 90 degrees) but I've never seen a bent Forfjord. Since it's not a high holding power anchor one needs to carry a Forfjord about twice the weight of what they would normally carry. I can't recall any fishermen raving about the Forfjord but many do re the claw. I think more and more fishermen are changing to claws. Probably when they drag their Forfjord's and feel the need to change. They get the claw because it looks (and is I think) skookum and many more fishermen have them than anything else. My friend Ed here on the island w a 30' Willard has a 65lb Forfjord and has had good luck w it for well over 5 years and has no intention of changing his anchor. I have only had*a few minutes experience personally w the Forfjord so hopefully others w more experience will be able to expand or correct what I've thrown out here as a beginning.


-- Edited by nomadwilly on Monday 7th of November 2011 12:57:15 PM

nomadwilly wrote:
... Seems to me there would be a strong chance only one fluke would bury. And then the Forfjord would be much like a Kedge. But I had similar thoughts about the Bruce and as I recall those notions were shown to be wrong.*... I can't recall any fishermen raving about the Forfjord but many do re the claw. I think more and more fishermen are changing to claws. Probably when they drag their Forfjord's and feel the need to change. They get the claw because it looks (and is I think) skookum ....

Click to expand...

*Tried out my 33# Bruce imitation today for the first time (finally).* In about 20 feet of water with a "sticky" mud bottom off Commodore Jones Point (Benicia, CA).* The anchor set rapidly and easily held the Coot in a 2-knot current with about a 4-to1 scope or less.


-- Edited by markpierce on Monday 7th of November 2011 07:46:52 PM

The Forfjord is our primary anchor as the Forfjord is on 95% of the commercial trawler over 50 ft and*many pleasure boats over 50 ft in the PNW/Puget Sound.* *I have not seen a Forfjord with the added wider flukes.* The Eagle came with two Danforth, bow and stern, and a QCR.* The QCR as the primary and the Danforths secured to the deck.***
*
I went to a commercial swap meet at Fishermans Terminal, Seattle,*and there was a Forfjord #8, 100 lbs for sale, which I bought.* *As it turns out the Eagle needs the next size bigger, a #12 at 145 Lbs.* However, the windless has enough trouble pulling up the #8, that I am concerned about the #12 with all chain.* If you size the Forfjord it is almost twice the weight and size of most other anchors, which is probable the reason you do not see them on many pleasure boats and they are not very pretty.
*
For a long range crusing, I still thing a boat should have at least a plow/claw and a navy/wide fluke*type anchor depending on the bottom.*
*
*
*

Sounds like you should go shopping for a higher performance anchor or a bigger anchor winch. I'll sell you a reel winch that should have no problem w heavy gear for $400. The ideal anchor for your boat could be the Manson Ray (a fabricated (not cast)) claw. Expensive though. And yes I too see Navy anchors on some larger craft. Here's two examples of Navy anchors as primaries (one on a yacht) and two examples of Forfjords on 30' boats. Heavy anchors still seem to have their place in the modern world. Here's a pic of the winch too.


-- Edited by nomadwilly on Tuesday 8th of November 2011 11:22:17 AM

Bump...

In pondering mode for a winter storm anchor and the #4 (40 pound) Forfjord is on the short list...probably with 100' of chain and up to 600' of 5/8 nylon 8 strand Brait. (This rope/chain length combination rode will exponentially increase the number of locations we can anchor. North coast BC's mountainous terrain results in most smaller bays rising steeply from around 100' depth to the shore).

Anybody have positive or negative experiences with the Forfjord?

http://www.seanet.com/~julie321/anchor_info.html

The real question is do the have it in polished SS, and how good does it look on your bow. Later, you could add your own roll bar.

Not a fan of the Forfjord.

Had one once and used one once. Was in a small bay off Rocky Pass in Alaska when my XYZ of the time would not set. Tried several times. Thought it may be a hard bottom. Was late and we needed to hook up there. Tried several times w a 25 lb Forfjord that I had reciently purchased. No luck at all. Threw out the 13 lb Danforth that came w the boat to me and as new I belive. Hooked up solid right away.

I truly believe they are a poor anchor. I suspect their performance is such that you'd be better off w a Claw .. that is similar in some ways and interestingly fishermen most often choose a Claw w they can't get their hands on a Forfjord. Sold my Forfjord to a fisherman for $25.

For you Murray I'm think'in a SARCA would be best.

manyboats said:

For you Murray I'm think'in a SARCA would be best.

Click to expand...

I'd agree with you, especially concerning the Excel, but if we ever lost one (say to an unmarked old booming ground and sunken logs) a replacement Forfjord from Vancouver would get here faster & cheaper than a Sarca from Australia.

