Is 33 Bruce sufficient?

HiDHo said:

I think the people at Fortress Anchors might be smiling with all the talk about anchor weight.

Click to expand...

I've never owned a Fortress but have used them a couple of times on deliveries. I found that in river or tidal currents they took off like a kite and it was virtually impossible to get them down where i wanted them.

Well if it's going to be bashing it should be pointed out that Fortress is the highest holding power anchor in the world.
Sure they are Danforth types (also very high holding power anchors (since 1938)) and they sure aren't perfect.

Simi60 wrote;
"Fortress are aluminium, not a valid comparison"
Sure it is. Fortress could have made them out of plastic. We compare anchors, usually out of convenience by weight. When only comparing steel or iron weight is a good standard.
But the real standard should be what each anchor costs. How many dollars for how much holding power. But that would change how we look at a number of anchors like Claws and aluminum anchors.

But re Simi's comment I think it's fair to compare aluminum anchors as long as one compares the performance also. And at times an aluminum anchor can be king of the hill for those deploying by hand. Then lightweight becomes a very large part of the performance issue. I could't handle a 44lb Claw but an 18lb Fortress would (i'm quite sure) out perform the Claw easily.

And if you have a windlass you're free to use a Fortress also. If you have a limit on the physical size of anchor you can handle that would be part of a comparison. But remember many anchor experts and manufacturers say that holding power is directly proportional to fluke area and there is no lack of that using a Fortress.

Your anchor is a piece of safety equipment. You don't want it to drag, ever. If it's the only anchor you carry, it wouldn't hurt to be a little bigger than some chart for generic boats indicates. Whatever the anchor brand.

Thank you all for your valued opinions. I’m going to upgrade to the larger Bruce.

Restitution said:

Thank you all for your valued opinions. I’m going to upgrade to the larger Bruce.

Click to expand...

It`s a record! 34 posts and conclusion reached on anchor type and weight!

Restitution said:

Thank you all for your valued opinions. I’m going to upgrade to the larger Bruce.

Click to expand...

If changing anchors, why not go with a nexgen anchor?

Most all experienced cruisers I know and others I have read articles from, all (including me) seem to agree to be happy with the decision.

boatpoker said:

I've never owned a Fortress but have used them a couple of times on deliveries. I found that in river or tidal currents they took off like a kite and it was virtually impossible to get them down where i wanted them.

Click to expand...

Can you say what sizes those were? I've read about that happening, but haven't ever seen it. The smallest we've used was an FX-23...

-Chris

Restitution said:

Thank you all for your valued opinions. I’m going to upgrade to the larger Bruce.

Click to expand...

psneeld said:

If changing anchors, why not go with a nexgen anchor?

Most all experienced cruisers I know and others I have read articles from, all (including me) seem to agree to be happy with the decision.

Click to expand...

Agree. Unless there's some reason a Bruce is the only kind of anchor that will mount on the bow tackle properly...

If you're open to upgrading, I'd at least do a full comparison of all the new one currently available... augmenting the tech specs with pics Noelex has posted and video's Steve has posted.

-Chris

I size anchors by the method and effort used to bring them on deck.

If you have a good windlass or capstan, sleeping is lots better with a 60lb or larger anchor.

If price is a problem there are usually plenty of genuine used Danforth or CQR's that have served worldwide for multiple decades.

A flyweight anchor with a heavy line is a poor choice as the nylon will not stretch enough to ease the load.

Stripper said:

The Lewmar knock-offs were the ones with casting issues. I have heard that the ones made by Manson are good quality, but don't have any first-hand experience to back that up.

Click to expand...

Dang... Could have gone all day without hearing this. Guess what anchor we have?

Lepke said:

Your anchor is a piece of safety equipment. You don't want it to drag, ever. If it's the only anchor you carry, it wouldn't hurt to be a little bigger than some chart for generic boats indicates. Whatever the anchor brand.

Click to expand...

Drag .. ever?
Some anchors drag quite frequently. Bruce comes to mind. Most of the time though I’m sure it’s just a few feet. I’ll bet there’s a whole lot of draging out there that goes w/o anybody being aware. Of course we all think it’s the other poor sap that happens to but who knows if no one noticed? And given a very soft bottom even newer anchors probably drag. And it’s probably a fairly rare thing in non-mud bottoms. But I think it’s a fairly safe thing to say that by a wide margin mud bottoms are most common.

Man, there is so much good info out there on nexgen anchors.


Why listen to marketing garbage or the holdouts that swear that their old time anchors are "good enough"?


Having evaded dangerous situations many times while towing or engine failures due to fuel/air issues and needing to anchor quick, I wouldn't think anything except one of the next gen anchors. Yes to a big fortress fow a storm anchor, but only after I am POSITIVELY sure it is fully set.

