Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-16-2022, 04:14 AM   #1
Guru
 
mvweebles's Avatar
 
City: Saint Petersburg
Vessel Name: Weebles
Vessel Model: 1970 Willard 36 Trawler
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 3,657
FYI - Vulcan Anchor Test (S/V Panope)

Steve Goodwin posted a test of a 20kg (44lb) Rocna Vulcan Anchor. Top honors in the weight class is shared between it and the Viking 20kg. At the end of the video he does caution that while he has found varied sea bottoms to test, his PNW testing grounds may not be representstive of all seabottoms. For soft mud, he continues to state the gold standard for holding to be Danforth style broad fluke anchors.

Screen shots of his comparison charts attached.

Many thanks to the good work by Steve Goodwin. Great service to the boating community

Peter


https://youtu.be/cPSQxoRVrIw
Click image for larger version

Name:	2137908910.jpg
Views:	139
Size:	41.1 KB
ID:	124943Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot_20220116-040411_YouTube.jpg
Views:	158
Size:	111.8 KB
ID:	124944
__________________
M/V Weebles
1970 Willard 36 Sedan Trawler
mvweebles is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 08:25 AM   #2
Guru
 
ranger58sb's Avatar
 
City: Annapolis
Vessel Model: 58' Sedan Bridge
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,065
Thanks for posting. Yesterday, I was just going through Steve's review #100, where the galvanized steel Excel came first, Vulcan second... and I don't remember a Viking in there at all... so maybe that's from one of his newer tests as well.

The mud thing is important for us here on the Chesapeake. I've been shopping, because this new-to-us fixer-upper came with a ~55-lb stainless Lewmar Delta, no lead in the tip that I can tell... and I already know a Delta isn't great for soft mud (aka slime, ooze, soup, etc.).

So far, our best choices around have been Fortress -- larger flukes are better, weight not so important -- and SuperMAX.

Fortress conducted some tests near here back circa 2014-ish, and of course Fortress did well... as they have for us. They don't hang all that well on our pulpit, though, and re-configuring for hard bottom or soft mud means completely dismantling the thing on deck and putting it back together again at the other angle. Because of that, we think it makes a great back-up and kedge here in our area. And it'd be a good primary, left on the mud setting all the time, if it hung nicely on our pulpit.

(Some have argued that resets don't work great when currents change directions. Our experience is that the anchor is apparently usually completely buried, no reset necessary. Retrieving is often an issue.)

Cap'n Wil Andrews published some mud tests on one of the trawler-related listservs back in the late '90s (IIRC) and SuperMAX came first in his tests. Reconfiguring the adjustable version can be done on the pulpit; one bolt out, back into a different adjustment hole, easy. Hung well on our previous pulpit, but...

But now I need to go larger and I'm not yet sure whether the MAX-20 will fit our pulpit or not.

Doesn't look to me like the Vulcan would hang very well, but I'll have to look more closely at that. And I guess I have to go learn what a Viking anchor is...

-Chris
__________________
Chesapeake Bay, USA
ranger58sb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 08:36 AM   #3
Guru
 
City: Owings, Md
Vessel Name: Graceland
Vessel Model: Mainship 34 MK1
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 867
Thanks for sharing, I was impressed by vulcan 20kg that came with my parent's Mainship 390 so I bought one for my boat last year. The only time it has struggled to set was a sea bottom covered with decaying leaves from the surrounding trees.
Gdavid is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 08:47 AM   #4
Guru
 
mvweebles's Avatar
 
City: Saint Petersburg
Vessel Name: Weebles
Vessel Model: 1970 Willard 36 Trawler
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 3,657
Viking is apparently built in Israel but has a distributor in New Jersey so may be available somewhat locally. If you look at Panope test, performance is excellent but he finds significant fault with galvanizing - he is able to flake away some of the coating with a utility knife. He also notes the Mantus has nice chamfered edges vs sharp edges of the Viking. Like the Vulcan, the Viking self-launches very well.