That, and I'm pretty sure our bow can take a Forfjord wth no modifications...has original bow roller (much like in Willard photo) below the anchor pulpit which now holds a Lewmar Claw).

I have a 65 lb. Forfjord in a hawse pipe against the port bow. It is a secondary anchor as it is vastly inferior to my primary anchor, a 45 lb. Manson supreme that is mounted on a centerline bow roller.

The primary reason I added the Forfjord, is that I needed to add weight forward to offset the additional weight of the pilot house. Rather than add something that serves no other purpose (like lead), I chose to add a heavy, secondary anchor.

The Forfjord sets reliably but does so with a very gentle and slow nature - not at all like the immediate "knock you off your seat" attachment to the bottom of the Manson. I do not yet have a good sense of ultimate holding power of the Forfjord but my guess it will be far less than the lighter Manson.

As was mentioned previously in this thread, the Forfjord must be just about indestructible and may be superior to the Manson in rock. Also, if very heavy weed is preventing the penetration of any anchor, the sheer weight of the Forfjord will give it the edge.

I would always choose a modern anchor over the Forfjord as a primary anchor.

Steve

Panope said:

The Forfjord sets reliably but does so with a very gentle and slow nature - not at all like the immediate "knock you off your seat" attachment to the bottom of the Manson.

Click to expand...

Thanks Steve...that's exactly the sort of comparative example I was looking for.

MurrayM said:

I'd agree with you, especially concerning the Excel, but if we ever lost one (say to an unmarked old booming ground and sunken logs) a replacement Forfjord from Vancouver would get here faster & cheaper than a Sarca from Australia....

Click to expand...

Mmm. There is a daily direct non stop flight between Sydney and Vancouver. Not sure about Melbourne(Anchorright location)-Vancouver, but there is a daily procession of Melbourne-Sydney flights. If you really want a Sarca it won`t take long. Ask Ksanders, he bought one. True, it won`t be cheaper.

There is just "something" about an anchor clinging closely to a boat's hull.

It's too bad the SARCA isn't available here .. at WM like the Supreme. Can you accommodate the Supreme on your boat?
The Excel seems a good anchor to really good anchor but still lacks anchor test history. Most anchors that look like it are at least a little weak at 3-1 scope. The SARCA is not. Another thing I like about the SARCA is that does it's business standing up ... not laying on it's side to be effective. Laying on the side seems fine if the anchor actually makes the transition to right side up where all anchors hold well. Most anchors do.

Re the Forfjord it could have an orientation problem as well. As it sets it's flukes are quite far apart and if one fluke digs in well (quite likely) and the other lags behind it's quite likely the Forfjord would wind up like a Kedge. One fluke sticking straight up and one straight down. Obviously holding power would be seriously reduced. It could be prone to do that. The Claw has been reported by several to have on occasion not rotated right side up ... just stayed on it's side. This tendency is not well known re the Claw and may not be known at all re the Forfjord. Some of this is speculation but some is fact.

With a Supreme or Rocna 25lbs should be anchor enough for summer gales. No need for a big heavy hook w a SHHP anchor. You'd need at least a 33lb Claw or about a 60lb Forfjord .. IMO. I have a friend in AK that has a 65lb Forfjord on a Willard much like mine but he rarely anchors out. When I last saw him he was looking for another anchor.

Edit w some pics.
1. A Forfjord w locally done mud fluke extensions.
2. A better looking set of mud flukes. On the drum to the left (in this pic) the nylon rode below the chain is visible on the drum.
3. My friend's Willard w the Forfjord.
4. I really like the way he mounts the anchor on the bow. Very little protruding beyond the boat.

Quit a few of the Forfjords in Craig have the mud extensions so one could conclude that they probably drag in mud. I think the factory where the Forfjord is made offers mud extensions and my #2 pic may be just that.

Re Forfjord

I still have mine sitting outside the barn using it as yard art.. which it really isn't all that great looking as yard art.. the reason its not on my boat is it is even worse as a anchor!

In my opinion is is the biggest P.O.S anchor made..
One of these days it is going to the scrap yard..
HOLLYWOOD

hollywood8118 said:

Re Forfjord

I still have mine sitting outside the barn using it as yard art.. which it really isn't all that great looking as yard art.. the reason its not on my boat is it is even worse as a anchor!

In my opinion is is the biggest P.O.S anchor made..
One of these days it is going to the scrap yard..
HOLLYWOOD

Click to expand...

Yeah, but...

Phil Fill said:

...the Forfjord is on 95% of the commercial trawler over 50 ft and*many pleasure boats over 50 ft in the PNW/Puget Sound.*

Click to expand...