Sneld,
I’d have a 55 Ford too but the’re all worn out.

But the Claw and Danforth are the most popular anchors. To para-phrase an old Chevy add millions of people can’t be wrong.
And It’s easy to relate to someone that has been anchoring for several years w an old anchor w/o any problems. Sunchaser used a Claw for many years in SE Alaska and didn’t seem to have any problems. Maybe he noticed a bit of dragging and said nope .... no more of that. Got a new anchor. But he prolly coulda gone on for many more years ???...... safely. Especially if it was a Bruce and big enough.

And I might add if I could get a new one I’d buy an 87 Stanza. Good enough? You bet.
According to WM trawlers use Claws and planing boats use Danforths.

The Claw and Danforth might be the most popular with people who rarely anchor, but not in my world of people currently cruising with modern products bases on real world experience.



Comparing cars in boating discussions is as silly as describing aviation.


I have a lot of experience in all 3, I prefer apples to apples.


I think many would agree though, onwce big enough, actual design may matter less.

So what your saying is that if I had to drive to the grocery store five miles away, and I had a choice between a yellow 72 Chevy Vega or perhaps a white 2015 Cadillac Escalade, it wouldn’t really matter which I drove, as I would still be back home in 20 minutes with a gallon of milk and a dozen eggs?

Restitution said:

So what your saying is that if I had to drive to the grocery store five miles away, and I had a choice between a yellow 72 Chevy Vega or perhaps a white 2015 Cadillac Escalade, it wouldn’t really matter which I drove, as I would still be back home in 20 minutes with a gallon of milk and a dozen eggs?

Click to expand...

No. Imagine being in a bomb cyclone, sitting in a Vega blowing toward the grocery store... and wishing you were in an Escalade ESV.



-Chris

Restitution said:

So what your saying is that if I had to drive to the grocery store five miles away, and I had a choice between a yellow 72 Chevy Vega or perhaps a white 2015 Cadillac Escalade, it wouldn’t really matter which I drove, as I would still be back home in 20 minutes with a gallon of milk and a dozen eggs?

Click to expand...

I've owned a couple of Bruce anchors, a Fortress and a Danforth. All purchased in the 1990's. I'd never buy a Bruce today as the new gen anchors are demonstrably better and there is no real Bruce any longer.

The Bruce knockoffs are cheaper than the new gens but not as good. Check out the SS Penlope video tests or other data driven comparisons. Any of the newer designs, Rocna, Manson, Mantus and others are simply better. Doesn't make sense to save a couple hundred bucks on something as important as a primary anchor.

Also, while a 33lb anchor may be generally sufficient, if you are cruising to parts unknown, upsizing makes a lot of sense. I'd argue that a 38ft trawler deserves a 45lb anchor at least.

I really miss my 72-pound Rocna I sold with my trawler, and when I bought this 12,000 pound 35-foot LOA boat, the ridiculously small 16-pound anchor I came with was immediately relegated to stern anchor duty when going to the barrier island for the day. I know it is a stupid way to buy and anchor, but I began looking for something big which would fit under the pulpit. Here it is, any guesses as to what it it is? I temporarily unshipped it in 2017 to replace the crappy plow on the bow of a Grand Banks 36 I was delivering from Gulf SHore, AL to Lake Michigan, and although the manufacturer said he thought is small for that vessel, we ran through 1400 miles and six rivers anchoring often with no issues.

Lepke said:

Your anchor is a piece of safety equipment. You don't want it to drag, ever. If it's the only anchor you carry, it wouldn't hurt to be a little bigger than some chart for generic boats indicates. Whatever the anchor brand.

Click to expand...

Exactly right.
Never heard anyone complain about too much anchor at 2am when its blowing its ring out.

We didn't choose our anchor size off of a generic chart.
I actually sent a photo to the anchor manufacturer of boat, weight and told them as full time cruisers I never wanted to worry, ever , so size the anchor accordingly.

The recommended a 150lb Supreme. I tried to talk them up into a more expensive 175lber but they deemed it unnecessary and so far, in approx 900 nights and several storms over 50 knots, it has not moved an inch or failed to set instantly.

Saying that, if we lost it tomorrow, 175lb would be replacing it.

Nomad Willy said:

Sneld,
I’d have a 55 Ford too but the’re all worn out.

But the Claw and Danforth are the most popular anchors. To para-phrase an old Chevy add millions of people can’t be wrong.
.

Click to expand...

Sure they can.

Smoking

rgano,
The anchor is a Max.
Below is an old anchor test by Practical Sailor Mag.