I have never cruised the Chesapeake but understand soft mud is common. SF Bay has thick, stinky, heavy mud in most parts but is decent holding. A Fortress/Danforth would be preferred except for the tide-induced strong current reversals that have been known to foul a Danforth style anchor and set the boat adrift. I watched a boat fail to reset after reversal off China Camp while the owner was ashore hiking (I too was ashore). I don't know the anchor they used, but would not be surprised if a Danforth style.

Sounds like the Chesapeake is unique for soft mud. If you look at the screen shot I attached, some anchors do better in mud than others, but none are nearly as good as they are in sand except (presumably) the fortress

One of the really interesting parts of Panope tests is anchors perform differently depending on their size. He loved the 17 lb Mantus. But didn't like the construction on the 44 lb. Similar with the 20-lb Vulcan which was decent, but he really preferred the Viking. That reversed in the 44-lb test. I find his bench-discussions at the beginning and end of the videos much more interesting than the actual tests

Please update with whatever you decide.

Peter
__________________
M/V Weebles
1970 Willard 36 Sedan Trawler
mvweebles is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:12 AM   #5
FWT
Guru
 
City: Centreville MD
Vessel Model: Helmsman Trawlers 38E
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 795
I watched that yesterday too.

The interesting thing about his tests over time is how the rankings change over time. To me, the conclusion is there is no "best". And that perhaps the experience seen is affected by a few number of tests per anchor.

Another conclusion is, what is important to YOU? Like the Chesapeake conditions. The ratings in cobblestone are not of concern, so throw out that category and re-rank.

The Bruce designs are ones he throws a lot of shade on, but then you see in his chart they do well in soft mud. One good test example?

I had about decided to bite the bullet for an Ultra some months back when it was rated close to the top. Its now fallen back. Which rating and batch of tests are the most valid?

Note he did have concerns about how the Vulcan moves around a lot on the roller. A legitimate concern for more than this design? Worthy of its own rating scale? Fixable? Seems like shaft SHAPE has an impact but I have not heard him discuss that.

There was a thread on here maybe 6 months ago. A member had purchased a boat where the anchor simply didn't fit well, and caused all sorts of issues. The shaft length was long, and the room between the roller and windlass was short. The conversation began with questions about surgery to the roller. If one has this issue with the roller, shaft length alone could rise to a level of an important metric to consider. In that case, just throw out the longest shafts from consideration and re-rank what's left, in the conditions that matter.

Analysis paralysis sets in, on an important choice.
FWT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:15 AM   #6
Guru
 
ranger58sb's Avatar
 
City: Annapolis
Vessel Model: 58' Sedan Bridge
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,065
I keep hoping to convince Steve Bedford to send a SuperMAX out for Steve Goodwin's testing... but there are a few other SuperMAX tests out there in the web-i-verse, and realistically I don't think Steve Goodwin has somewhere available to him for testing with the kind of soup/ooze/slime we have here.

As I understand it, or at least according to the MAX website, Andy Peabody -- SuperMAX inventor -- was originally experimenting someplace in Louisiana... so presumably that means they have some slime/ooze/soup around there somewhere too.

I had also hoped to influence Fortress to include a SuperMAX during their Chesapeake Bay tests... even offered to lend them ours... but Brian told me at the time that they thought the SuperMAX probably wasn't commercially viable, might not last much longer... since Andy was at the time either ill or looking for a retirement plan or some such. (I'm unclear about all that, though.)

We'll see how it goes. If the MAX-20 will hang on our pulpit, problem solved. If not, I guess I'll figure out an OK Plan B.

-Chris
__________________
Chesapeake Bay, USA
ranger58sb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:19 AM   #7
Guru
 
ranger58sb's Avatar
 
City: Annapolis
Vessel Model: 58' Sedan Bridge
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by FWT View Post
Note he did have concerns about how the Vulcan moves around a lot on the roller. A legitimate concern for more than this design? Worthy of its own rating scale? Fixable? Seems like shaft SHAPE has an impact but I have not heard him discuss that.
Steve Goodwin's review #106 addresses some of that "how does it fit in the roller" issue, if you haven't seen that.