So why do so many commercial fishing boats use them then?

MurrayM said:

Yeah, but...



So why do so many commercial fishing boats use them then?

Click to expand...

Fish boat operators dont like change..back in the day forfjord anchors were the norm..new better anchors have come along and they still hang on to the old forfjords.. I had a
Bruce that was a vastly superior anchor to the forfjord..and we know what some here think of Bruce's! Pull the heads and pan off a v8 engine block and wrap a chain through it..no doubt it will be a better anchor
Hollywood

hollywood8118 said:

Fish boat operators dont like change...

Click to expand...

Another reason might be cost. I told the owner of a marine store in Prince Rupert all about the new Super High Holding Power anchors these days, and he nodded to a pile of Lewmar Claws in the corner and said, "Yeah, well, I get a lot of repeat customers".

Something tells me if those fishermen were dragging Forfjords in 50 to 60 knot winter storms, they'd have theirs in a field too.

What circumstances led to your opinion?

MurrayM said:

So why do so many commercial fishing boats use them then?

Click to expand...

I have wondered the same thing. Here are my best guesses:

-Forfjord anchors fit perfectly in a centerline bow roller that is not cantilevered (no need for a bowsprit). They also stow perfectly in a side hawse pipe (like any other pivoting fluke anchor). Fitting a modern anchor to many of these (plumb stemmed) fish boats would require a fairly major modification.

-Commercial fishermen may be resistant to change. Heck, many of these folks are using boats that are 70 or 80 years old. The Forfjord was developed in the 1950's and was probably the best available at the time. If it aint broke, don't fix it.

-Commercial fishermen (unlike us lubbery cruisers) may be more likely to simply maintain an all night anchor watch or even better, put out to sea if the wind pipes up.

-These anchors (like the bruce) may not scale down well. In other words, the large sizes may work much better than the smaller ones. Most of the Forfjords that I see are well over 100 lbs.

-Lastly, there is another effect of scale that may allow larger vessels to get away with a poorer performing anchor. I am sure a naval architect can cite the exact name of this principle but in a nutshell - the force of a given wind will have a smaller effect on a larger vessel. Consider a tiny toy sailboat on a pond. Even with a deep ballasted bulb keel, the toy sailboat will heel over on its ear in even a gentle breeze. On the other hand, the tall ships of 200 hundred years ago had virtually no keel, all ballast inside the hull and endless tons of spars/rigging high in the air; yet they somehow stood up to storms without capsizing.

Steve

Thanks Steve, those are good points, particularly the last one and this one (which I'll look into);

Panope said:

-These anchors (like the bruce) may not scale down well. In other words, the large sizes may work much better than the smaller ones. Most of the Forfjords that I see are well over 100 lbs.

Click to expand...

Here's our bow configuration. (The curved pipe & hose in Badger's bow where the storm anchor will go is a chafe guard for the bow line).

The happy path of least resistance would see a storm anchor nestled in under the anchor pulpit with no modifications needed other than a new windlass.

MurrayM said:

Another reason might be cost. I told the owner of a marine store in Prince Rupert all about the new Super High Holding Power anchors these days, and he nodded to a pile of Lewmar Claws in the corner and said, "Yeah, well, I get a lot of repeat customers".

Something tells me if those fishermen were dragging Forfjords in 50 to 60 knot winter storms, they'd have theirs in a field too.

What circumstances led to your opinion?

Click to expand...

I think the thing may be great in rock, but I don't try to anchor in rock. In mud it was a very unreliable setter..grass forget about it.. most times it took 2-3 tries.. that is setting with low power..lower than I liked or thought was enough to insure a reliable set.
I have anchored all over the world with danforth, bruce, ultra, rocna, delta, fortress, CQR, .. thousands of times.
I never had 5% of the problem with the above anchors.
If the weight/chain size vs boat is in question it is a 40' Ocean Alexander, 3/8 all chain and a #8 size anchor @ 100lbs.
I swapped to a Delta and I have no issues with it at all.
But again its just from my experience.. just an opinion

HOLLYWOOD

Thanks for the background info, Hollywood...as you know, sometimes people can display strong opinions around here without any real experience to back it up. Yours appears to have some serious weight to it. Duly noted. Thanks again,

Murray

People tend to emulate other people. Most tend to think others are smarter than they are. Especially people w specific experience.