If you look at the "Anchor Guide" it looks like Max came in 2nd.
Not so. The winner of this test won with an experimental prototype anchor not ready yet for the market. I have one and went through a night in a 50 knot gale in Northern BC. Good anchor but frequently wouldn't set.
So the real winner of this test was Max.

You are the winner, Willy. To be perfectly correct, it is a SuperMax 15 (weight is 35 lbs, dunno why Steve labels it a 15).

rgano,
The 15lb Supreme is 18lbs.
But the “15” on the Max I think is a model number. Not for weight.

Zactly, but I am not sure why. I will ask Steve Bedford if he doesn't think that is counterproductive in his bidness.

Nomad Willy said:

If you're leaning toward the Ray this could be your Day.

40% off at the moment. 33lb $438.00

Click to expand...

Opps ... forgot to say it was 40% off at WM. Sorry.
Here is the anchor test done by Practical Sailor Mag and Manson Anchors.

See re the short scope testing the Rocna was found to be very noticeabley weak in all things short scope. I've read one or two other anchor tests (much bigger and more comprehensive) where the Rocna was weak on short scope.

And the Claw anchor tested better in setting (as usual) also in this test. This performance feature of all Claws also seems to be a strong showing in this test of the Ray. But they do mention that the Ray sometimes in hard bottoms do not completely set. That is .. setting on only two flukes laying on it's side as if thinking it's a new gen anchor. I've theroized that it could happen and don't know to what extent Claws in general do that but even 2/3rd's set there seems to be plenty of holding power and it's likely that the 2/3rd's set isn't that unusual on/in harder bottoms. Some say the've seen it and others swear it dosn't happen .. re TF comments of the past. Many of us probably hang on a 2/3rd's set anchor and aren't aware that it's so. It the Claw wasn't so expensive I'd have one but also I still have anchor business left undone.

Something else to notice re the Ray design is that the outboard flukes don't have the usual twist. I've thought the twist was to promote rotation of the anchor to assume an upright position w all three flukes submerged in the sea floor. Since the no-twist Ray sets with ease the twist may be for some other reason. Possibly to align the blades of the outboard flukes to come closer to being at right angles to the line of pull in the working position. This could/should increase the holding power per sq. in. of blade area and having less blade area than most other anchors the twist used thusly would be a plus.

Nomad Willy said:

rgano,
The anchor is a Max.
Below is an old anchor test by Practical Sailor Mag.

So the real winner of this test was Max.

Click to expand...

Can't see where Practical Sailor said that, in that article. Didn't make their "recommended" list... although that category also takes cost, and probably weight -- versus holding power -- into account.

In the table, PS describes the pivoting model as a "scoop/plow" -- and I think that's just wrong. Scoop is correct -- think : backhoe bucket -- and would be correctly applied to both the pivoting and rigid models. If a CQR or Delta illustrates a "plow", the SuperMAX anchors are NOT plows anchors.

We use a pivoting model, here in the Chesapeake mud. I've not yet ever had to change it to the mud setting; so far I've only ever had to use it in the center setting.

PS tested the pivoting SuperMAX in the middle position, and that tied with a couple others at the highest "holding power" (maybe that's what you meant?). I suspect, but don't know, it may have done better in the mud test if they had tried the mud setting. I also suspect, but don't know, that the rigid anchor they tested next to the pivoting anchor didn't do quite as well because the setting technique is likely more difficult to do consistently.

Wil Andrews did a lot of testing with the MAX and SuperMAX anchors, back in the late '90s I think... partly the reason we gravitated toward SuperMAX for use here in the Chesapeake slime. (Along with a Fortress for back-up and kedge, which also did very well in the Chesapeake testing they did a few years ago.) Probably still some of his info about MAX anchors out there somewhere.

-Chris

Ranger,
I’ll look at my link on the computer when I get time later today. But I can see the graphical presentation I have saved in the old i-mac computer is different. I could take a pic w my camera and post the pic.
Re your comments about (scoop/plow) I agree .. all three are scoop to be sure. And of course plows are not on the agenda here. Actually the Max could even be called a shovel. But the Rocna and Supreme are clearly scoop anchors. I remember a number of years ago somebody called the Excel anchor from Anchor Right Austrailia a plow Rex Frances came ungluded saying no way could his Excel anchor be called a plow. But it looks basically just like a Delta that is a decendant of the CQR plow anchor that is the mother of all plow anchors. But to call a boat anchor a plow seems kinda stupid but they do resemble plows used on the farm .. no doubt about it.