-Chris
__________________
Chesapeake Bay, USA
ranger58sb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:22 AM   #8
Guru
 
City: Newport, R.I.
Vessel Name: Hippocampus
Vessel Model: Nordic Tug 42
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 1,900
The sudden loss of holding and trouble resetting is said to be a down fall for Rocna and similar roll bar designs. We full time cruised the Carib and New England using a Rocna as primary and a fortress as secondary. The fortress wasn’t needed and the performance of the Rocna simply amazing even in storm force at 5:1. But yes needed to let the Rocna settle with no or little force on it for as long as you could to have success in the loose chessie mud soup.
Still other than rare anchoring in tidal rivers never had 180 shifts. Please read Attainable Adventures. They make a compelling case for the Spade. Particularly if 180 shifts are in your future. On the new to us boat there’s a Delta. It will be replaced with a galvi Spade.
Hippocampus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:35 AM   #9
FWT
Guru
 
City: Centreville MD
Vessel Model: Helmsman Trawlers 38E
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger42c View Post
Steve Goodwin's review #106 addresses some of that "how does it fit in the roller" issue, if you haven't seen that.

-Chris
Thanks, will check that out
FWT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:37 AM   #10
FWT
Guru
 
City: Centreville MD
Vessel Model: Helmsman Trawlers 38E
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 795
I guess one other metric to look at is avoiding anchors that do really poorly in some conditions, since most want something that will do at least "pretty good" just about anywhere. Such as, throw out anything with a 1 or 2 rating in any conditions you are likely to ever see.
FWT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:43 AM   #11
Guru
 
City: Rochester, NY
Vessel Name: Hour Glass
Vessel Model: Chris Craft Catalina 381
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 4,976
My own experience agrees with Steve's showing that in many substrates, the Vulcan will just bury itself well out of sight. In what I'd consider to be a medium mud (a bit soft on top, but firmer underneath and provides good holding), I've seen mud all the way up the shank and the first few feet of chain on mine after some decent wind. Based on what it took to retrieve it (and how much chain I pulled up in the process), I'd say the thing was a good 4 - 6 feet into the mud in my case.



Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger42c View Post
(Some have argued that resets don't work great when currents change directions. Our experience is that the anchor is apparently usually completely buried, no reset necessary. Retrieving is often an issue.)

In a really soft bottom, a Danforth / Fortress shouldn't have the resetting problems it can in firmer bottoms. If it's fully buried, that'll soften the impact of a direction change, and there's nothing sticking out for chain to snag on and trip the anchor.
rslifkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:58 AM   #12
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Ft Pierce
Vessel Name: Sold
Vessel Model: Was an Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 25,369
I have seen haystacks of Danforth styles with very bent shafts.

Sure some might have hooked something not natural to the sandy or muddy bottoms...but I believe the vast majority were from being deeply set, and not breaking out when being pulled from way different directions. Some by weather, some by power.

I just won't use one as a primary because of all my experiences and reported experiences of them not catching and setting quickly...so not great to be the emergency anchor.
psneeld is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 11:05 AM   #13
Guru
 
City: Rochester, NY
Vessel Name: Hour Glass
Vessel Model: Chris Craft Catalina 381
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 4,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by psneeld View Post
I have seen haystacks of Danforth styles with very bent shafts.

Sure some might have hooked something not natural to the sandy or muddy bottoms...but I believe the vast majority were from being deeply set, and not breaking out when being pulled from way different directions. Some by weather, some by power.

I just won't use one as a primary because of all my experiences and reported experiences of them not catching and setting quickly...so not great to be the emergency anchor.

Shank strength is one of the big differences between the cheaper Danforths (and cheap copies) vs the higher quality ones. There's a reason the Fortress or the high tensile Danforth cost a multiple of what the cheap ones do.

I absolutely agree on not liking them for a primary though. For the conditions where they're good, nothing will beat them. But they're not great across a wide range of conditions.
rslifkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 11:26 AM   #14
Guru
 
ranger58sb's Avatar
 
City: Annapolis
Vessel Model: 58' Sedan Bridge
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,065
I don't remember having too much troubles getting a Danforth or a Fortress to set around here.