A new fisherman is surrounded by fishermen w more experience and knowledge about fishing .. and of course fishing boats. Old fishermen are regarded almost like gods and younger or newer fishermen fall over themselves trying to emulate them. Until recently (40 years ago in the fisherman's world) fishboat anchors were like the dreadnought but people that made fishing gear started to make anchors .. Forfjords. And they became popular. Fishermen were not poor in those days if they good businessmen and were not lazy. When the fishermen did get poor (about 25+ years ago) they bought anchors that were cheap .. and much like the Forfjord. They still almost worship the Forfjord but get a Claw mostly because they are poor and big Forfjords are expensive. They still worship the Forfjord but Claws will be found on about 1/3 of the fleet. And there are about 15 boats in Craig using the Dreadnoughts (older than the Forfjord) .. assumed to be survivors. Never seen a newer anchor like a roll bar anchor on a fishboat. Even the little charter fishing boats for tourists have Claws.

Trawlermen are somewhat like fishermen. Most bigger trawlers are owned by boaters that have moved up via 2' itus over the years. They appear to be very experienced often often are. And they have disposable money and can buy any anchor they want. The younger and/or less experienced see his anchor and think or know he's got lots of experience and knows what is best. Of course what is best is rather vague to the guru as well so he gets the anchor that the guy or guys that HE looks up to has. And that anchor for years was the Bruce .. now it's the Rocna and those that look like it. But already evolution is having it's way. The roll bar anchor has it's limits in the marketplace and perhaps otherwise so for those that need to be seen w the latest (a huge chunk of our population) are already looking at the descendents of the roll bar anchors like the Excel, Vulcan, Boss and others.

So it's mostly a matter of what's cool. And to fishermen it's the Forfjord.

The local chandlery got in a bunch of Rocnas and whatever the tractor seat looking one is recently. In fact they used them to prop open the door so you couldn't miss them. I asked about them. The owner had taken one out and tested it on a weekend cruise. He swapped it back out for his claw. Why? Expense. He said he didn't have $350 to throw away. He also mentioned that I worked in the oil patch and my boat should have one...

Anchors are semi-disposable around here. Generally speaking to anchor in a sheltered area here means hidden in a cove. If you are hidden in a cove, you are likely over the top of an old logging show or booming ground. It could be howling forty and most prudent mariners would be home or tucked safely in a little nook. So in a way a good storm anchor around here is one that will hookup on an old bulldozer track or bundle of wire rope. Just don't expect to get it back. Trees on shore work well too.

He sells a lot of claws. Several a week in the summer to transiting boats who have lost theirs.

Murry, I'd consider just getting a ridiculous sized cheap lewmar claw and be done with it. Or move closer to these guy who throw away or use anchors as garden art...

Sometimes the enemy of the best is good enough.

Excellent excellent post Spy.

A Lewmar Claw for my boat (33lbs) is $315.
A Manson Supreme (25lbs) is $314.

$175 difference.

I have a 33# Lewmar and I'm quite sure I'm going to get a 25lb MS not too far down the road. Not through experimenting w my 15lb MS.

manyboats said:

Excellent excellent post Spy.

Click to expand...

manyboats said:

A Lewmar Claw for my boat (33lbs) is $315.
A Manson Supreme (25lbs) is $314.
$175 difference.

Click to expand...

??

-Chris

What's the question about?

Do you think I should have compared anchors of equal weight .. or what?

ranger42c said:

??

-Chris

Click to expand...

New math....

manyboats said:

Excellent excellent post Spy.

A Lewmar Claw for my boat (33lbs) is $315.
A Manson Supreme (25lbs) is $314.

$175 difference.

I have a 33# Lewmar and I'm quite sure I'm going to get a 25lb MS not too far down the road. Not through experimenting w my 15lb MS.

Click to expand...

Can you show your work for your above math problem Eric?

MATH PROBLEM ?

314 - 139 = 175. Seems I got that one right.

You must be concerned about my saying the Willard will require a 25lb MS and a 33lb Claw. I did not look up what the manufacturers recomendations were for my size boat. Is that the problem?

I've been using a 15lb MS on my 30' boat w sucess but not in a gale. Every time I get in a gale I use my modified XYZ (18lbs) reduced two days ago to 15lbs. Most Claws on 30' boats are 22lbs. I have a 22lb Claw and have used it also but like the MS not in a gale. If you want to know what an anchor will do in a gale the only fairly reasonable place to look is in the anchor tests. Asking other boaters almost always dos'nt count. Almost never do boaters put as much tension on a rode as they do in most anchor tests. Very high loadings is the only way to determine high holding power performance. But I digress.

If these numbers are suspected not to be correct consider any other anchor weight re the two anchors mentioned and you'll find that for a 30' boat in Northern BC those numbers are not questionable. I'll be happy to discuss it though.

Sounds like your trying to trip me up Craig. Instead of hiding it bring out the "math problem" for me to address.