But re the performance of the anchors on the PS test .. yes, I was using the numbers expressing the hundreds of pounds of rension or pull the anchors would resist. The XYZ was 500lbs in both scopes. The Max was 400 short and 500 at long scope. Those numbers made the Max 2nd place in the test. But IMP the XYZ shouldn’t even be on the test. It’s like comparing a rocket propelled dragster to a Olds 442. Or you could compare the cars to one that wouldn’t start half of the time. Just not apples and apples.

I think the reason Rex got upset at the Sarca Excel being called a plow anchor is that his anchor doesn’t leave a furrow like plow anchors do.

As the Excel sets, it digs in and doesn’t turn the bottom over; basically the only disturbance to the bottom is where the shank leaves a line. This was important to Rex, as he wanted to reduce harm to the bottom in anchorages.

Murray,
"Furrows"
Turning the bottom over as in flipping it? What anchor does that? Can't imagine any anchor neatly turning the bottom over. If it did it would probably be on a beach pull. Usually that's just interesting stuff to watch but not proving anything.

On the CQR the whole fluke area of the anchor looks just exactly like a farm plow. The Delta looks different to be sure but still enough to be called a plow. Probably having to do w hearing and calling the CQR a plow for many years or a decade or two. Then along comes the Delta and the resembbleance to the CQR is close enough that it was called a plow. And there were others (my favorite is the Davis) so calling the Excel a plow was natural as it looked much like the Delta. Actually a decisive question may be "what other classification of anchors" would you put it into? With nothing else coming close at all the Excel got thrown in w the other plows. You could say it was mostly an evolutionary thing.

One thing's for sure;
If it is plow it surely works better than all the others.

I'm going to try and re attach the link about the Ray anchor again.

anchoring & ground tackle

PS
VALUE gUidE
Anchor MoDEL
AnchorS For SoFt MUd (oVEr $200)

PricE & SourcE
WEight
SuggEStED BoAt LEngth
StyLE
SEt rAting
hoLDing PoWEr
SEt rAting
hoLDing PoWEr
Anchor Right
Sarca
Bulwagga  Danforth
Deep Set II
Davis
TalonXT  Fortress
FX-23
HydroBubble $ Kingston
Plow Rocna 15
Spade A80 Super Max
Pivoting
Super Max
Rigid
XYZ .
$ Budget Buy
$412 anchorright.com.au
$238 navstore.com
$249 boatersworld.com
$275 davisanchor.com
$269 boatersworld.com
$249 anchorconcepts.com
$249 jammarine.com
$383 rocna.com
$449
West Marine
$475 creativemarine.com
$475 creativemarine.com
$395 bestmarinesports.com
30 lbs.
17 lbs.
23 lbs.
36 lbs.
23-34ft. 20-30ft. 30-36ft. 30-36ft. 39-45ft.
Plow Good 420 lbs.
Hybrid Good 450 lbs.
Danforth- Good 350 lbs. style
Plow Good 450 lbs.
Danforth- Good 375 lbs. style
Fair 500 lbs. Good 480 lbs. Good 450 lbs. Good 450 lbs. Good 475 lbs. Excellent 480 lbs. Excellent 380 lbs. Good 440 lbs. Excellent 460 lbs. Good 500 lbs. Good 425 lbs. Good 500 lbs.
 Recommended . Best Choice
16 lbs.
15 lbs. 30-40ft.
Plow
Good 480 lbs.
36 lbs. 28 lbs. 16 lbs. 45 lbs. 47 lbs.
13 lb s.
30-36ft. 30-39ft. 25-34ft. 28-36ft. 30-38ft. 30-38ft.
CRQ-style Good 450 lbs. Plow
Plow Good 300 lbs.
Plow Good 250 lbs.
Adjustable Good 400 lbs. Scoop Plow
Plow Good 300 lbs. Plow Good 500 lbs.
3:1 Scope
7:1 Scope
The top performer with a price to match, the XYZ is our Best Choice for soft mud. The HydroBubble is a lightweight performer with a comparatively low price. The Davis Talon and the Bulwagga earned Recommended ratings.

88888888888888888888888888

Sorry. I can't delete it.
Another try;
OK good.
Use the April 06 kink.
It has the test results referred to way up above.

I see Murray they (PS) classify the SARCA as a hybrid plow. Probably because the SARCA'S flukes are a bit convex. That may be their rule of classification.
And of course this was before the Excel.

Most interesting that the anchors were set to resist a 1,000 lb load.

We read of folks using half throttle in reverse to set their anchor.

A common prop setup will produce about 20 lbs of thrust per HP, perhaps less in reverse.

That means 50 or 60 hp will create the 1,000 lb load.

Fine on a trawler with a displacement sized engine ,
but the faster boats with 200HP+ engines night want to reconsider some of their anchor "failures".