The one time I remember having difficulty with an actual, relatively small, Danforth was when we turned out to be over a bottom covered with downed leaves. Skatey, skatey, no setee. A different location in the same creek worked OK.

I also only remember a Fortress breaking out unexpectedly once. That was directly related to some kind of cyclonic event that spun the boat in a 360 over about 2 minutes. We'd seen the storm coming, but didn't expect the corkscrew effect. I didn't try to reset; we were anchored so close to our home marina it was easier to just beat feet back to our slip. We arrived, walked the dog, deluge began just as wifey and critter came back aboard.

I THINK that might have been an FX-23, brought over from the earlie 33' boat to our then-new-to-us 42' boat... before I'd had time to source a larger and more appropriate FX-37.

Otherwise, our Adventures in Anchoring have mostly been successful with the Danforth design.

Delta? Not so much, around here.

-Chris
__________________
Chesapeake Bay, USA
ranger58sb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 11:36 AM   #15
FWT
Guru
 
City: Centreville MD
Vessel Model: Helmsman Trawlers 38E
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 795
So OK, here is some analysis paralysis fodder.

Throw out cobblestone. Average the 3 ratings each for soft mud and sandy mud.

Soft mud (average of 3), ratings of 4 or better, in order

Viking - 5
M1 - 5
Knox - 5 (discard because of awful clean sand ratings, and weak sandy mud)
Vulcan - 4.7
Rocna - 4.7 (ditto Knox comments)
Bruce - 4.7 (ditto Knox)
Ultra - 4.3
Spade - 4 (discard because of poor clean sand ratings)

Sandy Mud (average of 3)

Spade S100 - 5 (discard due to poor soft mud)
Viking - 4.8
Spade A100 - 4.7 (discard due to poor clean sand)
Vulcan - 4.3
Excel - 4.3
M2 - 4.3 (discard due to poor soft mud)
M1 - 4

Discard everything with a poor rating on something (other than cobblestone which I just flat ignore for my purposes), and you are left with just 5 to consider, ranked by the average of soft and sandy mud

Viking - 4.9
Vulcan - 4.5
M1 - 4.5
Excel - 3.9
Ultra - 3.8

So from that short list one can look at fit, build quality, price, etc. That will throw out the Viking and M1 on build. Leaving Vulcan, Excel, and Ultra to look at fit and price.

Until the next batch of tests which scramble the ratings yet again.
FWT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 11:44 AM   #16
Guru
 
City: Rochester, NY
Vessel Name: Hour Glass
Vessel Model: Chris Craft Catalina 381
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 4,976
It is interesting to note that despite the fairly similar basic design, the Vulcan outperforms the Spade. And it's a sturdier design (my 73 lb Vulcan gives the impression of being nearly indestructible), plus it's much cheaper.



I wouldn't necessarily toss the Viking and M1 on build quality, but I'd definitely give some thought to the limitations of their construction. The Viking in particular seems to be a very good performer (although it seems like anything bigger than the 60lb Viking 25 is a special order). And it's in line with some of the other less expensive new gen anchors for price as well.
rslifkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 11:49 AM   #17
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Ft Pierce
Vessel Name: Sold
Vessel Model: Was an Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 25,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by rslifkin View Post
Shank strength is one of the big differences between the cheaper Danforths (and cheap copies) vs the higher quality ones. There's a reason the Fortress or the high tensile Danforth cost a multiple of what the cheap ones do.

I absolutely agree on not liking them for a primary though. For the conditions where they're good, nothing will beat them. But they're not great across a wide range of conditions.
Had a high tensile Danforth what had a slightly bent (unusable) shaft given to me.

Luckily we had a good hydraulic press at work.

My point was, yes they hold very well, so well they won't breakout well enough to keep from destroying them more than one would think.
psneeld is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 11:58 AM   #18
Guru
 
mvweebles's Avatar
 
City: Saint Petersburg
Vessel Name: Weebles
Vessel Model: 1970 Willard 36 Trawler
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger42c View Post
I keep hoping to convince Steve Bedford to send a SuperMAX out for Steve Goodwin's testing... but there are a few other SuperMAX tests out there in the web-i-verse, and realistically I don't think Steve Goodwin has somewhere available to him for testing with the kind of soup/ooze/slime we have here.

As I understand it, or at least according to the MAX website, Andy Peabody -- SuperMAX inventor -- was originally experimenting someplace in Louisiana... so presumably that means they have some slime/ooze/soup around there somewhere too.

I had also hoped to influence Fortress to include a SuperMAX during their Chesapeake Bay tests... even offered to lend them ours... but Brian told me at the time that they thought the SuperMAX probably wasn't commercially viable, might not last much longer... since Andy was at the time either ill or looking for a retirement plan or some such. (I'm unclear about all that, though.)

We'll see how it goes. If the MAX-20 will hang on our pulpit, problem solved. If not, I guess I'll figure out an OK Plan B.

-Chris
The anchor test on the SuperMAX website is from 2003 and compares against Delta, Spade, WM Danforth style, and Bulwagga. None of the modern generation except Spade. Like all anchor manufacturers, SuperMAX claims superior holding in all bottoms. Like many/most manufacturers, a lot of anecdotal testimonial statements which unfortunately mean very little to me which is why I'm so thankful for Goodwins testing. They also seem to state that unless the anchor is used according to their instructions, you can draw no conclusions on how well it works. Odd statement, especially since it isn't immediately followed up with what that means.

One of the interesting things in Panope tests is the Viking significantly out-performs all other anchors. However it loses a lot of points on galvinizing quality and self-launch capability. I could live with the latter shortcoming, but not the former. I would definitely be interested in Goodwins evaluation of build quality of SuperMAX, especially the hinged shank model. I realize shipping an anchor is expensive, but for the most part, I think many/most people in groups like TF end up shipping as part of purchase to get the anchor they feel best meets their needs. If the SuperMAX was the right anchor, so be it. Surprised they use wide availability as a reason not to have Panope test it. Certainly the Viking - made in Israel - has managed to find benefit in providing a sample anchor for testing.

Peter
__________________
M/V Weebles
1970 Willard 36 Sedan Trawler
mvweebles is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 12:21 PM   #19
DDW
Guru
 
City: San Francisco
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 2,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by rslifkin View Post
It is interesting to note that despite the fairly similar basic design, the Vulcan outperforms the Spade. And it's a sturdier design (my 73 lb Vulcan gives the impression of being nearly indestructible), plus it's much cheaper.
Vulcan is only better in mud, and both anchors perform poorly there compared to a danforth style. In the overall ratings, Steve continues to ding the Spade heavily for corrosion/galvanization. This is based on there being dissimilar materials (lead) in it. Yet after 13 years the Spade on my sailboat has no issues with corrosion or the galvanizing. I think I'd consider the Vulcan if I ever need another though, based on price.

Either the Spade or Vulcan can be stabilized nicely in the bow roller, you have to be willing to alter the roller or sprit a little to do it. On the sailboat the sprit was made to accommodate the Spade and it does not move. I did not want to remake the sprit on the trawler so I made a new roller for it, again Spade does not move. The flukes just need to pull up against something to keep it from rocking.
DDW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 12:21 PM   #20
Guru
 
klee wyck's Avatar
 
City: Seattle, WA USA and San Carlos, Sonora MX
Vessel Name: Domino and Libra
Vessel Model: Malcom Tennant 20M and Noordzee Kotter 52
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 756
I suppose it does not fit a very broad cross section of the boating community, but it surprises me a little that Steve has not tested anything that fits a nest through a hawse as far as I can tell.
Walking docks, there are quite a few of these.
Here is an example of something that is common internationally and seems to have good credentials though I do not find tests.

https://www.posidonia.com/images/anc...TWplus-web.pdf
__________________
Bill
klee wyck is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Trawler Port Captains
Port Captains are TF volunteers who can serve as local guides or assist with local arrangements and information. Search below to locate Port Captains near your destination. To learn more about this program read here: TF Port Captain Program





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012